Posted on 03/24/2011 6:24:09 PM PDT by rabscuttle385
RICHMOND, Va. – House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) on Thursday said Congress is unlikely to take away the popular mortgage interest tax break.
Speaking to a crowd of real estate professionals in his hometown, Cantor said the tax would be considered as part of the larger tax reform discussion.
But he suggested a change is probably not in the cards.
“Honestly, there’s not a lot of support for getting rid of the mortgage deduction on Capitol Hill,” Cantor said to loud applause from the audience.
Cantor was speaking to nearly 200 members of the Richmond Association of REALTORs. It was his second speech this week on economic issues.
“Before we start thinking about some other scheme that the government can do to help us, let’s get government to stop harming us,” Cantor said in response to a question from the audience about ways to increase purchases of distressed housing.
Much of Cantor’s address repeated his remarks earlier this week at Stanford University, where he called for the government to allow companies to repatriate income back to the U.S. at a reduced tax rate to stimulate the economy and discussed the need to cut regulations.
He also discussed the need to improve the housing market and suggested any GOP-led reforms to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac would be done in a way that would not damage the real estate industry. The two government entities back more than 90 percent of the nation’s mortgages.
“Our goal is to create an environment for the private sector to engage in lending again, where the federal government has filled a void in the market through Fannie and Freddie and FHA,” Cantor said.
“We will work to eliminate the systemic risk that GSEs pose to our nation, but are committed to doing it in a way that does not jeopardize the prospects for a rebound in the real estate industry,” he continued. “We need smart regulations for mortgage applications that mitigate risk but do not close the doors to homeownership to responsible borrowers.”
“Well, then that’s their fault for being too stupid to not use the avenues available to recover more of the money taken from them by the tax system.”
No, that’s called the STANDARD DEDUCTION. You’re obviously over your head in this discussion...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_deduction
They are, probably 98% of the time doing the RIGHT THING when it comes to minimizing taxes.
Er, that's a pretty stupid argument.
Please explain to us how the mortgage deduction that other people itemise on their taxes ends up taking money from you. Do you think that everyone else's money belongs to you?
I see into which category you've put yourself. I'm not surprised, at least you are consistant.
“So? That’s simple a rather unsophisticated attempt at a tu quoque argument, which does nothing for your “case.” “
It does EVERYTHING...it shows that people WILL borrow money, even without having to steal it from other taxpayers (in the form of a deduction). You STATED that cash was the only option if the deduction went away...that is why you’re over your head here.
Of course, and by quoting Wikipedia, you are obviously Mr. Rocket Scientist Expert on Financial Matters. Thanks for clearing that up.
The standard deduction. A welfare plan for simply breathing.
“I see into which category you’ve put yourself. I’m not surprised, at least you are consistant. “
Thanks, I’m glad you agree with me that WELFARE is destructive, whether it’s cash payments to non-workers, or non-productive tax deductions to workers. At least I’m making some progress here.
Generally, people who are against the mortgage deduction are communists.
“Please explain to us how the mortgage deduction that other people itemise on their taxes ends up taking money from you. Do you think that everyone else’s money belongs to you? “
No, but I do think, with a 14 Trillion dollar debt, that anything you don’t pay will be shoved on the backs of my kids and (future) grand kids.
In my world, everyone should pay the same...and my kids should not have provide you a SUBSIDY for YOUR MORTGAGE, just because you have chosen to take a large debt.
I find it interesting that you think it is "welfare" for people to utilise an opportunity to recoup more of their own money that was taken from them by the government in taxes.
You do realise that you're arguing apples vs. oranges, don't you?
“The standard deduction. A welfare plan for simply breathing. “
We’re done. Here you go, they’ll save you THOUSANDS...
“House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) on Thursday said Congress is unlikely to take away the popular mortgage interest tax break.”
Well I would hope not. If thats the grand plan to balance a budget that is about $3 trillion then we are all screwed. Notice not a soul will talke about Rand Paul’s plan to balance the budget in 5 years without touching Soc Sec or Medicare. He actually has the audacity to suggest shutting down 4 unecessary agencies. Cutting the size of government which is the whole problem in the first place.
It’s not the only way, but changing the rules in the middle of the game is sort of like Obama deciding bond holders take a back seat to the auto union because it was convenient. People make financial decisions based on the set of criteria in play. Changing the rules in such a major way at the very least, you should not be so quick to dismiss the impact.
Debt is just another tool people use. Corporations use it to their advantage if they are wise, to their detriment if not. I only have a problem when the government decides who should be saved from their bad behaviour and who should not. If companies did not have that tool, we couldn’t compete globally. There are follow on benefits.
There are inequities everywhere. I am subsidizing the guy who decides to have one more child than I do. Go to a consumption tax (and only a consumption tax), I’m in. The benefit is worth it. Otherwise, complaining about one tax deduction you don’t get is just another person arguing to improve his situation over mine.
Sorry, I thought we were talking about the mortgage interest deduction and not local property tax.
Tell him when he will start an investigation into Rep. Ron Kind’s (D-WI) “pay for play” scandal, whereby he asked for a large donation ($10K or so) from a group of Eau Claire doctors before he would agree to see them in his office about their concerns. This took place in 2008 or so and only came to light in 2010. Kind’s constituents would like to know the full story about their representative’s possible corruption.
“It’s not the only way, but changing the rules in the middle of the game is sort of like Obama deciding bond holders take a back seat to the auto union because it was convenient. People make financial decisions based on the set of criteria in play. Changing the rules in such a major way at the very least, you should not be so quick to dismiss the impact.”
SANITY. Thank you Scarlet. You have a valid point...it will hurt some people BIG-TIME, those who planned on the deduction. So getting rid of it would have to be done in a way that doesn’t crush people. I can see that part of it.
You are using the very same arguments those who believe all money belongs to government first. We generally call them Liberals, or perhaps communists.
See post #22, that one about property tax caught my eye.
No matter, the cost of borrowed money, or property taxes generally gets passed on to the renters. There are exceptions, of course.
LOL.
“unlikely”??
How about, “It will never happen under a GOP majority House, period”?
This assclown Cantor is starting to scare me - - he sounds like he’s already angling for a sneaky way to squeeze more taxes out of society’s producers.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.