Re:For first time since 1880s, more young Americans live wit...
by marssaxman on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @08:27PM
(#11766741)
That's the part I understand. What surprised me, when I bought a house, was that for all the talk about what a big deal this deduction was supposed to be, and how difficult it would supposedly be to eliminate it, the actual effect on my total housing cost was effectively negligible. They could roll it back tomorrow and I'd never notice.
Re:For first time since 1880s, more young Americans live wit...
by mevile on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @09:01PM
(#11766900)
You must not pay a lot of interest. I deduct this and my property taxes and it's thousands of dollars less that I pay each year. It's significant.
Re:For first time since 1880s, more young Americans live wit...
by gozur88 on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @09:17PM
(#11766973)
That's because this is a time of historically low interest rates. If rates were 12%, like they were when I got out of school, you'd definitely notice.
Re:For first time since 1880s, more young Americans live wit...
by ArkyBeagle on Tuesday May 24, 2016 @11:49PM
(#11767538)
I've owned three homes and never taken the mortgage interest deduction. The historical reason is based on 20% down mortgages for less-than-2x-annual-income housing. That's clearly not much the case any longer. Now it's expected by the NAR and the general real estate industrial complex.
It contributes to economic unfairness. Paying less taxes just because one owns a house is not optimal use of tax dollars when people who can't afford a house are doing pretty badly.
A homeowner pays less in housing costs (mortgages aren't subject to rent increases by a landlord) and pay less taxes than someone who rents who makes the same and they get to keep all the equity. It's incredibly unfair.
The historical reason for the subsidy is to increase home ownership. It's not really helping anymore.