I quote from myself (http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=111396&perpage=6&pagenumber=3)
Today, in the FT, we see this, from the appropriately named Clive Crook:
The sequence is the same as mine. None of it is original; for instance, he could have mentioned the capital gains exclusion, whereby you are not taxed on the gain you might have made in the sale of your home, provided you buy another within a certain set period (don't remember the period, but I think it's something like a year).
I think I have a case. What do you guys think?
That letter has got to be one of the stupidest things ever written.
How many ways is the housing market subsidized? Let's count the ways:
1 - Mortgage interest deduction.
2 - Property tax deduction (sales taxes aren't)
3 - The existence of the GSE's, Fannie and Freddie, whose mission is to keep up liquidity in the marketplace.
4 - Etc: FHA, FHLB, a whole slew of Federal agencies and interventions, all designed to "make housing affordable", or something.
So this latest is just the next in line. The housing market hasn't been a free market in a long long time.
Today, in the FT, we see this, from the appropriately named Clive Crook:
Start with virtually unlimited tax relief on mortgage debt. Throw in the two giant âproviders of liquidityâ, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, key enablers of the mortgage securitisation surge, operating in the background under implicit government guarantee, with transactions accounting for 40 per cent of US mortgages on their books. Do not forget the Federal Housing Administration, the government mortgage insurer (6m loans and counting), which the administration has just asked to take on a much expanded role. And now this.
Totting up the explicit and implicit cost of these programmes, the mind reels. The tax deduction alone is nearly $80bn a year. It is a little late for a market-based approach.
The sequence is the same as mine. None of it is original; for instance, he could have mentioned the capital gains exclusion, whereby you are not taxed on the gain you might have made in the sale of your home, provided you buy another within a certain set period (don't remember the period, but I think it's something like a year).
I think I have a case. What do you guys think?
