Congress Eliminates Child Tax Credit, Mortgage Deduction And E.I.T.C From Tax

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Say WHAT? Why shouldn't I be able to deduct mortgage interest that I pay on my home from my taxes? I've already been taxed on the money, before I pay it to the banks, so in effect, I am getting the taxed portion back. I don't see an issue with this. It's an incentive to BUY a home as opposed to always paying rent.

Of course this is a joke...

No, there really should be no mortgage deduction. Absolutely no justification to have renters subsidize homeowners. But, alas, this will never happen. Politicians of all stripes are too spineless.

Agreed.

Edited November 18, 2014 by DavenRoxy

[unsmiley 111]

Say WHAT? Why shouldn't I be able to deduct mortgage interest that I pay on my home from my taxes? I've already been taxed on the money, before I pay it to the banks, so in effect, I am getting the taxed portion back. I don't see an issue with this. It's an incentive to BUY a home as opposed to always paying rent.

Why should I as a renter help you pay for your house???

My taxes would be lower if you homeowners did not get this "sacred cow" deduction. It is totally unfair. Why can't I get a renter's deduction? And to use your argument, I too have already been taxed on the money I pay for rent.

You, or anyone else, don't need an incentive to buy a house from me. Do I share in its appreciation? In fact, that would be just: When homeowners sell their houses they should be required to return to the treasury the subsidies received in the form of mortgage deductions.

The home mortgage deduction is completely without merit and fairness.

[Karee 4,189]

Why should I as a renter help you pay for your house???

My taxes would be lower if you homeowners did not get this "sacred cow" deduction. It is totally unfair. Why can't I get a renter's deduction? And to use your argument, I too have already been taxed on the money I pay for rent.

You, or anyone else, don't need an incentive to buy a house from me. Do I share in its appreciation? In fact, that would be just: When homeowners sell their houses they should be required to return to the treasury the subsidies received in the form of mortgage deductions.

The home mortgage deduction is completely without merit and fairness.

They should do away with the deductions for kids as well. Also, why do I have to pay taxes for school districts and public transit? I don't have any rugrats or ride the bus.

[unsmiley 111]

They should do away with the deductions for kids as well. Also, why do I have to pay taxes for school districts and public transit? I don't have any rugrats or ride the bus.

I agree with kids, and possibly school taxes, but there is a societal benefit to public transit, IMO. And you could use public transit, if you so desired. You could not use someone's mortgage-subsidized house. We should not be subsidizing the purchase of private property.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

Why should I as a renter help you pay for your house???

My taxes would be lower if you homeowners did not get this "sacred cow" deduction. It is totally unfair. Why can't I get a renter's deduction? And to use your argument, I too have already been taxed on the money I pay for rent.

You, or anyone else, don't need an incentive to buy a house from me. Do I share in its appreciation? In fact, that would be just: When homeowners sell their houses they should be required to return to the treasury the subsidies received in the form of mortgage deductions.

The home mortgage deduction is completely without merit and fairness.

But I'm not renting you my house, I'm living in it. You want a deduction, go buy your own house.

As a homeowner, I DO pay back to the treasury when I sell my house. I pay taxes on the gains. Guess what? If I buy a house and sell it 27 years later for the same price I paid for it, 100% of the money is taxable as income unless I use it to buy another house. So all those deductions go away upon the sale of the house.

I agree with kids, and possibly school taxes, but there is a societal benefit to public transit, IMO. And you could use public transit, if you so desired. You could not use someone's mortgage-subsidized house. We should not be subsidizing the purchase of private property.

Not true for all.... There are no city buses within 200 miles of where I live.

[Karee 4,189]

. Guess what? If I buy a house and sell it 27 years later for the same price I paid for it, 100% of the money is taxable as income unless I use it to buy another house. So all those deductions go away upon the sale of the house.

You sure about that? That doesn't make sense. From what I've read there's even a home sale exclusion for capital gains.

[Umka36 781]

Topic 701 - Sale of Your Home

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc701.html

[unsmiley 111]

But I'm not renting you my house, I'm living in it. You want a deduction, go buy your own house.

I don't want a deduction. No one should get one. But if you get one, I should get one. Period.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

When the idea that the Govt lets me keep my own money, somehow becomes a handout, we are all screwed.

[Karee 4,189]

Topic 701 - Sale of Your Home

http://www.irs.gov/taxtopics/tc701.html

That link is related to selling your house with a capital gain. Dave was saying if he sold his house for the same price he would have to pay some sort of federal taxes.

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

I don't want a deduction. No one should get one. But if you get one, I should get one. Period.

If you want a porsche, you don't buy a Toyota. If you want deduction, you don't rent.

Why should you get the same benefit that a home owner dpes, without any of the risk? Do you also think you should get to deduct mileage on your vehicle even though you don't own your own business?

[DavenRoxy 1,073]

That link is related to selling your house with a capital gain. Dave was saying if he sold his house for the same price he would have to pay some sort of federal taxes.

Each year the government forces you to take a depreciation deduction on your house. For illustration purppse, say you bought it for $27,000 and you can depreciate it for $1,000 a year for 27 years. That means the government had allowed you a tax break that effectively reduces the value of the house to zero. Now you sell it for $27,000. All $27,000 is seen as a capital gain and therefore taxable... UNLESS you lived in it for 2 out of the last 5 years.

So you are exempt if you are living in it as a primary residence, but not so much if you are renting it out. I spoke of this because unsmiley thought a landlord should pay the government back when they sell... and they do.

[Karee 4,189]

Each year the government forces you to take a depreciation deduction on your house. For illustration purppse, say you bought it for $27,000 and you can depreciate it for $1,000 a year for 27 years. That means the government had allowed you a tax break that effectively reduces the value of the house to zero. Now you sell it for $27,000. All $27,000 is seen as a capital gain and therefore taxable... UNLESS you lived in it for 2 out of the last 5 years.

So you are exempt if you are living in it as a primary residence, but not so much if you are renting it out. I spoke of this because unsmiley thought a landlord should pay the government back when they sell... and they do.

Got it now. Still seems like a pretty good deal.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

I agree with kids, and possibly school taxes, but there is a societal benefit to public transit, IMO. And you could use public transit, if you so desired. You could not use someone's mortgage-subsidized house. We should not be subsidizing the purchase of private property.

There's a societal benefit to kids and education. Without those, this nation would be dead in a few years time.

[Karee 4,189]

There's a societal benefit to kids and education. Without those, this nation would be dead in a few years time.

You could argue that there's a societal benefit for a lot of things. Doesn't mean taxpayers should foot the bill for them.