Mortgage News Home

Saturday July 19, 2008

Home Page   26,235 Active Members   Register Welcome, Guest    Sign In  

Home

Latest Headlines

Popular Stories

Bookmark Us

Reader Comments

SUBSCRIBE

SEARCH OUR SITE

RSS News

Mortgage Rates
  30 Yr Fix 6.37% 0.02%
  15 Yr Fix 5.91% -0.01%
  1 Yr ARM 5.17% 0.00%
  5/1 ARM 5.82% 0.04%
  30 Yr Tres 4.47% -0.05%
  Fed Prime 5.00% -0.25%
MND Features

- Wiki
- Video News
- Mortgage License Information
- Real Estate License Information
- Mortgage Content Syndication
- Mortgage Fraud
- Housing Bubble
News Archives

Submit A News Tip
or Story Idea
 

Free Subscription To News Alerts
Stay up to date on breaking news with our free News Alert Service.


Study Measures Mortgage Interest and Real Estate Tax Deduction Benefits

20705 Views - Printer Friendly - Email This Story To A Friend
 
RSS COMMENTS(11) LINK HERE ADD NEWS TO YOUR WEBSITE

Back in November we reported that The President's Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform had submitted recommendations to then Treasury Secretary John Snow. Principal among the panel's suggestions were the elimination of federal income tax deductions for state and local taxes which would include the current deduction for local property taxes and the replacement of the current deduction for interest payments on home mortgages of up to $1,000,000 with a tax credit of 15 percent of the mortgage interest paid. The Panel maintained that this change would actually be advantageous to low and middle income homeowners although comments received on this website from those who made the computations based on their own circumstances did not concur, at all! The recommendations would pretty much do away with any deduction for a second owner occupied vacation home which, with some restrictions, is allowed under the current tax code.


Under current rules, itemizing taxpayers can deduct interest and origination points on home loans and on equity lines of credit for both first and second (vacation) homes up to a total of $1,000,000 in value, and properties taxes on both, even if paid in a foreign country.

This is not the first time these deductions have been placed on the chopping block and this time the recommendations pretty much evaporated in the face of heavy opposition, but a study released recently by the National Association of Home Builders illustrates the bonanza that awaits the federal treasury if such changes were to take place.

The publication "Local Use of the Mortgage Interest and the Real Estate Tax Deductions" by Robert Dietz, Ph.D. analyzes, on a micro basis, the benefit to taxpayers and the cost to the treasury of these deductions.

Using data from 2003 tax returns and the 2000 census, the study computes tax payer savings (or treasury losses depending on your perspective) on a federal, state, and congressional district level. The numbers are astounding.

For starters, while study is using the 2003 figures, it quotes The Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation as estimating that the value of the mortgage interest deduction to taxpayers this year will be $69.4 billion and the deduction for real estate taxes is equal to $19.9 billion.

In 2003, 35 million taxpayers used the home mortgage deduction, deducting an average of $9,650 for each filer and 39 million taxpayers took the real estate tax deduction with an average of more than $3,000 per filer. These are the most widely used deductions under the federal tax code.

Jerry Howard, executive vice president and CEO of NAHB stated that "Because Mortgage interest and real estate deductions significantly reduce federal tax liabilities for home owners, they are important tools for promoting homeownership. The report shows that millions of working families across the nation use and depend upon these important tax incentives to help them maintain their current standard of living."

The study states that the average congressional district - and there are 435 of them - contains roughly 80,000 taxpayers who claim the mortgage interest deduction and 88,000 who take advantage of the property tax deduction.

While congressional districts are designed to contain roughly the same number of citizens, the deductions are not utilized evenly across the congressional districts or the states. The six districts with the smallest number of taxpayers claiming the mortgage interest deduction, for example, are all located in New York City where people overwhelmingly rent. The 6th Congressional District of Colorado which encompasses the outlying areas and suburbs of Denver contains the highest number of taxpayers who claim the mortgage interest deduction, approximately 153,000. The fast-growing suburbs of Atlanta, New York, and Washington, DC also rank high in the number of residents taking advantage of the benefit. California has 4.6 million mortgage interest claiming taxpayers while Wyoming, one of the least populous states, has the fewest at 36,000. (The entire state of Wyoming may lack the total number of residents necessary to actually constitute a congressional district.)

The 14th district of California, which contains parts of San Mateo, Santa Clara, and Santa Cruz counties and is home to Silicon Valley, ranks number one in the cash value of the mortgage interest deduction, $3.2 billion. The State of California is tops among the states as well; the mortgage deduction statewide is estimated at $65 billion. On the other end of the scale is North Dakota at $260 million.

Across all districts the average amount of the deduction for mortgage interest is $9,500 but the 14th district of California again leads with an average of $35,000. The state also has the highest average deduction, $14,000, while Oklahoma has the lowest at $5,700.

Real estate tax deductions averaged a bit less than $3,000 per household nationwide and were highest in New York's 18th district which includes fabled Westchester County. The average tax deduction there was $12,000. The western suburbs of Houston, Texas in the 7th congressional district were second with an average of $8,900. Alabama had the bottom to itself - taxpayers in its 2nd, 3rd, and 4th Congressional districts claimed an average of $550 to $675 in real estate taxes. Coming in last is not necessarily a bad thing.

New York's 3rd congressional district, comprised mainly of the eastern half of Nassau County (Long Island) had the largest aggregate amount of real estate tax deductions - $1.25 billion. In fact, New York and New Jersey districts with suburban demographics comprise the top nine districts in terms of total real estate deductions while the lowest levels of deductions were found in the renter-dominated city itself. California led the states with total deductions of 12.5 billion and Wyoming was last with total taxes deducted at $65 million.

With these kinds of numbers in play, it will be remarkable if the real estate tax and mortgage interest deduction benefits do not soon come into play again as the government struggles to deal with skyrocketing deficits. Using a rough average tax number of 15 percent, the elimination of the real estate tax deduction would result in additional taxes of $2.98 billion and doing away with the mortgage interest deduction (without any adjustment such as the 15 percent tax credit suggested by the panel) would bring in an additional $10.41 billion. Next we hope to see a study projecting the disruption such a massive change would bring to the housing market and to the currently thriving state of homeownership.



Story Views: 20705 | Permalink

Story Tools



Email This Story To A Friend

Subscribe To News Alerts
 

Related Tags

Select a Tag for more information related to that Tag. (View All Tags)
 

 

Comments (11)

Post Comment Comments RSS


Eddie really nailed it. Depending on your tax rate and how much your deduction is, it might only save you $2000 in your pocket. Granted that is a nice incentive to buy a house. However, saving that small amount of money at first can't be that great of incentive. It hardly pays closing costs or a heatpump that died.

Above Posted By: James | Wed, 28 Mar 2007 05:40:21 EST

Austrian School, what are you thinking?? These tax deductions are what makes it worth-while for most people to buy a home. If this proposal takes place, home values are going to drop considerably and will really put a strain on people close to retirement who plan on selling their home or getting some kind of reverse mortgage or home equity loan to help with their lifestyle during retirement. It sounds like you are a renter who can't afford to buy a house and wants others to suffer because of it.

Above Posted By: pope | Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:33:37 EST

Cmon - if we take away the mortgage deduction and the property tax deduction - I could not afford my home. Period. When we bought the house - we depended on that deduction to make one of the mortgage payments. Sure - the total deduction is somewhere in the line of 30k.. But the govt. gets my money in so many other ways - I think they can give me some back to allow me and my family to live.

Above Posted By: Wayne | Wed, 15 Nov 2006 13:31:52 EST

The home mortgage deduction is partially responsible for the inflation we've seen in residential housing. By getting rid of this deduction, you'd make houses more affordable. A second home is luxury, why are we subsidizing this? People are able to deduct the interest on effectively anything when they use a cash out refi to pay of other debt such as credit cards. What this policy really encourages is debt. Another example of the law of unintended consequences and social engineering.

Above Posted By: Jay | Tue, 1 Aug 2006 19:25:13 EST

Its funny how the same people that say the home mortgage tax deduction makes home owning more affordable, also say that if you got rid of the deduction, prices would plumet (AKA get more affordable). So which is it? The distortion to our economic system is only beginning to be understood. Cash out refi's effectively allow people to deduct not just their home mortage but any kind of debt, jet skis, hummers, vacations... Its really a policy that encourages debt and inflates prices.

Above Posted By: Austrian School | Sat, 29 Jul 2006 01:43:23 EST

The point is that home ownership can and will still occur, but perhaps not at the same pricepoint. THAT is the key issue here for brokers and bankers alike. Less of your cash in their pockets!!

Above Posted By: Eddie | Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:38:48 EST

The itemization of mortgage interest and real estate taxes is a reduction in earned income to arrive at adjusted reportable income. The effect is that if the filer is in the 30% bracket and pays $12,000 real estate tax for example, the income is reduced by $12,000. This means that the filer saved $4,000 in taxes. I agree that is certainly a reduciton in tax due. But I will gladly give anyone $4,000 back for every $12,000 they give me ALL DAY LONG!!! Just send me an email to sign up!

Above Posted By: Eddie | Thu, 27 Jul 2006 10:35:07 EST

Most middle and lower income homeowners do not have a 2nd/vaction home, so this would HURT them. And considering that a min. 25% of Americans do not have a home, the real issues lie elsewhere - as in "programs" that require great/perfect credit to participate. This could be an issue for some investors, but only for those who purchase homes for tax incentives which is not how one should invest. Tax laws are always changing and should not be relied upon.

Above Posted By: FSBO | Fri, 21 Jul 2006 13:13:00 EST

I forgot to mention how losing mortgage and local tax deductions would create a disincentive for people to own homes in good school districts. It would would also be a disencentive for homeowners to vote on tax appropriations to their school districts. The key to a successful economy and being able to compete in the global economy (therefore providing the tax revenues which reduce the deficit, that Bush is currently so pleased about!) is EDUCATION! Figure the rest out.

Above Posted By: Gene | Sat, 15 Jul 2006 03:27:19 EST

I guess since the Bush Administration sees a booming economy, it can afford to kill off the rest of the real estate industry,not to mention the vacation home market! Yes, there are ways to help middle and lower income homeowners and its not by killing off home values and the industry that goes with them.

Above Posted By: Gene | Sat, 15 Jul 2006 03:19:19 EST

Another reason to be an increasingly cautious buyer.

Above Posted By: Morgan | Fri, 14 Jul 2006 14:47:55 EST


Post A Comment

Please fill out the form below to submit a comment.

Name: 
(Required - Type Anonymous or Use First Name Only if Private)
Email Address: 
(Not Required So No Fake Emails Please.)
URL or Weblog:
(Leave Blank If You Don't Have One - Use http://)
Comments: 
(Please keep comments on topic. No HTML Allowed. No Advertisng.)
Please Note: Due to Comment Spam, all comments are reviewed by hand. Most comments will appear shortly after submission but it may take up to 12 hours to appear. If you would like to come back, click here to Bookmark the page.
PLEASE DO NOT USE ALL CAPS


Character Count =     (5000 Character Limit)

If you would like to leave a longer comment, please submit your comments in 5000 character increments and we will merge your comments.
Notify me via email when my comment is approved.


Note: Please don't bother spamming. All submissions are reviewed by our our editorial staff. Comment spam and irrelevant links will not be approved.

 




NEW VIDEO
Trump Talks Economy, Oil and Real Estate
New Evidence of Deceptive Practices at Countrywide


Reader Comments (More)
I believe that lending is a two way street. The lenders obviously failed some of the borrowers out there, but over 90% of mortgage...
Read
Why won't the Bush Administration, Senate, Congress concentrate on one thing at a time. Bernanke pointed to deceptive practices as...
Read
Amazing that we have people citing the buyers as victims. Culpability for the housing mess falls to both the lenders AND the borro...
Read
Home - Contact - Sitemap - Disclaimer - Privacy Statement - Advertising
All Content Copyright © 2003 - 2008 Brown House Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part in any form without the express written permission of MortgageNewsDaily.com is prohibited.