Comments on: The Biggest Beneficiaries of Housing Subsidies? The Wealthy.

By: zonmoy

zonmoy — Mon, 11 Jul 2016 04:29:00 +0000

In reply to swek. as well as major D donors, for the same reasons.

By: Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt

Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt — Sat, 09 Jul 2016 19:54:00 +0000

In reply to Cathy M.

The main reasons I can think of that many want to own houses are that mortgages can be paid off while rent lasts forever and for more space. For many of us, it’s a paid off home is part of a retirement plan. For others, it’s also an investment/savings plan.
Others see a freedom in renting not found in ownership. Or an availability of living in places that ownership is cost prohibitive.
Homeowners get up to two tax deductions renters don’t get but they also pay property tax which renters don’t.

By: Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt

Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt — Sat, 09 Jul 2016 19:43:00 +0000

In reply to JessSayin. Keeping a mortgage in order to get a tax deduction on the interest is stupid math.

By: Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt

Sherry Ball Schoenfeldt — Sat, 09 Jul 2016 19:41:00 +0000

I agree with your comments about disproportionality of the mortgage interest deduction. The fact it can be taken on mortgages on two homes totaling up to $1M is so shocking to me. I guess technically that could include a yacht if you could live on it.

But I feel it’s wrong for you to use the property tax deduction in your comparisons. Homeowners pay a tax renters don’t and get a reduction to their income for it but they are still paying net tax — just to a different taxing authority. For instance a homeowner pays $10,000 in property tax which reduces his federal taxable income by $10,000. If she is in the 35% bracket, she saves $3500 on her federal taxes. She has still paid $6500 in net taxes which is $3000 more than the tax on the $10,000 in income would have been.

By: swek

swek — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 22:26:00 +0000

the Realtors – or fancy real estate brokers – are major R donors; kill the deduction for mortgage interest and real estate taxes, and you’ll loose all their campaign cash

By: Lydia D York

Lydia D York — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 15:11:00 +0000

Many thanks to Mr. Meni, Mr. Levin and especially TalkPoverty for giving them the platform to say what I’ve been trying to say for years; The people who most desperately need help with housing aren’t getting it. But, you’d never know it by the way the federal department of Housing and Urban Development market their programs. They purport to spend millions and millions of taxpayer funds for low income housing, when nothing could be further from the truth. While the rich get richer, the poor get crumbs. I’ve highlighted their abysmal track record through my online fb group OCCUPY HUD for years; Hoping against hope that someone from HUD would prove me wrong – they never have. The onus really is on us to correct the myths, debunk the stereotypes and admit that we all have a lot of work to do to ensure that safe, clean affordable housing becomes our national priority from this point, forward.

By: JessSayin

JessSayin — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 12:35:00 +0000

You can deduct the property tax and interest paid for two homes, as long as one is far enough away to count as a vacation home. One of these two homes can be a yacht or just a boat with galley and sleeping quarters. If you look at the Clintons’ tax records, they bought two homes when they left the White House — one for $1.7 million in NY and one for $2.85 million in D.C. They make millions of dollars, including Bill was making $4 million/year as honorary chancellor of Laureate International universities (a private, for-profit college corporation) from 2010-2015. They could have paid off those homes in any given year, yet they continue to hold mortgages on them for the tax deduction. Prior to 1986, people who didn’t own homes routinely itemized because you could deduct interest paid on credit cards and car loans, as well as any sales tax you had paid. Reagan’s agreement with the banks was that he wouldn’t eliminate the tax deduction for mortgage interest because this would be bad for their business. Part of the justification was that credit cards and car loans are “personal debt,” which should be discouraged. Since 1986 however, credit card debt has risen, so the disincentive isn’t as great as the need people have for emergency income. What was encouraged is remaining in debt to the bank via mortgages. At a lower income than the Clintons’ it puts people’s homes at risk, rather than the opposite, because people are encouraged to borrow more on a home when the home’s value increases, rather than carry consumer debt that they can’t deduct on taxes. Should they then become unable to pay for the home mortgage, the home is foreclosed on by the bank, whereas if they had kept the debt in the consumer realm of credit cards and personal loans, which are unsecured, they could have gone bankrupt and preserved their home ownership.

By: brian_in_arizona

brian_in_arizona — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 11:41:00 +0000

Putting a cap on home mortgage interest would be a simple remedy to what is indeed a tax system tilted towards the affluent. Or more broadly, putting a firm $ cap on all deductions.

“Common sense tax reform” doesn’t happen due to fierce opposition from the charity lobby, the real estate lobby, and coolness from Democrats representing affluent states like NY, NJ, CT, MA, CA, MD, WA, etc. Republican opposition to higher taxes is a given, of course.

By: Matt

Matt — Fri, 01 Jul 2016 11:21:00 +0000

In reply to Cathy M. Home ownership helps people in trades make money like carpenters, electricians, etc. Homeownership also helps banks, or used to before banks started doing way more than mortgages. Renting helps hedge funds/investment firms now who bought a lot of cheap properties during the recession. This blog finally made sense with this article. A broken clock is right twice a day. They failed to mention that renting helps the rich as well. Think about the fact that a wealthy person rents out a house for $1000 a month because the government pays the rent for the occupant. The rental assistance programs and the tax credit is what has artificially inflated housing the most. Republicans are for these things because it helps their constituents. Democrats are for it because they are idiots and don't realize the damage.

By: Cathy M

Cathy M — Thu, 30 Jun 2016 23:30:00 +0000

Why is home ownership the be all and end all? I don’t want to own a home. I don’t want to have to worry about the water heater going out or a leak in the roof. I am quite happy to pay my rent to someone else who takes on that responsibility. But, why should I be penalized in tax refunds just because I don’t want to be saddled down with a mortgage?