Home : Blogs : John Mulkey, Housing Guru : John Mulkey, Housing Guru

The Surprising Cost Of The First Time Buyer Tax Credit

money and time Many see the $8,000 first time buyer tax credit as an excellent stimulus for an ailing housing market; and some are seeking an expansion that would extend the credit to all home buyers. Others have proposed increasing the amount to $15,000. After all, spending such small amounts is insignificant when measured against the stimulus and bailout packages that have cost trillions.

The first time buyer tax credit was intended to stimulate housing, to bring in more buyers; and it has succeeded. Just like the Cash for Clunkers program stimulated new car sales, the housing stimulus has brought in more home buyers. But what if we discovered that the $8,000 number didn’t really cover the cost? What if we discovered the actual cost of bringing in each additional buyer wasn’t $8,000, but was more than 5 times that amount? Would it still seem like a good deal—like a fair deal?

Well that’s the cost, more than $40,000 per each additional buyer. And the estimate is probably on the conservative side. Based on numbers from the NAR, the program is expected to cost just over $15 billion; and when you divide that number by the projected number of additional homes sold, you discover the “real” cost to the American taxpayer.

Is it worth it? Will it help restore stability to the housing market? Probably not. But it did at least keep a few billion away from Wall Street and put it directly in the hands of consumers.

Source: Calculated Risk Blog

The Housing Guru: The one source for all your housing questions

Posted by John Mulkey, Housing Guru on 09/03/2009 06:26 AM

Comments (94)

Cost of the First Time Buyer Tax Credit in the ActiveRain Channel

first time buyer tax credit, housing crisis, government interference in business

Generate short URL

Post is included in group: Celebrating Free Enterprise
Post is included in group: Politics And Real Estate
Post is included in group: Silent Majority
Post is included in group: The Economics of Real Estate
Post is included in group: The Ninety-ninth Percentile

94 Comments on The Surprising Cost Of The First Time Buyer Tax Credit

SEP

2009

It might have been worth it if the tarp funds were utilized differently and all this is doing is putting a band aid on an oozing sore but what people dont realize is the worst is yet to come.

Heather - And they didn't even put any antiseptic on the gaping wound!

John - I had to reread the blogs a couple of times before I figured out what they were trying to say. I think, though, that NAR's estimates of home sales without the tax credit were high and that the credit will have influenced more than 350,000 home sales. I think that without the credit the total home sales would have been below 4,000,000. But that still leaves the cost of each additional home sold well above $8000, well above $20,000 per additional unit.

John, I just read this a second time, and I'm still confused. Oh well. Interesting stuff!

Mike - I thought it interesting, and even though we can't pin down the exact cost--for we'll never know just how many purchased solely because of the credit--it's far above 48,000, and probably above $40,000.

Patricia - The bottom line is it's much more expensive than just $8,000.

For what it's worth...It's only helped me with TWO buyers....so not much relief here.

But hey, health care will solve all our problems. Maybe I should focus on that...at the rate things are going I might need it more than real estate......LOL!

Thom - I hope something solves our problems soon. I need to find a new source of subject matter : )

Again, government intervention costs more to the tax payers than its worth. The free market will take care of itself by price adjustments, and not taxation without representations...which this government is famous for.

John

Just proves what many of us have felt all along. The Fed can't get much right anymore.

SEP

2009

Well taxpayers have been complaining that they would like the money rather than give it to the banks, automakers and insurance companies - so we really can't complain.

The government can't win either way!

Nicholas - Exactly!

Trey - But they can spend our money with ease.

Jane - It's difficult to feel sorry for them. Their solutions always cost more than they estimate.

This, as with all government programs, is smoke and mirrors.

When the governemnt gives, it is giving tax payer money to others. After all, the money has to come from somewhere.

Every American who has not or will not receive a Tax Credit for buying a home this year and last is subsidizing American tax payers who did.

Simple as that. The government is again playing favorites with the hard earned money of others.

John, Interesting statistics. I am curious where did and how did NAR come up with these figures? I do understand that with the Feds, there are always cost over-runs. I had no idea that it was that much...

I had one buyer take advantage of it, but he would have purchased anyway. It was an afterthought for him. It did not stimulate any buying here.

There are two sides to every issue; I hadn't....and it looks like alot of other people hadn't...considered the other side of this particular coin. Lenn summed it up in saying that the money had to come from somewhere and taxpayers who didn't receive a credit are subsidizing those who did. Same old, same old!

Lenn - And the money isn't even accomplishing its stated goal.

Michael - The estimated number of additional sales comes from the NAR, then it's a simple matter to divide into the amount spent. Interestingly, the NAR numbers are probably overstating the benefit which makes the actual cost even more.

Judi - And it certainly won't make a long-term difference.

Leslie - From one pocket into another.

We know the government os one of the least efficient users of resources - but besid this, many of the sales this year just accelerated sales that would have come anyway in 2010, and now will not.

I actually had one seller almost refuse to sell his home to a buyer that was qualified for the $8,000 tax credit for just the principal alone. He sold, but every step of the negotiations was met with "They can pay for it....they're getting $8,000 of my money anyway". In some cases, it's making it harder to put the deal together.

Brian - Just like the Cash for Clunkers did to auto sales.

Lina - I've heard similar stories from others.

John:

Those are interesting numbers on the cost. I hadn't read those figures anywhere. It is a bit distressing but as a Realtor, I would still prefer that the government does what it can to stimulate the housing market. We are all paying for bailouts and programs that have astronomical price tags. At least this one is bringing in some home sales.

John,

Interesting information. I don't think I buy the calculated risk blog conclusions entirely and here is why.

It is very difficult for any entity to project future buying trends for people while the economy is in an economic recession. Consumer confidence is lowered. NAR may project that 1.8-2 million people will be first time home buyers, but if the consumers are feeling so uncertain about the future many will probably delay their purchase until confidence returns. Americans are now finally SAVING more money-evidence of an uncertain future.

I feel that the tax credits are worthwhile and that they have strongly influenced people to jump back into the market. I doubt if many Wall Street executives own a "clunker"; "main street" Americans are catching the break -as intended by the tax credits.

Everyone is quite correct when the government issues a tax credit, subsidy, or tax deduction it is taking money from one group of people and transferring it to others.

Thanks for the post.

Claudette - I also support stimulating the housing market, but in typical government fashion, they've over spent for the value received.

Bruce - While it's impossible to know the exact numbers, logic tells us that the ultimate cost is far beyond the $8,000 credit alone. And the question is: Is it worth it, or could the money have been better spent?

John, I've worked with first time home buyers all year. They're after that $8000 tax credit big time. It has been brisk business for me. However, I think you have a valid point. I've often wondered in my mind how much total money this "great" incentive program was going to cost us and further, where is all that magic money coming from?

Great post.

Bob - Well, we know where the money is ultimately coming from. I just question whether or not the benfit outweighs the cost. $15 billion might have made a greater and more lasting impact if spent differently--but we'll never know.

Government solutions are always costly and mismanaged.

John, I hate it when someone bursts my bubble LOL. But we must deal in the realities. Thanks for a great post.

Barb - Deep inside, we all knew the numbers would be higher. : )

When it comes to our government, things are never as they seem. That holds true even moreso during these tough times. I still say as I said from the beginning, let regular Americans do what we've always done, work hard, pull together and get the country rolling again, the government needs to get out of the way IMHO.

Yes, I agree with the above comment made that the tax payers want the money, so the government gave it to them so they shouldn't complain should they?!

Patricia Aulson/portsmouth nh homes

Thanks!

Both of my children have been waiting out this market to buy homes. They have a nice down payment, good jobs, great credit scores, are renting and have been reluctant to buy because of the fear of loss in this market. I can't blame them, in fact, I encouraged them to wait (If you have kids, I bet you did too...). The $8000.00 tax credit brought them into the market and one of my children just bought their first home. The seond child has written three offers and lost each time. Certainly the tax incentive was the impetus behind getting them into this market to buy.

I have to figure there are tens of thousands of other kids just lilke mine across the country that have been inspired by the tax credit to purchase. Bringing them out to buy is what this market needs. The tax credit has helped to get them over their fears.

Historically, we have given tax credits for farming, energy, education and a plethora of other areas of our economy over the years. The tax credit is an inch off of a ball of string in the big picture. If it will help remove a couple million foreclosures off of the market, I have no complaint (and I am one of the haves).

I can tell you that from personal experience working with First Time Home Buyers, that 8,000 has brought out many new home owners. All of those people now not only paying property taxes, but paid you and I too, which in turn we used that commission to pay for other goods and services. That 8,000.00 will end up right back into the economy, further spurring more buying activity for workers across America. Most of those buyers will not take that 8k and stick it under their mattresses, they will go out and buy new cars, TV,s boats etc, giving those sales people funds to buy more houses and get more loans... Hence sparking the economy.

Donna - I agree that private enterprise and innovation can do much more for the economy than government spending.

Patricia - I suspect many might re-think their approval if they knew the true costs.

Dan - My only point is that most aren't seeing the cost beyond the $8,000. Is it still worth it if the cost to the taxpayer is 5 times that amount.

Ricky - We'll see. I think many of the sales have just been stolen from the future; and they came at a high cost.

The government shouldn't get involved in such things. It distorts the market.

In response to comment #32 about the positives of now people are paying property taxes. When one pays rent on a house, doesn't part of that rent allow the property owner to pay the taxes? I always thought that it was wrong to not let renters deduct property tax as owners get to do. It's also not fair to allow mortgage interest to be deductible while none of your rent is deductible.

That's why I think that the whole income tax system needs to be scrapped. It just distorts the decisions of people and messes up the free market. Instead of making busniness decisions on their own merits, people make decisions based on taxes.

Tim - I agree on a total revamping of how we collect taxes, and think the government's attempts to stimulate housing will ultimately do more harm than good. It's certainly costing more than just $8,000 per additional buyer.

#34 - Thank you for making my point for me. When a renter purchases a home, now over 80% of them foreclosures or bank owned, another renter takes their place. The home they purchased the taxes were not being paid, you need to think big picture and the velocity of money and how it all moves the market.

Imagine where the housing marketing would be if the tax credit had not been available. We'd really be in bad shape!

Russel - I'm just wondering where it will be once the tax credit expires.

I have seen some returns in my own business this year, so I can't really complain about the tax credit, but I DO REGULARLY complain about the government and its "answers" to our problems. They seem to have a way of causing more problems than they actually fix, no matter who is in office.

I'd certainly rather see the funds in the hands of the little guy versus the big corporate giants. However I would rather simply see the government stay out of the whole thing. All they are doing by printing all the money is dragging the recession out. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't see a double dip recession because of all the government meddling.

Emily - My complaints about government interference also extend to both political parties. It always seems their solution is to see how much money they can throw at a problem, which, at best, only generates short-term benefits.

Rob - Many "experts" also predict a double-dip for the economy.

While I'm more than a little curious to know where the discrepancy occurs on the cost side, you cannot limit the economic benefit to just home purchases. These transactions provided additional income to thousands of people (taxed). These people spent most of their income (it's the American Way and it was taxed) and thereby employeed others (taxed). Beyond that, many FTHBs are in their new homes, but have yet to receive their money. It will come with their tax returns next year. At which time, they will buy appliances, furniture, etc (taxed).

In the end, the numbers will be calculated a dozen different ways until each party ends up with the answer they want. We will never know the actual cost/benefit.

Exactly what I was getting at Erik... AMEN

John,

It is interesting when Washington gets involved. That is why I think the real estate community should get ahead of the curve on the mortgage side and work hard to show mortgage transparency to their buyers. It may short circuit our wonderful legislators getting in the middle of mortgages which would increase the cost to the borrowers and make it more difficult for real estate agents to close homes. The wonderful $8000 credit is a case in point as you have described.

thanks,

I have had 2 buyers jump in the market and take advantage of the credit so far. I agree though, that we will all be paying for this in the end.

Erik - A great portion of the homes purchased were resales, foreclosures, etc. The impact is certaily not the same as the purchase of a new home. And while the total impace cannot be measured, I think it's hard to justify spending $40,000+ of taxpayer money just to stimulate a few sales. And the other issue remains of just how many of these homes were "stolen" from the future. I'm not saying there is no benefit--in fact many benefit--I'm just surprised with the overall cost versus benefit.

Mark - Government involvement usually means wasted money.

Kristi - For those who truly needed the help, the program has been great.

John,

Still not a lot of people jumping on board the tax credit here in my area. Most of our sales are REO's and foreclosures.

Mike - Those who want to jump on board better do so quick.

I'm going to have to agree with everyone here. I'd also like to ad a few additional thoughts to the conversation.While it's true that in my market there has been a boom in sales directly related to this Tax Credit it may however,be a double edged sword.

The Government in it's infinite wisdom has done it again.They have successfully created an artificial uptick in the housing market a mini bubble in some areas. On one hand it's been nice to have seen an increase in my sales this year but on the other hand I wonder "has it taken away sales for me that would have come in 2010"? It's probably very much like the clunkers debacle.These things need to clear themselves up in a normal cycle instead of lengthening the pain and suffering instead of ripping of the bandage quickly they pull it off slowly, yet again they've put their finger in the dike.

What's going to happen to the market in 2010 when the 5 year arms reset? We've seen the effects of the 2 and 3 year arms resetting and it wasn't pretty.The early rounds of foreclosures were in a first time home buyer price range wich effected market prices as a whole benefiting 1st timers and investors who scooped up the foreclosures. The Feds stepped in to incentivise the first time homebuyer who would come in and stimulate additional sales in the lower price points (Sub-Prime). When the 5 year arms reset it wont be the Sub-Prime type.This will be higher price point homes and who will they try to stimulate then?Did this whole other sector of higher priced homes and mortgages lose equity also? We know they did.Will these homeowners be able to refinance? I think we all know the answer to that one too.We are about to experience another round offoreclosures and downturn in the market its really unfortunate.

I dont want to be the bringer of doom and gloom all im saying is that we need to prepare and be knowledgable of this situation.The successful agents are going to position themselves now for the coming storm.We can look at this as a positive or a negative i leave it to all of you to decide.

Jim - Can't say I disagree. We still have some difficult times ahead, and no one really knows what the full impact will be.

Being a numbers guy, it is always interesting to see what someone can do with numbers. I think your source is faulty. I don't believe that what we have encountered is actually costing us what he says. The program brought a lot of people out that may have bought anyway, but the actual cost of the program is the $8,000 per new sale and when you use that money in the local economy, it does mulitply itself, but only for the benefit of the economy. This is one program I do believe in. Should we extend it, not as it is being recommended.

The $8,000 tax credit has been very popular with most of the first time buyers I've worked with. Our local first time buyer homes are actually in pretty high demand and running into multiple offers isn't unusual at all.

The credit has definately stimulated the first time buyer market here, but for how long?

It will be interesting to see how the market responds starting Dec 1st.

Fred - I'm a numbers guy too, and I'm not disputing the fact that we gave an $8,000 tax break to each individual who participated in the program. But if you want to understand the actual cost of achieving these sales, you must divide the amount spent by the number of increased sales. Sure it's a different way to interpret the data, but it tells us what it cost per additional sale. And that's an important number to consider.

Brett - Can't say I wouldn't avail myself of the program if I could. There have certainly been those who benefited from the program.

I need mor explanation for the numbers. A tax credit takes very little overhead. Some printing and auditing cost at the IRS maybe. Then $8,000.00 time the number of credits. Where did the rest of this cost come from? Where is the line item in the budget? How do they project that cost?

Gene - The numbers are not based upon the cost of the $8,000 credit or it's administration, the post refers to the actual cost to generate additional sales. If you use $15 billion as the cost and divide that by the projected additional sales--for you would have had "normal" sales without the stimulus--that leaves the cost of the extra sales. It's not an exact number, for you can never quantify the exact number, but is an estimate based upon expectations.

This is basically an after the fact analysis..another I told you so pieces...so remember this next time!

It is government, so you know it is not going to be cost effective just based on the history of our budget deficit.

Wow, I didn't stop to read between the lines on this one. I'm not surprised,though, the government has a lot of authority and little accountability. Thanks.

Gary - It would be great if we could get the after the fact infor before the event. Sure could help avoid mistakes : )

Sybil - Yes, it is government.

Kathleen - Thanks for visiting.

Hi John -- Interesting post. I would love to have seen the tax credit double or triple to try and create first-time home buyers.

Well . . . you sure have a lot of comments on this one. I'd like to read Obama's comments, but don't think he's read the post yet, huh?

Chris - It will be interesting to see what happens next--if they'll extend or increase the credit.

Milissa - I don't recall a comment from him, but I might have just overlooked it : )

I don't think we'll have to wait until December to see the affect.. I think we will start seeing it by the beginning of November... so many buyers that will be out of the market...

SEP

2009

Is the cost so much higher because of the cost to administer the credit. Would the price per person be lower if more people participated?

It has helped to incentivize several of my buyers.

This is an expensive stimulus, yet, it worked. What did the other president do with his half of the money? The big three car bailout was just as expensive, yet, it accomplished very little.

My hope is that we are not just borrowing on future sales. In my opinion we are no where near out of the woods.

This is phenominal...After I first read the article I was angry thinking that it's a lot of money to pay but after reading the comments I have mellowed and am stuck in the middle. I have had one buyer jump into buying because of a number of factors and the 8k was only a part of it. I am not opposed to helping buyers or stimulating the economy but I still think that if the feds would have given a check to every taxpayer who filed a return last year and distributed that wealth back to those who are paying it, we would have done more to stimulate the economy. The banks did exactly what they were not supposed to do, by hoarding the money of buying up other banks. The people would have bought new cars and houses and othe goods that would have put the money immediately back into circulation. Again, favorites and padding the pockets of the rich. Welcome to American politics.

Lane - I would think that the program has probably already peaked, and while we may have a few that jump in at the last minute, we've probably received the benefit.

Christine - What the number represents is the cost of ADDITIONAL BUYERS, those that would not have otherwise purchased without the credit. It's not the administrative cost, it's the cost to bring in more buyers.

Mark - Politicians, and I place them ALL in the same category, always think short-term. That's why we continually face large problems in education, social security, medicare, etc. Few are willing to sacrifice their re-election to do the right thing.

Charles - Just as the Cash for Clunkers program borrowed from future sales, this program is doing the same.

Dave - It is definitely politics as usual.

How much revenue was created by these additional sales? How many rental trucks were used, how many appraisals got done, deeds prepared, commissions paid? How many trips to Lowes or Home Depot? How much TAX was paid by those who sold a home, wrote a loan, did an inspection etc.???

This blog you used did not take the ripple effect into account.

Joe - No. That wasn't the focus. Of course there is a ripple effect, but the only point of the post was to show the cost of increasing the sales number and to have us consider it with a different perspective.

It just goes to show you the mismanagement of budgets within our government. And they want to do the same thing with healthcare???

Darrell - I think what we need to consider is the inability of government to accurately describe the amounts of money being spend and the benefits we'll receive.

The tax credit did relatively little in our area. But prices have remained relatively high here. Some think we have another leg down to go and buyers are scared. Only one of my buyers was taking advantage of the tax credit. But they would have bought anyway.

John

I want to look at the whole donut, not the hole in the donut.

A first time buyer who would not had bought did so. That seller got to buy another home.

2 mortgages, 2 sets of moving expenses, 2 borker fees, appraisals etc.

I bet most ofthe tax credit was covered by the economic ripple effect and the tax paid on that effect.

Argggg. That's really not a good reply but that's all I've got after getting that number.

Ruthmarie - Your buyer just added to the overall cost, since they would have purchased anyway.

Joe - While I don't particularly care for donuts, I'll look at your "whole." It's impossible to measure the overall benefit, and that was neither my intent, nor do I believe it was the intent of Calculated Risk. What I wanted to show was that you can't just judge the cost by the $8,000 number, for whatever number is the real one, I believe it's much larger than the tax credit. I find it hard to believe we've received 5 times the benefit--which is what the actual cost calculates to be--for the transaction. But the bottom line to our discussion is that it's just academic. The money is spent, and I truly hope we receive many times that amount for the economy needs all the help it can get. Thanks for taking time to think the issue through.

Lyn - I could say that too, but I don't think it would be as effective as your saying it : )

I agree John, we need to look past the $8,000 cost to see what the "real" cost to the taxpayer is of the tax credit.

I would like to see what the real cost will be to the taxpayer in real dollars if these houses don't move, the housing prices collapse and what burden that will bring down upon the taxpayer. It could possibly exceed any numbers we can possibly project.

Dan - Wonder how many of these will wind up in foreclosure.

I never thought this was a good idea.....it might have helped our industry some but it was bad for America.

SEP

2009

I haven't had any first-time homebuyers this year. All of mine have been older consumers who have sold their home and are buying another. I only had one first-time homebuyer last year. Once the credit score was raised to 620 and the 0% down was eliminated, except on USDA programs, we lost a majority of our first-time homebuyers. Unfortunately, consumers have not been well educated about credit and saving for things so it has slowed our market down on the buying side.

Damon - I think there may have been better ways to spend the money.

Carolyn - Your last sentence describes the crux of the problem. Consumers do need financial education, and it needs to begin in at an early age.

SEP

2009

Its very frustrating when you listen to the people who are supposed to be watch dogs and they openly admit they don't even know where the money is going. How are they supposed to fix the problem when they don't even know where they are throwing the money.

Brian - And they don't care how much it costs; it's not their money.

John,

Nice post and great points that you make. Anytime the government gives out money, somebody loses. :)

Steve

Steve - The government would prefer that we not consider the complete numbers.

SEP

2009

John - I'm not sure about how many of these will end up in foreclosure, let's hope for the best; but it is different this time.

Credit score requirements are much higher than before, income is being documented (now that's a novel idea), option arms and interest only loans have disappeared and many of the buyers today have cash in the bank and very good jobs.

My daughter and son have great jobs and have been afraid to buy because of the plummeting prices in the market - not because they couldn't afford to buy. In fact, I advised them not to buy in early 2007 (please don't anybody get upset at me for admitting that). They are what I call the "smart money" and have been prudent in their decisions to buy a home and have been timing the market. I believe there are many other buyers that have been sitting on the fence just like my kids; highly qualified buyers that just needed a push to get into the market, The tax credit is working to get my kids to buy and I am sure for many others just like them.

Who knows how many foreclosures there are going to be? Probably about 6 million or so, according to the NYT. Will this tax credit bring more foreclosures like before? Well, prices are half what they were before, credit standards are much higher and the insanity is over in the market. With lower payments, today's buyers stand a far better chance of being able to keep their homes than the homeowners who just left their homes to foreclosure.

Many homeowners dumped their homes when their mortgages doubled (after their ARMs adjusted) and they discovered that the value of their home was half what they paid two to three years before. This was why the classic "buy and bail" scheme became so popular. Buy your neighbor's house at half price and then dump the one you own on the bank, cutting your mortgage payment in half. There has been a lot of selfishness going on, I do not excuse these people for what they did. Again, banks have changed underwriting guidelines to prevent that scheme and have effectively nipped it in the bud leading to less foreclosures in the marketplace.

I think if prices stabilize in the near future, the foreclosure crisis will wind down and we will be out of this mess by the end of 2011. I am not one afraid of making predictions, read my post about my predictions on this market back in February 2006:

http://activerain.com/blogsview/1135530/they-called-me-chicken-little-hey-what-did-i-know-

Dan

Dan - The $8,000 credit is great for many, such as your children--and there are millions just like them. Many are still avoiding the market out of fear, and many lack the guidance that you can offer your family. Of course the point of the post isn't whether or not it offers help to buyers, but to point out the actual cost to the taxpayer to generate those additional sales.

I read your post. Interesting. Since I don't have a friend with a crystal ball, I'll subscribe to your blog to see what yours predicts. While I failed to see the severity of the crash, I was making predictions in 2005, and began winding down my residential construction business. After 40 years of volatility, I felt we were entering a time in which I had no interest in participating. I closed the doors 2 years ago.

I really don't care who would have or would not have bought a house without the credit. What we really need was a tax cut, rather than the stimulus. But at least this puts some cash back in people;s pockets.

Gene - Few understand the long-term benefits that tax cuts bring, and the current political climate in DC is unlikely to allow anything meaningful to happen.

OCT

2009

John, I think I am beginning to change my mind on this whole tax credit issue debate (Did I say that?). I agree with you that the cost is high to the taxpayer, especially when you add all the other spending that congress is doing, and lately, that is making me quite nauseous.

The tax credit is stimulating purchases but in many cases the purchase is being brought forward and that could leave a hole in the future of the housing market (where the purchase would normally have occurred). I certainly don't have a crystal ball, and frankly, I am confused right now about this market. Right now I am leaning towards seeing a lot more pain in this market to come. I appreciate your followup comments with me and have enjoyed the dialogue with you.

Dan - I agree that we may yet have quite a bit of pain to endure. Next year will be interesting--could be disastrous--but it depends upon the govt. response, whether or not they are willing to take a long-term approach or not.

MAR

2010

I have helped quite a few who have taken advantage of this, and I think despite the high cost, this was one small attempt at getting the country moving again. But I agree that a double-dip is very possible. i just hope that the summer months bring more new activity despite the expiration of the tax credit so at the least we can stay level in home sales.

Leave a response…

Name:

Email:
(optional)

Comment:

What does the graphic say?

John Mulkey, Housing Guru

Waleska, GA

More about me…

TheHousingGuru.com

Address: P.O. Box 910, Waleska, GA, 30183

Office Phone: (678) 493-3432

Cell Phone: (404) 310-6015

Email Me

Listings

Links

The Housing Guru

Archives

Find GA real estate agents and Waleska real estate on ActiveRain.

Disclaimer: ActiveRain Corp. does not necessarily endorse the real estate agents, loan officers and brokers listed on this site. These real estate profiles, blogs and blog entries are provided here as a courtesy to our visitors to help them make an informed decision when buying or selling a house. ActiveRain Corp. takes no responsibility for the content in these profiles, that are written by the members of this community.