In response to:

Time to Get Rid of Tax Preferences for Housing in the Internal Revenue Code

David1334 Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 9:11 AM
"...capital shifts out of owner-occupied housing and into business investment." This neglects a number of issues, most notably that housing, like food, is an absolute necessity. As a result, the housing stock would evolve from owner-occupied housing to rental housing. This eliminates several benefits of owner-occupied housing, including financial security for the occupant and safer, more stable neighborhoods. These are the primary reasons for the tax preference for owner-occupied housing.
Sheryl14 Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 10:35 AM
I still see owner-occupied buyers as wanting a home if their own even without the MID. The MID is a secondary benefit to all the others, including what is usually appreciation after some years.
Bob34222 Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 9:55 AM
But that hasn't worked out so well over the past few years! It's old thinking.
Joseph64 Wrote: Dec 21, 2012 11:14 AM
Look at neighborhoods where the housing is primarily owner-occupied vs areas where it is primarily rentals. Owner occupied properties are kept up better, services in those areas are better, streets are safer, schools are better, business owners are not afraid to locate there, etc. In areas where there are primarily rentals, the people who live there don't give a damn because it's not their property. They have no interest in keeping the place up because they have no skin in the game and so their neighborhoods turn into ghettos.

Even though I knew some people would call me Scrooge, I wrote a few days ago about why we should get rid of the tax deduction for charitable contributions in exchange for lower tax rates.

Simply stated, I’m a big advocate of fundamental tax reform, and I would like to scrap the corrupt internal revenue code and replace it with a simple and fair flat tax.

Needless to say, that also means getting rid of tax preferences for housing. I make the case against...