You are making a straw man argument. Nobody said anybody was going to lower rents. The claim was that rents are lower because landlords can reduce their costs by deducting mortgage interest. In an otherwise competitive market, you charge what you think you can get, whether you have a mortgage to pay interest on, or not, and those with lower costs can undercut those with higher costs.
I don't know if you are slow or what, but I suspect you are just being deliberately obtuse so you don't have to admit that renters pay all the costs associated with the properties they rent. That's the 'fail', and it is yours. Grocery store shoppers don't get to deduct the mortgage interest payments the store's owner makes, either, but if he didn't get to, they would be the ones paying the difference.
At the end of the day, nobody is arguing against the assertion that 'Renters cannot deduct mortgage interest payments', so why do you keep saying it? Because the rest of your argument is bogus, so you have to erect a straw man argument to save face.
Thanks for another pointless post.
You really are unable to accept that there is only one statement between to two of us that is rock solid.
RENTERS CANNOT DEDUCT BUILDING MORTGATE INTEREST RATES.
All your suggestions about how renters benefit from them anyway are hollow.
Renters shouldn’t be able to deduct them. Building owners owe them nothing. They can spend their money any way they like. It has nothing to do with profit margins. It has to do with what the market will bear.
If rents in an area are $2000 a unit, and the building owner can make $1500 a month profit off each unit, they should. They are not obligated to give renters are discount based on mortgage interest rate deductions.
I’ve not made the case owners owe them anything, or that owners will definitely lower rents based on mortgage interest rate deductions. That would be silly.
Renters rent property based on what the market will bear, not what their deductions were.