Comments on: Caroline Rummel Just Won an A! http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/ Paying taxes is painful... but reading about them shouldn't be. Sat, 21 Nov 2009 12:33:00 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: How to Win an A in Tax Law | taxgirl http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-8740 How to Win an A in Tax Law | taxgirl Fri, 06 Feb 2009 16:00:26 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-8740 [...] If you want to see what a winning entry looks like, check out Caroline Rummel’s piece on mortgage interest deductions. [...] [...] If you want to see what a winning entry looks like, check out Caroline Rummel’s piece on mortgage interest deductions. [...]

]]> By: www.superhomerentals.com http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3700 www.superhomerentals.com Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:47:39 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3700 i own www.superhomerentals.com the only website that allows for section 8 listings i know first hand section 8 housing does help single moms and the main reason i help and list section 8 housing is for kids exiting foster care that need the housing or would be homeless -wow i am really impressed by your thoughts and the insite on this ! i own http://www.superhomerentals.com the only website that allows for section 8 listings i know first hand section 8 housing does help single moms and the main reason i help and list section 8 housing is for kids exiting foster care that need the housing or would be homeless -wow i am really impressed by your thoughts and the insite on this !

]]> By: Kelly http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3698 Kelly Mon, 10 Dec 2007 22:29:16 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3698 Thanks Andy! The first runner up is already up. The URL is: http://www.taxgirl.com/does-thompsons-flat-tax-proposal-make-sense/ Thanks Andy! The first runner up is already up. The URL is:
http://www.taxgirl.com/does-thompsons-flat-tax-proposal-make-sense/

]]> By: andy http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3699 andy Mon, 10 Dec 2007 21:10:55 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3699 good post. i hope you post some 'honorable mentions' as well. good post. i hope you post some ‘honorable mentions’ as well.

]]> By: overnight loan » Blog Archive » Caroline Rummel Just Won an A! http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3695 overnight loan » Blog Archive » Caroline Rummel Just Won an A! Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:40 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3695 [...] Read the rest of this great post here [...] [...] Read the rest of this great post here [...]

]]> By: Does Thompson’s Flat Tax Proposal Make Sense? http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3696 Does Thompson’s Flat Tax Proposal Make Sense? Fri, 07 Dec 2007 11:55:38 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3696 [...] up on yesterday’s announcement about the winning entry in my law student writing contest, I am pleased to present the entry which [...] [...] up on yesterday’s announcement about the winning entry in my law student writing contest, I am pleased to present the entry which [...]

]]> By: Andrew http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/comment-page-1/#comment-3697 Andrew Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:04:36 +0000 http://www.taxgirl.com/caroline-rummel-just-won-an-a/#comment-3697 I think there are some good points here- there is definitely a classist element to the mortgage interest deduction, and it definitely does cut along racial lines, but I think it is questionable whether homeowners actually receive much of a "benefit" from the deduction. There is a fairly strong argument (which also makes sense intuitively) that the value of the deduction results in higher home prices across the board. Thus, it seems the real beneficiaries of the deduction might in fact be homebuilders and real estate agents, while homeowners themselves have their benefit offset by the higher prices they've paid initially. Further, given that it's a deduction rather than a credit, low-income homeowners may derive little to no value from the deduction (if their current marginal rate is zero because of nonrefundable credits and other deductions). By contrast, Section 8 vouchers, being used in a far smaller segment of the rental market than mortgage deductions in the purchase market, probably have less of a distortionary effect on prices, and are more likely to actually help their recipients than the mortgage deduction. Overall, I strongly agree that the deduction should be scaled back (it might make sense to limit it to the conforming loan threshold, which I believe is $417k), as it seems like an extremely inefficient way to encourage homeownership. But, um, good luck with that one. I can't really think of a more entrenched deduction in the code. I think there are some good points here- there is definitely a classist element to the mortgage interest deduction, and it definitely does cut along racial lines, but I think it is questionable whether homeowners actually receive much of a “benefit” from the deduction. There is a fairly strong argument (which also makes sense intuitively) that the value of the deduction results in higher home prices across the board. Thus, it seems the real beneficiaries of the deduction might in fact be homebuilders and real estate agents, while homeowners themselves have their benefit offset by the higher prices they’ve paid initially. Further, given that it’s a deduction rather than a credit, low-income homeowners may derive little to no value from the deduction (if their current marginal rate is zero because of nonrefundable credits and other deductions).

By contrast, Section 8 vouchers, being used in a far smaller segment of the rental market than mortgage deductions in the purchase market, probably have less of a distortionary effect on prices, and are more likely to actually help their recipients than the mortgage deduction.

Overall, I strongly agree that the deduction should be scaled back (it might make sense to limit it to the conforming loan threshold, which I believe is $417k), as it seems like an extremely inefficient way to encourage homeownership.

But, um, good luck with that one. I can’t really think of a more entrenched deduction in the code.

]]>