News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on In January, there were more real-estate agents than homes for sale in the U.S.. Parent comment

Re:In January, there were more real-estate agents than homes... by frongpik on Monday March 22, 2021 @08:11PM (#26549268)
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.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:In January, there were more real-estate agents than homes... by exclusiv on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @04:02PM (#26559694)
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.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:In January, there were more real-estate agents than homes... by frongpik on Tuesday March 23, 2021 @09:53PM (#26562651)
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.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:In January, there were more real-estate agents than homes... by munk-a on Wednesday March 24, 2021 @01:13PM (#26570098)
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?
[ Parent | on HN ]