Mortgage Debt Interest Deduction -- Yes or No?

By
Industry Observer

About this time last year, there was a lot of noise about tax reform and how the government would be able to increase revenue by eliminating what some call loopholes.  In the same breath, many of our large-mouthed legislators spewed the idea that, somehow we could all pay lower taxes, and the government could collect more revenue.  Everything sounded really good as long as nobody was pressed for specifics.

One of the most noticed proposals was the removal of deductions for mortgage interest, and there are few real estate professionals who do not have strong opinions about this.  Once the "presidential candidate draft" has chosen a couple Democrats and a few dozen Republicans who aspire to White House residence, we'll begin to hear the tax reform stuff again.  It would probably be productive to re-ignite a discussion about mortgage debt interest decuctibility before we hear it from the hopeless hopefuls in a few months.

Last year, I wrote about the use of mortgage debt interest decuctibility and said in part:

Then there's the mortgage deduction, useless to most skin of their teeth first time home buyers and to those who have paid down their mortgage debt.  The banking industry loves the deduction, and one of their lobbyists, the NAR, also loves it.  Without it, some buyers could not afford the same level of debt that they want to take on.  Its cost to the government could be used much more effectively with another strategy to truly encourage home ownership.

The purpose of all tax code, either intended or unintended, is to control (influence if it makes you feel better) the behavior of the citizenry.  The bankers have brainwashed the general population and most real estate professionals to believe that mortgage deductions encourage home ownership.  Of course, they really mean that it encourages debt.

As long as the focus is on comprehensive tax policy reform, the debt deduction is probably safe.  However, it could come up as a stand alone issue, and the fact that interest rates are substantially lower than their traditional levels may make it easier for congress to make it happen.  My opinion is that a revenue neutral switch from a debt interest deduction to a homeowner tax credit taken without the need for an itemized return would benefit the real estate industry and all homeowners.

 

Posted by

 Mike Carlier  Lakeville, MN

 

612-916-3033

 

close

This entry hasn't been re-blogged:

Re-Blogged By Re-Blogged At
Topic:
Lending / Financial
Location:
Minnesota Dakota County Lakeville

Post a Comment
Spam prevention
Spam prevention
Show All Comments
Ambassador
2,553,290
Ed Silva
RE/MAX Professionals, CT 203-206-0754 - Waterbury, CT
Central CT Real Estate Broker Serving all equally

A no deduction or loophole flat-tax rate would help far more people, especially the tax burdened middle class.  A 10% across the board tax with no deductions would allow those that really nee the money to keep more and those with large incomes to finally pay their share

Mar 26, 2015 04:02 AM #1
Rainmaker
522,122
Mike Carlier
Lakeville, MN
More opinions than you want to hear about.

Ed, I don't disagree with you, but that would entail agreement on comprehensive tax reform.  I don't think that's likely to happen.  We could see a few stand alone bills, better for soap-boxing, and easier to get through the gang of 535.  The other problem with a flat tax is that it would probably not end up being a no-deduction tax.  It would probably be at least a tax on profit and wages, and that means deductions.  Right back where we started.

Mar 26, 2015 04:27 AM #2
Rainmaker
3,978,839
William Feela
WHISPERING PINES REALTY - North Branch, MN
Realtor, Whispering Pines Realty 651-674-5999 No.

A flat tax done as a Sales tax would be very easy to implement I would think.

Mar 26, 2015 10:23 AM #3
Rainmaker
522,122
Mike Carlier
Lakeville, MN
More opinions than you want to hear about.

Bill, I'm going with a "perhaps" response on that one.  Would the flat sales tax apply to other taxes being paid, such as property tax?  How about tax on medical care?  Home purchases and commisions paid?  Insurance premiums?  College tuition?  Charitable contributions?  Purchases made while in another country?  I think we could end up trading one mess for another.

 

May 11, 2015 04:19 AM #4
Post a Comment
Spam prevention
Show All Comments

What's the reason you're reporting this blog entry?

Are you sure you want to report this blog entry as spam?

Rainmaker
522,122

Mike Carlier

More opinions than you want to hear about.
Everyone has opinions -- what's yours?
*
*
*
*
Spam prevention