Housing tax credits for people who've lived in their house for the last 5yrs?

[muck]

Clicky

[AtomicCEO]

I'd have to buy a new house to take advantage of it, right?

[dmarc117]

so if you bought this year and arent a new buyer, you are skrewed?

[detlef]

Interesting, this is basically a subsidy for realtors and others who profit from the sale of a home. The first time buyer deal can be seen as an incentive to make the biggest investment you may ever make. There are so many advantages to being a home owner and that just gives you another reason to take the plunge.

 

This just gives you incentive to move somewhere else and sell your place. Which essentially just lines the pockets of realtors, mortgage lenders, and moving companies. However, there is no net change to everyone else. After all, it does not create a net increase in demand for homes because, for every home being bought, one is being put on the market.

 

More importantly, this is not stimulative. It barely offsets (if that) the costs of buying and selling a house. So, unless you were already planning on moving, it's not like it's enough to make you move for the hell of it. It just reduces the burden on those already doing so and everyone else picks up the tab.

 

Am I missing something here?

[muck]

Said another way, it appears that my parents (same house for like 30yrs) can get $6500 tax credit.

[detlef]

Said another way, it appears that my parents (same house for like 30yrs) can get $6500 tax credit.

But only if they sell their house and buy another, right?

[AtomicCEO]

So it sounds like they are just trying to root out the speculative buyers and help actual homeowners.

 

I don't think it is in this country's interests to indefinitely inflate the real estate market with federal dollars.

 

That being said I may take this money next year.

[muck]

But only if they sell their house and buy another, right?

 

The way I read (misread?) it was that you got it for staying put (in a home that possibly has less/negative equity due to the shenanigans of other people).

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

Don't think so. Original credit was limited to first time homebuyers toward purchase of a home. They are talking about opening it up now to people who've lived in a home at least 5 years as well in the purchase of a home. At least that's what it looks like to me.

[detlef]

Don't think so. Original credit was limited to first time homebuyers toward purchase of a home. They are talking about opening it up now to people who've lived in a home at least 5 years as well in the purchase of a home. At least that's what it looks like to me.

that's how I read it as well.

[Perchoutofwater]

Interesting, this is basically a subsidy for realtors and others who profit from the sale of a home. The first time buyer deal can be seen as an incentive to make the biggest investment you may ever make. There are so many advantages to being a home owner and that just gives you another reason to take the plunge.

 

This just gives you incentive to move somewhere else and sell your place. Which essentially just lines the pockets of realtors, mortgage lenders, and moving companies. However, there is no net change to everyone else. After all, it does not create a net increase in demand for homes because, for every home being bought, one is being put on the market.

 

More importantly, this is not stimulative. It barely offsets (if that) the costs of buying and selling a house. So, unless you were already planning on moving, it's not like it's enough to make you move for the hell of it. It just reduces the burden on those already doing so and everyone else picks up the tab.

 

Am I missing something here?

 

I think you are spot on. I'd much rather see an across the board tax cut that would equate to the amount of money they project to spend on this, or even better, that amount of money used to pay of some of our debt.

[Skippy]

Don't think so. Original credit was limited to first time homebuyers toward purchase of a home. They are talking about opening it up now to people who've lived in a home at least 5 years as well in the purchase of a home. At least that's what it looks like to me.

That is what I think that I read. Now I guess that screws someone like me that bought a house in April. :shurg:

[detlef]

I think you are spot on. I'd much rather see an across the board tax cut that would equate to the amount of money they project to spend on this, or even better, that amount of money used to pay of some of our debt.

What I'm afraid of is that this was born from the "what about us?" mentality that so often pollutes public policy making. As I said earlier, I think the first time homebuyer deal is a fine idea, even if it doesn't directly affect me because I can't take advantage of it. It is, none the less, something that will buoy the housing market as well as increase the percentage of home owners to renters which also helps home values. So, I'm cool with the fact that there's no way that I can tap into that $8 grand myself. Do I wish it was around 7 years ago when I first bought in? Of course I do, but it wasn't.

 

Thing is, there's so much pissing and moaning about everyone chipping in via taxes to help others, even if by doing so the economy improves (not implying that all of these programs are effective, mind you) that they're probably bullied into throwing a bone to those who are belly aching that they feel punished for already owning homes. So you get something pointless like this.

[yo mama]

I think you are spot on. I'd much rather see an across the board tax cut that would equate to the amount of money they project to spend on this, or even better, that amount of money used to pay of some of our debt.

Really? I'd have assumed you'd have wanted to augment the earned income tax credit.

 

And I kicked yer arse in 12 Man last week.

[Jimmy Neutron]

... or even better, that amount of money used to pay of some of our debt.

 

What about a tax break for paying off debt? Gets individuals in better financial shape and would help pour cash back into the banks. Of course, there would have to be some provision that banks actually keep a lot of that influs as reserves....

[Chief Dick]

If this passes I will more than likely sell and buy a new house. My wife and I have been talking about it anyway, so it would be a good time to execute.

[max]

The way I read (misread?) it was that you got it for staying put (in a home that possibly has less/negative equity due to the shenanigans of other people).

 

 

From this quote in the article, I believe it won't be provided to those that have been residing in the same house for 5+ years if they stay put.

 

"Homebuyers who have lived in their prior residences for at least five years may receive a credit of $6,500 under the plan, said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus. "

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

What about a tax break for paying off debt? Gets individuals in better financial shape and would help pour cash back into the banks. Of course, there would have to be some provision that banks actually keep a lot of that influs as reserves....

 

This is a GREAT idea. Matching funds or something.

[Perchoutofwater]

This is a GREAT idea. Matching funds or something.

 

Screw that, I don't want to pay for half of your PS3. Now letting you deduct any debt assumed prior to November 1st of this year from your taxable income would be a great idea. That way you aren't taking money from one person and giving it to another, but rather letting people keep more of what they earn.

[cliaz]

I'd have to buy a new house to take advantage of it, right?

 

 

so if you bought this year and arent a new buyer, you are skrewed?

 

Yeah, this only applies to 1st buyers. I was surprised

[CaP'N GRuNGe]

I meant a very small percentage. Not dollar for dollar. And your way is also taking money from one to give to another. It's all redistribution no matter which way you cut it.

[Perchoutofwater]

I meant a very small percentage. Not dollar for dollar. And your way is also taking money from one to give to another. It's all redistribution no matter which way you cut it.

 

No my way we are keeping our money instead of paying taxes. Your way you would be redistributing a lot of money to people who do not pay taxes.