The housing market is soft, so this is the worst possible time to get rid of the mortgage interest deduction, right? Well, it’s not that simple.
1.) The deduction is not a subsidy to homeowners. It’s a subsidy to people who have mortgages, and then only if they itemize their taxes. Those claiming the standard deduction can’t take advantage. Paying cash for a home won’t qualify you for the deduction, either. Following a great recession fueled by would‐be homeowners borrowing more than they could afford, it’s well past time for the feds to get out of the business of subsidizing home debt.
2.) Borrowing to own a home now costs homebuyers less in interest than it has historically, which means that the cash value of the mortgage interest deduction is lower than it will be under higher (future) interest rates. In other words, this particular tax‐code goodie is at a historically low value to taxpayers, so why not get rid of it now?
Mitt Romney has nibbled around the edges of this idea. He would cap the mortgage interest deduction. In delivering a bit of a backhanded compliment, Yonah Freemark and Lawrence J. Vale write in the New York Times that “while Mr. Romney’s tax proposal overall may not be fair or sensible — or even mathematically logical — Democrats shouldn’t be so quick to attack any change to the mortgage interest deduction.”
Freemark and Vale would use the boost in federal revenue from ending the deduction to fund new housing programs. However, ending the mortgage interest deduction could also be used to lower overall tax rates. Mark Calabria and I chatted about the mortgage interest deduction this week for the Cato Daily Podcast.