Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 12/05/2017 8:10:58 AM PST by DIRTYSECRET
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last
To: DIRTYSECRET

No it is not.


2 posted on 12/05/2017 8:12:43 AM PST by blackdog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Yes. End it, or at least reduce it to $250,000 and end it later. Also end all Federal aid to colleges, and yank non-profit status from Big College as well.


3 posted on 12/05/2017 8:13:19 AM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

We should have a national sales tax and no income tax at all. If we can’t do that, the next best thing is one tax rate and no deductions for anything.


4 posted on 12/05/2017 8:13:19 AM PST by rigelkentaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

I would disagree that the mortgage deduction is bad. It actually favors people WHO ARE MORE VESTED IN THE ECONOMY AND AMERICA’S WELL BEING. And these people having more disposable income by having their taxes reduced are more likely to contribute to causes, candidates and efforts which further conservatism.

Call that government engineering, but it mirrors solid economics.


5 posted on 12/05/2017 8:16:35 AM PST by fwdude (Why is it that the only positive things to come out of LGBT organizations are their AIDS tests?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Anything that restricts the government from confiscating income legally earned by American citizens is good — not just for the person who legitimately earned it, but for liberty and our Republic as well.


6 posted on 12/05/2017 8:17:43 AM PST by glennaro
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Nope


7 posted on 12/05/2017 8:18:01 AM PST by rrrod (just an old guy with a gun in his pocke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Trim it to $50,000


11 posted on 12/05/2017 8:19:59 AM PST by Bulwinkle (Alec, a.k.a. Daffy Duck)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET
It's government interference in the marketplace. It's also a benefit utilized by fewer and fewer Americans. If you aren't itemizing, you aren't benefitting. If you pay so much in interest that it goes beyond the standard deduction, you don't have a genuine "need" for a handout. Additionally, if you have to rely on a government handout to buy a home, you can't afford the home to begin with. Either downsize your expectations or rent. <>
15 posted on 12/05/2017 8:23:18 AM PST by Jhadur ("You are not ready for immortality.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET
Why should some millionaire owner get a tax break

Class envy. It always gets the hoi polloi all worked up.

18 posted on 12/05/2017 8:23:50 AM PST by ladyjane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Republicans are only limiting the mortgage deductions past a certain value. They’re not saying if you have two homes in Arkansas you should pay more than if you have one home in Massachusetts.


22 posted on 12/05/2017 8:28:12 AM PST by dangus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

No, it isn’t.


23 posted on 12/05/2017 8:30:07 AM PST by bgill (CDC site, "We don't know how people are infected with Ebola.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Is it fair for the government to change the rules if someone recently signed a 30 year note? The deductions may have been part of their decision to buy. What if they can no longer afford the home because of the government changing the rules mid-stream? Should they lose it? Should those with existing mortgages be grandfathered in?


24 posted on 12/05/2017 8:30:11 AM PST by boycott
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

No one thing is equally good for everybody.
(Well, maybe clean air and clean water, except that would destroy the air and water purifier industries. See, I told you).


27 posted on 12/05/2017 8:37:12 AM PST by calljack (Sometimes your worst nightmare is just a start.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

As one who has paid cash for his last two houses, I think the mortgage interest deduction is terrible for housing. Like artificially low interest rates, it encourage the incurrence of debt and penalizes savers. It also distorts housing prices by creating artificial an incentive to spend more on a house, thus driving up prices.

There will inevitably be a painful adjustment period, and people stuck in overpriced homes will suffer the loss of artificial equity, but ultimately eliminating this deduction will lead to a much more market based housing system and more affordable home prices.


29 posted on 12/05/2017 8:40:44 AM PST by con-surf-ative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET
The IRS just announced the 2018 tax brackets, standard deduction, exemption amount, etc. https://www.forbes.com/sites/kellyphillipserb/2017/10/19/irs-announces-2018-tax-brackets-standard-deduction-amounts-and-more/#ebb1be2273b4 Taxpayers with AGI over the Pease limitation have their standard/itemized deduction reduced anyway. The loss of the mortgage interest deduction will not affect them. Pease Limitations apply to charitable donations, the home mortgage interest deduction, state & local tax deductions, and miscellaneous itemized deductions. They do not apply to medical expenses, investment expenses, gambling losses, and theft/casualty losses. Pease AGI limitations where standard/itemized deduction starts phasing out:
31 posted on 12/05/2017 8:47:43 AM PST by DFG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

All deductions, exemptions, and credits are bad and wrong. And the rates are too high and too many. There should be only one rate of no more than 10% and it should be from the first dollar of earned income.


38 posted on 12/05/2017 9:02:40 AM PST by arthurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

It is one of the WORST IDEAS ever - debt should NEVER be subsidized...just don’t talk about killing it or the spear-throwing brigade here will come after you with swords blazing.

What should have been done, decades ago, was a slow phase out, maybe 4% per year. So year one you can deduct 96%, year two 92%, etc. That would give people time to adjust. The other approach would be gradually lowering cap on how much can be deducted. Perhaps beginning with $30k and dropping $3k per year. One other option would be for newly-built homes - homes started after, say 2019 - no deduction at all.

The problem with simply ending it is that property values would crash, and that affects even responsible people (like me), who buy smaller houses than they can afford, and thus are able to quickly pay them off. So eliminating it has to be phased in to not hurt people who paid an inflated price for their home (i.e., bought their home with the assumption that the deduction would always be there), but now have to sell it for what it’s really worth (i.e., no deduction).

We also need to get rid of Fannie Mae and others - who artificially keep mortgage rates low, at risk to the US Treasury (as we learned the hard way 10 years ago)...if people still want to borrow money, they should pay MARKET RATES, not subsidized rates - where they wind up spiking the national debt.


45 posted on 12/05/2017 9:31:23 AM PST by BobL (I shop at Walmart...I just don't tell anyone)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

End all write offs for nonprofits, foundations, and other left wing tax scams.

If someone want to give money to a charity let them do it WITHOUT HELP FROM THE GOVERNMENT.

‘Nonprofits and foundations’ are most often (dollar wise) left wing tax scams for the very wealthy. End them.


47 posted on 12/05/2017 9:45:17 AM PST by GOPJ (Are the NBC women 'NOT complaining' the ones who 'put out' then MOVED up the ladder?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

Economic distortions are bad; the dislocations caused by suddenly ending them are VERY bad.

Any change in mortgage deductibility that affects a lot of people must be tapered. Many people buy on cashflow. If they can’t deduct their mortgage, they can afford 25% (or so) less house. A sudden elimination of that deduction would crash real estate markets and anything that depends on them (banks, pension funds that have invested in MBS, construction, lumber, the list goes on). Tapered changes wouldn’t do that.


50 posted on 12/05/2017 9:52:26 AM PST by Pearls Before Swine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: DIRTYSECRET

If it wasn’t there already, I would say leave it out.

However you would cause countless people financial hardship now and property values would decline if you pull it out from under them. Causing a chain reaction and another possible collapse of ALL business activity like in 2008.

I’d say leave it alone. We are Taxed Enough Already


52 posted on 12/05/2017 10:34:22 AM PST by varyouga
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson