
Is the mortgage tax break in danger?
It's hard for federal budget-cutters to ignore the tens of billions of dollars Congress could save by eliminating the taxpayer mortgage interest deduction.
As Congress struggles -- and maybe fails -- to trim the federal budget deficit, it's hard for budget-makers to ignore the tens of billions of dollars Congress could save by eliminating the taxpayer mortgage interest deduction.
Axing the deduction could save $134 billion in one fell swoop, a congressional committee in charge of tax proposals has estimated.
Few use it
At the tax code stands now, homeowners can deduct up to $1 million of mortgage interest paid and up to $100,000 in home equity debt, says MSN Money tax expert Jeff Schnepper, the author of "How to Pay Zero Taxes 2012: Your Guide to Every Tax Break the IRS Allows." If you own a vacation home, the same applies.
But few of us use the deduction. Only about 23% of taxpayers who filed used it in 2010, for example, says Reason.com, published by the nonprofit Libertarian Reason Foundation. That's because you've got to itemize to claim the deduction and relatively few taxpayers do.
"The numbers work only for taxpayers whose total deductions -- for mortgage interest, charitable giving and other expenses -- are worth more than the standard deduction," writes USA Today. Only 30% of taxpayers itemize, according to the Tax Policy Center.
The deduction's use varies by geography, USA Today says, "ranging from a high of 37% of taxpayers in Maryland to a low of 15% in North Dakota and West Virginia." It's used most where housing costs are high.
Who benefits most? "Taxpayers with big mortgages in high tax brackets," says the San Francisco Chronicle. Only 16% of taxpayers in the 10% bracket itemize, while 71% in the 33% and 89% in the 35% tax bracket do, according to the Tax Policy Center.
Wildly popular
Few of us use it but most of us love it. Passionately -- as Los Angeles Times columnist Doyle McManus found recently after he proposed dumping it. "Our mortgage interest deduction doesn't directly support homeownership; instead, it supports mortgage indebtedness, which isn't the same thing at all," wrote McManus.
Uh-oh. Them's fightin' words. Never mind that McManus is far from alone. "In the aftermath of the Great Recession . . . many observers have begun to wonder whether the time has finally come for reform," writes the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center, for example.
LA Times readers were furious. "Angry emails flooded in," McManus wrote in a follow-up. "Many of the objections were well-reasoned, although one reader just called me a Marxist." Another reader said the deduction "is the only real tax break the middle class gets."
Happy ending?
If the tax break is such a sacred cow, why are changes to the deduction being discussed in Congress? A couple recent events contribute:
- President Barack Obama's re-election. Obama campaigned on a promise of raising taxes on wealthier Americans. His win is seen by many to be a mandate by voters to do just that.
- Deficit talks. Congress and the White House may or may not negotiate a way around the severe "sequester" budget cuts due to kick in March 1. But eventually their budget talks should get serious. That puts the tax deduction at least on the table for discussion.
There could nevertheless be a happy ending in all this for fans of the mortgage deduction. Remember the $134 billion that could be saved by eliminating it? Oops. Turns out that number was a bit squishy.
That congressional committee re-ran its numbers. Now it says the mortgage write-off is worth far less than previously estimated.
Real-estate columnist Ken Harney explains: "The nonpartisan Joint Committee on Taxation published revised estimates indicating that because of changes in the economy and tax legislation, the cost of the deduction for fiscal 2013 will be $69.7 billion."
That's a $64.3 billion difference. It means that while the mortgage deduction is still a juicy target, it's only half as juicy as before.
Even if Congress does take up the deduction, it could agree to make trims rather than eliminating it outright. It could cap how much interest a homeowner can deduct, for example, Schnepper says. Or Congress and the White House could declare mortgage interest paid on second homes ineligible.
More on MSN Money:
There are only so many ways to "soak the rich." Eventually, those in favor of more revenue, which is code for tax increases, will have to start taxing the Middle Class more. Everyone will feel it. This shouldn't come as a surprise to anyone.
Cuts need to happen first. Look at how the entire government is screaming about the Sequester, both Dems and Reps. About how bad the cuts will be, etc... I realize they aren't the best planned cuts, but get over it. It isn't even a cut, but a reduction in spending increases. If the government and the citizens cannot handle what amounts to a 2% spending decrease, then I fear we have gone beyond the point of no return.
I have used this particular deduction religiously ever since I purchased my first home in 1971 after being discharged from the Navy. The existence of that deduction and the availability of a low interest VA loan were, in fact, principle selling points that helped me decide to take the leap and actually commit for 30 years.
If the vast majority of tax payers are too lazy or too uninformed to itemize and claim it that is their problem but it would hurt me terribly to lose this deduction. The only way that I would support its elimination is if it is replaced by a major tax credit for homeowners whose principle residence is valued at $250,000.00 or less rather like the standard deduction for a dependent.
Itemizing is indeed a royal pain but if I had not itemized for the last 43 years I would have paid something like $35,000.00 to $40,000.00 in extra taxes. It typically saves me eight hundred to one thousand dollars every year. The elimination of credit card debt as a deduction a few years ago was tough to take but I agreed with it because personal credit was becoming far too easy to get and abuse. That slowed it a bit. At a time when we are trying to stimulate the home market it seems to me to be counterproductive to do something that would further hamper that effort and make home ownership less attractive to first time buyers like I was 43 years ago. Stupid if you ask me.
I guess the average republican would rather lose their home mortgage tax break instead of the ultra wealthy losing their
"jet , yacht and capital gains" tax breaks. Go figure. With my salary of $52K, I had almost $22K in deductions. I learned a lot from ole. Mitt...I'd sure hate to lose all my deductions...I'm sure Ole' Mitt would too.
This is all a big farce. They are gonna holler about "no money" and "need more taxes" and "gonna shut the guvymint" down until they get more money from taxpayers. The government is not going to shut down. I wish it would. but it isn't. They will do anothe "last minute" deal. Another "eleventh hour" scenario. They will bail out again. They alwasy do. It is just another "fiscal cliff" movie, this time the 2013 version. The best way to save money would be to shut the government down. Lock the doors and turn out the lights. Go home! Nothing is done in DC anyway. If that would happen, there might be more interest in paying congressmen/women minimum wages to get the money and benefits grabbers out of office and introduce MERIT pay for those left there. Shut 'em down Mar 1...
The problem folks, is that the people in government are so wildly out of touch with middle-lower class that they cannot comprehend how most of us live. They still think a wage of $10.00 per hour is a heap of money and it probably was back when they last had a honest job. Therein lies the biggest reason the Founding Fathers never envisioned career politicians. They sought to have honest citizens take a turn serving and then return to their former lives. These bozos have to go, all of them republican and democrat alike. Collectively they are disaster.
And you can just bet the farm that if they did eliminate the mortgage deduction that they would exempt themselves from it.
That's another reason they have to go.
Axing the deduction could save $134 billion in one fell swoop, a congressional committee in charge of tax proposals has estimated.
Few use it
"The numbers work only for taxpayers whose total deductions -- for mortgage interest, charitable giving and other expenses -- are worth more than the standard deduction," . Only 30% of taxpayers itemize, .
So is this what would be saved if it was cut - or is this what would be saved if everyone used this credit? Washington has a way of spinning numbers to make people say they'll go gladly give it up then next year when the real numbers come in (after the credit is eliminated and won't be reinstated or also known as they got your money again) they will say it only brought in 1 million cause not everyone itemized.
RELATED ARTICLES
DATA PROVIDERS
Copyright © 2013 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Quotes are real-time for NASDAQ, NYSE and AMEX. See delay times for other exchanges.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Thomson Reuters (click for restrictions). Real-time quotes provided by BATS Exchange. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Interactive Data Real-Time Services. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by SIX Financial Information.
Japanese stock price data provided by Nomura Research Institute Ltd.; quotes delayed 20 minutes. Canadian fund data provided by CANNEX Financial Exchanges Ltd.
ABOUT SMART SPENDING
LATEST BLOG POSTS
Yes, sometimes retail therapy has a place. Just try to be aware of shopping to beat the blues, and don't overspend.
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
TOOLS
- Best rates on savings
Find the highest rates on savings accounts, CDs and money market accounts.
- Are you saving enough for retirement?
- Find a great credit card
- Car insurance premiums by model




