I agree with you about all of those unfair tax breaks and credits but my point is, Roberts just made the entire thing worse.
I’m not trying to say plus or minus columns, I’m saying you can not we taxed for doing nothing.
Let me just use one single example.
House buyers get to write off their interest and tax payments. It is not that the renter has to pay the government more, but that the house payer unfairly pays the government less than he should.
This hurts renters because he has to pay a larger share than the house owner does and he gets no benefit on top of it.
So yes, you are right that the renter who buys nothing is being hurt because he does not get to financially benefit in the way that the house owner does with lower taxes.
But this is still not a tax on the renter. This is a tax break for the owner. This still hurts the renter relative to the owner as you showed. But the fact is, the person who took some action (bought a house), gets a reward for doing so, with a tax break, so he pays less taxes.
This is the way it has always been and this is the way it stays. The renter who does nothing, he pays his regular tax rate and gets no benefit, while the guy who took an action to purchase a home, gets a tax break.
What Roberts did is to make it legally possible from now on for the renter to have to pay an additional tax above and beyond his regular taxes for not buying a home.
If the want to, Congress can now pass a law saying that all renters MUST buy a home and if they don’t, then they have to pay an additional $1,000 per year for not doing so.
Before Roberts ruling, you have a home owner and a renter. The homeowner gets a tax break. The renter does not get a tax break.
After Roberts ruling, you have a home owner and a renter. The home owner still gets a tax break. The renter still does not get a tax break, but now he has to pay a brand new $1,000 dollar per year tax penalty for failing to buy a house.
Do you see what I am saying?
Yes, all of those credits and tax breaks people get that others don’t get are unfair and they do hurt the people that don’t get them. I do agree with you there. But now with Roberts’ ruling, all of that unfairness still stays, but on top of that you can add the brand new unfairness of having to pay even more taxes than you did before, for just failing to buy or do what the government wants.
OK, OK, OK.
Let’s go back to the old way of doing things.
Bush tax cuts go out on January 1st.
Everyone is paying more taxes than now.
But if they will buy into the obummer health insurance plan, they get a $10,000 tax credit.
Now, do you feel better?
You weren’t really taxed for doing nothing, were you? It is just that you did not get the tax credit.
Wonder who pays for the freebies?
Could it possibly be the guy who does nothing?