Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Its funny but most folks, not just on this site, but everywhere are missing the real truth about the events of the last 5 years creating a massive real estate reduction in price/value. I will try and make two points you all can think about.. or not.
1. Rich people take a worse beating than the average Joes when they walk away from a property which is underwater. The more it is underwater the worse it is for the rich person. Its seems most folks forget unless the property being foreclosed on or sold as a short-sale falls under the primary residence exclusion where the owner never refinanced to take money out of the property they are going to be 1099'd by the lender. This 1099 will be the difference between the eventual sale price of the property and the monies owed by the borrower. This is considered straight taxable income and is payable in the year the 1099 is issued. A rich person, being in a higher tax bracket, will naturally be paying more per dollar in taxes than an average person based on the tax rate on the last dollars of income. Additionally the rich or less rich person will still have to pay the property tax prorated for the balance of the time they owned the property. Chances are the rich person has a higher property tax bill than the average Joe. Additionally, many folks did not take the time to request a lowering of their property tax bill based on the devaluation of their properties thus all parties will still owe their pro rated share of the higher tax bill. The new owners will pay a fraction of the tax bill based on the new sales price, undoubtedly half or less of the previous owner.
2. Now the real story. I cannot believe the media or blogs have not analyzed the REAL boon for the government's coffers as a result of this housing market decline. Before you think I am completely insane let me explain. The numbers I will use are for ease of the math and are more of a rough national average but I hope you will see where I am coming from. I am going to use a 50% decline in property values since 2006 which depending on the area specific will either be a bit high or a bit low but on average is not bad. We will take a property purchased in 2006 for 300,000 dollars and assume it is now worth 150,000 dollars. Property Taxes in 2006 would be about 3,000 dollars per year and today would be half of that or about 1500 dollars per year. On a 30 yr. fully amortized loan the monthly mortgage payment in 2006 at 6% on 80% of the value would be 1440 dollars per month on a 240,000 dollar loan with most of that number being tax deductible interest. Today's 80% loan of 120,000 dollars at 6% would be 720 dollars per month again almost all of it interest. So based on these numbers lets see how specifically the Government makes out though for those states such as California who have a very high State tax it actually has a more dramatic effect. Please note when I refer to the overall government I mean any Government agency whose income or revenue stream is affected by Real Estate property taxes and or income tax.
On the noted value reduction the Property Tax revenue is reduced from 3000 dollars per year to 1500 dollars per year thus the Government has a net reduction of income of 1500 dollars. Sounds bad for the government and in turn seems to give the government a reason to raise taxes but is it really a loss of income? In California the majority of working folks are paying on the last dollar 9.3%. In Nevada it is 0 but for the sake of argument we will use a low figure like 6% as the average percentage paid on state income taxes nation wide. For the Federal Tax rate we will use 25% on the last dollar.
Based on the above paragraphs we know property taxes and interest on principle residences (First and Second home) are tax deductible. I am not worried about those of you with over a million dollars in interest as I am referring to most folks with mortgages. So lets see how the government loses or gains in this housing down turn. Thus the home owner in 2006 deducted a total of 20,280 dollars
(12 X 1440 dollars mortgage + 3000 dollars property tax) from their income. Based on the above noted tax brackets this is a net savings to the home owner, but a loss of revenue to the government of $5070.00 for the Federal (25% tax bracket) and $1217.00 for the State (6%) or a net savings to the home owner of about $6300.00. Going back to the new buyer earning $80,000 per year who purchases the same property for half the price in today's market paying half of everything referring to property taxes and mortgage the homeowner only saves $3150 on their taxes. Since the tax boards have taken away most all other deductions other than children and a few other potential expenses, most of which the majority of tax payers cannot deduct, home mortgage interest and property taxes make up the lions share of deductions.
So what is the net result in collectible taxes by all aspects of the Government including State, Federal and Local? Did it go up or down?? I believe, and the math proves it out, the overall Government has benefited just in the real estate down turn by an extra 50% or so of income from taxes. Oh my... For those of you who do not believe me refer above and below to the math and see if I am right.
The reduction of property value from 300,000 to 150,000 reduced the Government's income from property tax by $1500.00 However, the overall Governments income INCREASED by the reduction of tax deductible expenses relating to the tax payer's real estate. In the above example the tax deduction went from tax year 2006 where a home owner making 80,000 dollars per year deducting their interest and property tax reduced their net tax burden by $6300.00. Today the new buyer has only reduced their tax burden, on the exact same property by $3150.00. Thus the government GAINED additional income due to less tax deductions affecting the net tax burden of the home owner to the tune of $3150.00. If we deduct the loss to the government of $1500.00 based on the lower property tax amount we see the Overall government (All government entities affected by real estate deductions or property tax income) benefiting to the tune of $1650.00 above what all government entities earned from the tax payer owning the home in 2006. The math shows although the income to any government agency is reduced by 1500 dollars in property tax the same total government income increased due to a large reduction in tax deductible expenses. Multiply this by the number of home owners effected in the down turn having to be sold or changed hands per the above examples and you will see the income stream to all real estate related government agencies has increased dramatically. But wait, there is much more.
Going back to my first paragraphs where I noted those home owners who were foreclosed on or decided on a short sale are being 1099'd by the lender, who did not meet the exclusions for being taxed on the event, and now will have to pay both state and federal taxes based on that income. Without the down turn in the housing market this taxable consequence would never have occurred. Therefore on top of the increase in Government income from taxes noted in the above paragraphs we tack on this windfall for the government tax income from the foreclosure and shorts to find all real estate associated government agencies in total have and or will benefit from this housing down turn enormously. Yet, the government wants to find ways to increase our taxes??? Okay folks, go ahead and tell me where my math is wrong. I hope this finds some of you rethinking your position the Government has our best interests in mind and is only proposing tax increases because their revenue stream dropped dramatically. By the way this is neither a democrat or republican thing as greed has no affiliation with any single political party.
FOD
Last edited by fishordie; 05-13-2011 at 02:39 PM..
Okay folks, go ahead and tell me where my math is wrong. I hope this finds some of you rethinking your position the Government has our best interests in mind and is only proposing tax increases because their revenue stream dropped dramatically. By the way this is neither a democrat or republican thing as greed has no affiliation with any single political party.
FOD
FOD, I'm a fan of your postings but I think you're looking at this a bit backwards. You're "saving less" in scenario 2 because your deductions are much less. It doesn't make sense to spend an additional dollar in deductions only to get 25 cents of it back from the Fed and 6 cents back from the State. Using all the same assumptions you've used above; 25% Fed rate, 6% State, etc., you'll see that the second scenario results in a larger tax bite.
Scenario 1
$59,720 AGI
$14,930 Fed tax
$3,583 State tax $3,000 Property tax
$21,513 Total Fed, State, Property tax
Scenario 2
$69,860 AGI
$17,465 Fed tax
$4,192 State tax $1,500 Property tax
FOD, I'm a fan of your postings but I think you're looking at this a bit backwards. You're "saving less" in scenario 2 because your deductions are much less. It doesn't make sense to spend an additional dollar in deductions only to get 25 cents of it back from the Fed and 6 cents back from the State. Using all the same assumptions you've used above; 25% Fed rate, 6% State, etc., you'll see that the second scenario results in a larger tax bite.
Scenario 1
$59,720 AGI
$14,930 Fed tax
$3,583 State tax $3,000 Property tax
$21,513 Total Fed, State, Property tax
Scenario 2
$69,860 AGI
$17,465 Fed tax
$4,192 State tax $1,500 Property tax
$23,157 Total Fed, State, Property tax
Hi Tony,
Thank you for the nice words about my previous posts but in your example you are making my point... I think. My point of the post was to show we the tax payers are paying more in taxes with a lower real estate valuation meaning the government is getting more of your income. Most of the voting public believe this housing crash has resulted in less government revenue not more. In California there is another strong push to raise taxes, again, based on the perception government is earning less revenue. I want to show if there really is less government revenue locally it is not because Homeowners are not paying their share.
Your scenario one is based on tax year 2006 for the person who paid 300,000 for the property. You noted correctly this person paid LESS in taxes, meaning less income for the Government than the person in Scenario 2 who purchased the same home for 150,000 dollars who is now paying MORE in taxes or to say it differently more revenue to the government based on a lower home value. In your exact example you are showing the Government made out to the tune of around $1650.00 in extra tax income based on the property value going down. I had noted in my preamble I was using a straight 25% Fed and 6% state tax scenario just for the ease of math but your example appears to be more exact in nature yet still shows about an 8% increase in tax revenue to the government based on the latest lower property value. Now add in the windfall from those folks receiving a 1099 from their lender and paying taxes on this unrealized, phantom, income based on the perception the home owner incurred income from not paying all the monies owed to the lender during their for foreclosure or short sale (Another amazing concept the loss to the lender is actually a financial gain to the homeowner who lost the house is being ingrained in our heads and accepted as gospel) and you will see the revenue stream increase to the government has seen a large upward movement regarding the down real estate market. Now multiply my single example by the number of homes changing hands in the last few years and undoubtedly in the many, many years to come, at much lower values than 2006, and you will see a fairly substantial increase in tax revenue. Everyone else seems to believe the government has lost revenue from this event. Again, you have just proven my point using more exact numbers. My point of the original post was to show the government is actually benefiting from the significant downward spiral of the real estate market. Additionally, if my assumption and your math are correct the government really has a negative incentive to buoy the real estate market. After all, as real estate deductions go up tax revenue goes down so why would a money hungry government ever want to see real estate prices go up if it results in taxable income going down?? Now you can see why the government is using this completely mis-understood event to once again try and pass legislation significantly reducing the mortgage tax deduction on our taxes or eliminating it altogether. My 60's inner self has finally made me post this information all over the net including, hopefully, news stations. Let me know if you agree.
FOD
Last edited by fishordie; 05-13-2011 at 05:36 PM..
Ah, I went back and read your first post again. You're right, I made your case for you.
But here's a thought - the higher taxes paid in scenario 2 are coming about from a substantial reduction in the interest deduction paid on the mortgage note. So, every dollar saved on interest paid to the bank, is a dollar of revenue that's not recognized by the bank.
From my previous example, the homeowner's AGI is ~$10K higher in scenario 2 resulting in higher personal income tax receipts for the Fed. However, bank revenue has been reduced by $8,640 resulting in lower corporate tax receipts for the Fed. Does it end up being roughly a wash? Thoughts?
<on edit> Scenario 2 results in a $1,644 larger total tax bite to the homeowner and $8,640 less revenue to the bank. Depending on the corporate tax rate it could certainly make up the $1,644 difference from the homeowner. Agree? Disagree?
I'm pretty sure I've found federal and state tax receipts on the web before. I'll look for them again later this evening. Intuitively, I'd think there would be a rough correlation between home values and tax receipts, but maybe not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishordie
Hi Tony,
Thank you for the nice words about my previous posts but in your example you are making my point... I think. Your scenario one is based on tax year 2006 for the person who paid 300,000 for the property. You noted correctly this person paid LESS in taxes, meaning less income for the Government than the person in Scenario 2 who purchased the same home for 150,000 dollars who is now paying MORE in taxes or to say it differently more revenue to the government based on a lower home value. In your exact example you are showing the Government made out to the tune of $1500.00 in extra tax income based on the property value going down. I had noted in my preamble I was using a straight 25% Fed and 6% state tax scenario just for the ease of math but your example appears to be more exact in nature yet still shows about a 7 or 8% increase in tax revenue to the government based on the latest lower property value. Now add in the windfall from those folks receiving a 1099 and you will see the revenue stream increase to the government has seen a large upward movement regarding the down real estate market. Now multiply my single example by the number of homes changing hands in the last few years and you will see a fairly substantial increase in tax revenue. Everyone else seems to believe the government has lost revenue from this event. Again, you have just proven my point using more exact numbers. My point of the original post was to show the government is actually benefiting from the significant downward spiral of the real estate market. Additionally, if my assumption and your math are correct the government really has a negative incentive to buoy the real estate market. After all, as real estate deductions go up tax revenue goes down so why would a money hungry government ever want to see real estate prices go up if it results in taxable income going down?? Now you can see why the government is using this completely mis-understood event to try and pass legislation significantly reducing the mortgage tax deduction on our taxes or eliminating it altogether. My 60's inner self has finally made me post this information all over the net including, hopefully, news stations. Let me know if you agree.
FOD
Last edited by tony soprano; 05-13-2011 at 05:50 PM..
The issue with the banks sounds good on paper but as you noted I have been preaching the banks are really not interested in making real estate loans. I have noted over and over again the removal of investment restrictions on banks created a huge income stream for the banks using such things as derivatives and other similar instruments. Although world wide the banking industry took a huge write down of losses on their real estate portfolios the big banks are reaping huge overall profits as their investment sides are making 3 to 8 times the margins of the lending sides. I have actually heard through reliable sources the investment sides of bank are looking to make over 20% returns on their monies and we the taxpayers are giving them almost free money with which to do that. Remember, you the American tax payer are giving almost free loans, through our government, to the Banks in addition to the Tarp monies the banks used to leverage other investment opportunities. How do you think it was possible for banks, who we were told were on the brink of extinction, to be able to pay back all of the Tarp monies, replenish their own lost monies, plus post huge profits in only one year??? Do you really believe they could do this on a margin of 3 or 4 points they make on home loans??? Remember most loans are packaged up and sold off by banks at some discount. None the less, thank you for making my point for me in a more exacting manner.
Perhaps I can answer your question as to who is losing money if government and banks are earning more monies. Combine my statement we the home owners are paying more in taxes based on lower home valuations and we the American taxpayers are watching as our dollar is worth less and less as we are printing money as fast as possible and you can then figure out who is really losing out in this equation. Remember the story if you are looking around the room and cannot identify who the goat is it just might be you. Well, we the American taxpayers are the dupes.
FOD, I see the point you're making but we just have a different interpretation on the numbers. I need to parse the information in more detail but as I somewhat expected, tax receipts do correlate somewhat to housing values.
It would appear that if the Fed's primary interest was maximizing tax receipts they would use whatever resources they have at their disposal to buoy housing prices. In fact, I'd argue the point that they have done so.
To the point that we're paying more taxes as a result of lower deductions, one needs to look at the entire picture. In the previously mentioned scenario 2 - yes, the tax bite is greater by $1,644, but it's a result of having a $10K higher AGI. I don't know about you, but I'll pony up $1,644 in exchange for $10K all day long. That's a no brainer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishordie
Ahhh Tony,
The issue with the banks sounds good on paper but as you noted I have been preaching the banks are really not interested in making real estate loans. I have noted over and over again the removal of investment restrictions on banks created a huge income stream for the banks using such things as derivatives and other similar instruments. Although world wide the banking industry took a huge write down of losses on their real estate portfolios the big banks are reaping huge overall profits as their investment sides are making 3 to 8 times the margins of the lending sides. I have actually heard through reliable sources the investment sides of bank are looking to make over 20% returns on their monies and we the taxpayers are giving them almost free money with which to do that. Remember, you the American tax payer are giving almost free loans, through our government, to the Banks in addition to the Tarp monies the banks used to leverage other investment opportunities. How do you think it was possible for banks, who we were told were on the brink of extinction, to be able to pay back all of the Tarp monies, replenish their own lost monies, plus post huge profits in only one year??? Do you really believe they could do this on a margin of 3 or 4 points they make on home loans??? Remember most loans are packaged up and sold off by banks at some discount. None the less, thank you for making my point for me in a more exacting manner.
Perhaps I can answer your question as to who is losing money if government and banks are earning more monies. Combine my statement we the home owners are paying more in taxes based on lower home valuations and we the American taxpayers are watching as our dollar is worth less and less as we are printing money as fast as possible and you can then figure out who is really losing out in this equation. Remember the story if you are looking around the room and cannot identify who the goat is it just might be you. Well, we the American taxpayers are the dupes.
Sorry for the Caps below but I am using them to separate my answers from your points.
It would appear that if the Fed's primary interest was maximizing tax receipts they would use whatever resources they have at their disposal to buoy housing prices. In fact, I'd argue the point that they have done so.
AGAIN, MY POINT NEGATES THIS POINT OF VIEW ONLY AS FAR AS IT RELATES TO REAL ESTATE DEDUCTIONS AND TAXES. MY POINT CONTINUES TO BE AS REAL ESTATE TAX DEDUCTIONS GO UP BASED ON HIGHER PRICES OF REAL ESTATE, TAX REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OVERALL GOES DOWN.
To the point that we're paying more taxes as a result of lower deductions, one needs to look at the entire picture. In the previously mentioned scenario 2 - yes, the tax bite is greater by $1,644, but it's a result of having a $10K higher AGI. I don't know about you, but I'll pony up $1,644 in exchange for $10K all day long. That's a no brainer.
AGAIN, MY POINT WAS NOT TO ARGUE ON HAVING MORE MONIES IN OUR POCKETS AS NEWER HOME OWNERS BENEFITING FROM THE LOWER VALUES OF REAL ESTATE, THOUGH I WILL ARGUE MANY PAST HOMEOWNERS ARE NOW PAYING EVEN MORE IN TAXES AS THEY HAVE BECOME RENTERS WITH MINIMAL DEDUCTIONS. RATHER, AS IN VEGAS AND ELSEWHERE AROUND THE WORLD, MANY OF THE PROPERTIES, ESPECIALLY THE CHOICEST PROPERTIES, ARE BEING PURCHASED BY DEEP POCKET INVESTORS OR LLC INVESTOR GROUPS WHO ENJOY GREAT WRITE OFFS NOT AVAILABLE TO HOMEOWNERS BUT THAT IS A STORY FOR ANOTHER POST.
IN REGARDS TO YOUR SECOND POINT, THE EXTRA MONIES WHICH IN 2006 WENT TO THE BANKS WHO ALSO WERE AFFORDED GREAT WRITE OFFS. BASED ON PAST HISTORY THIS CHANGE CLINKING AROUND IN AMERICANS POCKETS WILL BE SPENT ON CONSUMABLE GOODS WHICH HAVE A CHAIN OF TAXES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. WE AMERICANS ARE NOTORIOUS FOR LIVING BEYOND OUR MEANS AND THUS THE EXTRA MONIES WILL HAVE PORTIONS OF IT FLOW INTO GOVERNMENT COFFERS AS WE SPEND THIS MONEY ON TAXABLE GOODS OR WORSE THE STOCK MARKET... OR MAYBE THE SLOTS IN VEGAS. NO ONE CAN REALLY BELIEVE THIS EXTRA COIN WILL GO INTO A SAVINGS ACCOUNT YIELDING .2 - .4% ANNUALLY. AS INDIVIDUALS WE DO NOT GET ANY WRITE OFFS FOR THOSE GOODS AND SERVICES YET WE WILL CONTINUE TO PAY EXTRA TAXES ON THE GOOD FORTUNE OF LOWER REAL ESTATE VALUES.
One other note: Be careful about using GDP for anything. Sorry, but it is what I believe. GDP is an item which can be manipulated by the FED as they see fit to regulate issues like inflation, deflation, etc. GDP can be increased or decreased with a simple statement from the Head of the FED let alone some sort of policy change like increasing or decreasing interest rates. GDP is not the end all be all.
FOD
Last edited by fishordie; 05-13-2011 at 07:00 PM..
FOD, normally you and I are in complete agreement. I suppose this will be one of those time where we just have a different perspective. It's bound to happen on occasion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishordie
Hi Tony,
Sorry for the Caps below but I am using them to separate my answers from your points.
It would appear that if the Fed's primary interest was maximizing tax receipts they would use whatever resources they have at their disposal to buoy housing prices. In fact, I'd argue the point that they have done so.
AGAIN, MY POINT NEGATES THIS POINT OF VIEW ONLY AS FAR AS IT RELATES TO REAL ESTATE DEDUCTIONS AND TAXES. MY POINT CONTINUES TO BE AS REAL ESTATE TAX DEDUCTIONS GO UP BASED ON HIGHER PRICES OF REAL ESTATE, TAX REVENUE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OVERALL GOES DOWN.
Personal income tax receipts, yes. Overall tax receipts? I don't think you can say that as a matter of fact. Is there any hard data that supports that? Undoubtedly, mortgage interest deductions and property tax deductions would be higher in 2006 thru 2008 than in 2009 and 2010. However, tax receipts were markedly lower in 2009 and 2010 than when deductions were higher in the 2006 thru 2008 period.
Quote:
To the point that we're paying more taxes as a result of lower deductions, one needs to look at the entire picture. In the previously mentioned scenario 2 - yes, the tax bite is greater by $1,644, but it's a result of having a $10K higher AGI. I don't know about you, but I'll pony up $1,644 in exchange for $10K all day long. That's a no brainer.
AGAIN, MY POINT WAS NOT TO ARGUE ON HAVING MORE MONIES IN OUR POCKETS AS NEWER HOME OWNERS BENEFITING FROM THE LOWER VALUES OF REAL ESTATE, THOUGH I WILL ARGUE MANY PAST HOMEOWNERS ARE NOW PAYING EVEN MORE IN TAXES AS THEY HAVE BECOME RENTERS WITH MINIMAL DEDUCTIONS. RATHER, AS IN VEGAS AND ELSEWHERE AROUND THE WORLD, MANY OF THE PROPERTIES, ESPECIALLY THE CHOICEST PROPERTIES, ARE BEING PURCHASED BY DEEP POCKET INVESTORS OR LLC INVESTOR GROUPS WHO ENJOY GREAT WRITE OFFS NOT AVAILABLE TO HOMEOWNERS BUT THAT IS A STORY FOR ANOTHER POST.
IN REGARDS TO YOUR SECOND POINT, THE EXTRA MONIES WHICH IN 2006 WENT TO THE BANKS WHO ALSO WERE AFFORDED GREAT WRITE OFFS. BASED ON PAST HISTORY THIS CHANGE CLINKING AROUND IN AMERICANS POCKETS WILL BE SPENT ON CONSUMABLE GOODS WHICH HAVE A CHAIN OF TAXES ASSOCIATED WITH THEM. WE AMERICANS ARE NOTORIOUS FOR LIVING BEYOND OUR MEANS AND THUS THE EXTRA MONIES WILL HAVE PORTIONS OF IT FLOW INTO GOVERNMENT COFFERS AS WE SPEND THIS MONEY ON TAXABLE GOODS OR WORSE THE STOCK MARKET... OR MAYBE THE SLOTS IN VEGAS. NO ONE CAN REALLY BELIEVE THIS EXTRA COIN WILL GO INTO A SAVINGS ACCOUNT YIELDING .2 - .4% ANNUALLY. AS INDIVIDUALS WE DO NOT GET ANY WRITE OFFS FOR THOSE GOODS AND SERVICES YET WE WILL CONTINUE TO PAY EXTRA TAXES ON THE GOOD FORTUNE OF LOWER REAL ESTATE VALUES.
FOD
It seems somewhat misplaced aggravation to focus on the implications of paying higher taxes on a higher AGI. If lenders told homeowners "going forward, we'll allow you to pay 0% interest on your mortgage, but you'll have to pay income tax on the money you save", would anyone think that a bad deal?
FOD, perhaps I'm misinterpreting part of your message, but the statement below seems to indicate that you're aggravated at paying more in taxes in spite of lower home valuations?
Quote:
Originally Posted by fishordie
Perhaps I can answer your question as to who is losing money if government and banks are earning more monies. Combine my statement we the home owners are paying more in taxes based on lower home valuations and we the American taxpayers are watching as our dollar is worth less and less as we are printing money as fast as possible and you can then figure out who is really losing out in this equation. Remember the story if you are looking around the room and cannot identify who the goat is it just might be you. Well, we the American taxpayers are the dupes.
Last edited by tony soprano; 05-13-2011 at 07:38 PM..
Naw, not aggravated just concerned. My point to my post was not to decide what the overall tax revenue is of the government or if we as home buyers are benefiting from lower home prices. My sole intention was to draw attention to the misplaced concept of the Government losing tax revenue solely as it related to the housing market tanking. This incorrect concept has prompted renewed attempts to remove or greatly reduce the home mortgage deduction by congress. Though most of us of held this deduction as a sacred we may find at some point it is merely a golden idol which can easily be destroyed if we give into the concept the housing market collapse resulted in the country having to lose public benefits such as schools, police, fire department, social services, etc. which are always soft spots in the hearts of new or younger voters.
Remember the make up of voters nationally is changing with more and more voters looking do what is necessary to keep from cutting social and public services. This means either the government cuts from other areas, raises our tax levels or reduces or removes the mortgage interest deduction. Without continued public outrage from a dwindling homeowners pool, who are being steadily replaced by investors whose businesses already receive beneficial deductions, including depreciation and write off of other costs, the number of owner occupiers will decrease. Add to this the number of one time home owners concerned with tax deductions are now renters mad at anyone who bought homes at lower prices. These are folks who once would have bristled at the thought of removing the home interest tax deduction and now might just believe it is not so important especially if it impacts their unemployment, welfare, government funded health benefits, Social security, etc. This means owner occupiers will become less of a voting majority resulting in the eventual removal of our sacred tax deduction. You do not have to believe me but it is coming.
Anyways Tony, you and I always agree on issues and I still believe we do but I think you may have mis interpreted my intentions. I never intended to discuss how much or how little tax revenue the government is receiving overall only how they have increased their revenue based on declining real estate values. My intent is to make folks aware, as home owners, our savings on home prices have actually aided the governments ability to provide monies to services rather than reducing that ability.
My intent is to make folks aware, as home owners, our savings on home prices have actually aided the governments ability to provide monies to services rather than reducing that ability.
I for one am always pleased to help out the Gub'ment in any way I can. As a matter of fact I wouldn't even mind if they buried spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste 100 miles from my home...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
