4 ms·

Unfortunately the mortgage interest deduction is a major third rail in U.S. politics and it is probably here to stay. This article is 100% spot on though--it i

by danhak 10y ago

Unfortunately the mortgage interest deduction is a major third rail in U.S. politics and it is probably here to stay. This article is 100% spot on though--it is a completely regressive policy and privileges those with enough capital to purchase real estate at the expense of those who have no choice but to rent.

underbluewaters 10y ago
Yep. While in the abstract I would support eliminating it, now that I've finally purchased a home I'm against any changes to the status quo. The very economics of this huge purchase are only made rational by that deduction.
- maxerickson 10y ago
  What about phasing it out over 20 years? The deduction related to the purchase decision you just made will be a lot smaller by then and you would know what the new rules were for future decisions.
- hx87 10y ago
  What about implementing an equivalent deduction for renters? I know renters theoretically benefit from their landlord's deduction, but that only applies if the landlord is carrying a mortgage, and tax benefits for landlords have a dubious record of filtering down to renters.
rwmj 10y ago
The equivalent in the UK (MIRAS - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_interest_relief_at_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_interest_relief_at_so...) was abolished in 2000 without too much fuss.
DrScump 10y ago
Only if you look at it as media moguls try to sell the concept. As implemented, much of the benefit goes to the wealthy with both pricey primary homes and with secondary homes. If you instead limited it to primary homes only and only up to, say, property prices 1.5 times the median single family home price for the area, you'd recover a majority of that deduction right off the bat without harming lower- or middle-income home ownership or causing a dive in property prices or lose the stability benefits of home ownership.

by danhak 10y ago

underbluewaters 10y ago

Yep. While in the abstract I would support eliminating it, now that I've finally purchased a home I'm against any changes to the status quo. The very economics of this huge purchase are only made rational by that deduction.

maxerickson 10y ago
What about phasing it out over 20 years? The deduction related to the purchase decision you just made will be a lot smaller by then and you would know what the new rules were for future decisions.
hx87 10y ago
What about implementing an equivalent deduction for renters? I know renters theoretically benefit from their landlord's deduction, but that only applies if the landlord is carrying a mortgage, and tax benefits for landlords have a dubious record of filtering down to renters.

rwmj 10y ago

The equivalent in the UK (MIRAS - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_interest_relief_at_source https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortgage_interest_relief_at_so...) was abolished in 2000 without too much fuss.

DrScump 10y ago

Only if you look at it as media moguls try to sell the concept. As implemented, much of the benefit goes to the wealthy with both pricey primary homes and with secondary homes. If you instead limited it to primary homes only and only up to, say, property prices 1.5 times the median single family home price for the area, you'd recover a majority of that deduction right off the bat without harming lower- or middle-income home ownership or causing a dive in property prices or lose the stability benefits of home ownership.