【改造房屋减免税】【阅读】找到了原文 --- 我是原文的搬运工

SiwenTang

原始稿中说，提出了减免税这件事之后，从三个方面进行了反驳，指出政策的缺陷。

但是，原文其实是5个方面，有5个Problem。

原文如下：

Tax Deductions on Housing Subsidiaries

Article:

Thetax code allows homeowners to deduct the interest on loans used to buy, buildor improve a home, for mortgage principals up to #1,000,000. A wide range ofeconomists have long found fault with the deduction. Here are a few of thereasons:

Problem #1: Subsidizinginterest payments encourages people to leverage themselves to the hilt to beton housing markets. The size of the tax benefit is proportional to your debt.The deduction essentially encourages us to make leveraged bets on the swings ofthe housing market. That leverage means that housing price swings can easilywipe people out. We are currently experiencing the consequences of subsidizinggambles on housing.

Problem #2: Thededuction pushes up prices in places where the supply of new homes isconstrained, as it is in many coastal markets. Economics 101 teaches us that ifwe subsidize demand where supply is inelastic then the only effect is to makeprices go up. Housing supply is pretty constrained in places like New York Citybecause of land-use restrictions and lack of land. In these places, thededuction doesn’t make housing more affordable. It just transfers money frombuyers to sellers, and that makes little sense.

Problem #3: The homemortgage interest deduction is poorly designed to encourage homeownership,which is, after all, the alleged desideratum. Much of the interest deduction’sbenefits go to richer Americans who are likely to own homes in any case. Poorpeople who are on the margin of buying and renting often don’t even itemize. Myresearch found that when the value of the interest deduction rose, duringperiods of high inflation, there was no observable increase in thehomeownership rate.

Ifthe goal of the deduction is just to increase homeownership, then it would makefar more sense just to give a flat tax credit to people who buy homes. If thecredit was independent of home value, then this would eliminate the incentiveto buy bigger homes. If the credit was independent of borrowing, then thiswould decrease the incentive to over-borrow.

Problem #4: Thededuction is wildly regressive. The tax savings for households earning morethan $250,000 is 10 times the tax savings for households earning between$40,000 and $75,000 a year, according to recent research by James Poterba andTodd Sinai.

Ifthere ever was a case for small-government egalitarianism, then this is it.Eliminating the home mortgage deduction and replacing it with anacross-the-board tax cut would equalize after-tax incomes without a single newgovernment program.

(Not in GMAT starts from here)

Problem #5: Thededuction encourages people to buy larger, single-family detached homes, andthat increases carbon emissions and pushes people out of cities. The deductionencourages people to buy more expensive homes, which are generally biggerhomes. Bigger homes use more energy. The deduction is therefore implicitlyurging Americans to run higher electricity bills and spend more on homeheating. If global warming is a serious problem, then the government should beencouraging us to live in smaller, not bigger, dwellings.

Leo_ChaseDream

感谢楼主！！！！

FlyingC2

感谢分享！               

myteams257

楼主有点神

Btough

非常神！！！！！

Cinderella灰

叫我如何不爱你！

SiwenTang

Cinderella灰 发表于 2015-7-7 11:55
叫我如何不爱你！

约。（字符 字符 字符）

慕容亚宇

感谢分享！               

Sybil_Wang

谢谢lz~

piscesq

谢谢楼主，很厉害，研究深入。