3 ms·

Still doesn't offer that tax advantage (either in capital gains or the numerous deductions). And if you have to live somewhere like the parent comment, this doe

Still doesn't offer that tax advantage (either in capital gains or the numerous deductions). And if you have to live somewhere like the parent comment, this doesn't help you. You will have a commission in the expense ratio indefinitely. But yes, definitely a decent option if you want to put your money in real estate with less headache.

frongpik 6y ago
The tax advantage is up to comical 250k that will be promptly eaten away by brokerage fees, transfer fees and other god knows what fees, on top of all the house maintanence costs over those years. Those who have a million or two but a house not because it's good for financials, but because they can't stand cranny rentals. Those with bare minimum money jump into a mortgage because for them it's the only efficient financial instrument available (a margin trading account essentially). If they tried to open such an account with a brokerage, they would be told no after looking at their net worth.
- exclusiv 6y ago
  It's 500k of tax free gains for married couples. How is that, or even the 250k individual comical? Also, that's the gain that has no taxes AFTER fees/commissions. It does not get "eaten away". You can also do 1031 exchanges, opportunity zones with real estate, or put it into an LLC. A lot of flexibility and tax strategy available.
  - frongpik 6y ago
    I'd rather pay capital gains tax on a 250k stock appreciation, than have my house appreciate by the same amount. It's just ordinary people don't have brokerage accounts that can appreciate by so much.
    - munk-a 6y ago
      As a slight diversion, this thread danced around a pretty interesting point in my eyes - why are ordinary people denied access to brokerage accounts with advantageous rates - it's not likely that the money actions will be nearly as dynamic or require nearly as much oversight as folks with a lot of money and the minimum investment bars seem unreasonably high before you start dodging the heavy fees. Isn't that system just furthering wealth inequality?

frongpik 6y ago

The tax advantage is up to comical 250k that will be promptly eaten away by brokerage fees, transfer fees and other god knows what fees, on top of all the house maintanence costs over those years. Those who have a million or two but a house not because it's good for financials, but because they can't stand cranny rentals. Those with bare minimum money jump into a mortgage because for them it's the only efficient financial instrument available (a margin trading account essentially). If they tried to open such an account with a brokerage, they would be told no after looking at their net worth.

exclusiv 6y ago
It's 500k of tax free gains for married couples. How is that, or even the 250k individual comical? Also, that's the gain that has no taxes AFTER fees/commissions. It does not get "eaten away". You can also do 1031 exchanges, opportunity zones with real estate, or put it into an LLC. A lot of flexibility and tax strategy available.
- frongpik 6y ago
  I'd rather pay capital gains tax on a 250k stock appreciation, than have my house appreciate by the same amount. It's just ordinary people don't have brokerage accounts that can appreciate by so much.
  - munk-a 6y ago
    As a slight diversion, this thread danced around a pretty interesting point in my eyes - why are ordinary people denied access to brokerage accounts with advantageous rates - it's not likely that the money actions will be nearly as dynamic or require nearly as much oversight as folks with a lot of money and the minimum investment bars seem unreasonably high before you start dodging the heavy fees. Isn't that system just furthering wealth inequality?