This news story has 6 comments:

Register or Login to rate comments »
•  
  

  • Tony Petroski: 
  • Comments (1695)
  •  • StockTalk (59)
  Can you say housing subsidy II?

  Sep 24 10:15 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Malkiel: 
  • Comments (612)
  "Extending and expanding the tax credit also would help to keep other families from becoming upside down in their mortgages or risk foreclosure,” Yun said."
  
  I'm not exactly sure how it would do that short of selling the house, but while we're on the subject, why has no one involved with the legislation considered the possibility that allowing SELLERS to claim a tax loss of some kind on their end of the transaction might be just as helpful as giving a tax subisidy to buyers? By letting sellers claim some percentage of their loss many sellers who are only slightly upside-down could perhaps lower their prices to meet market expectations, facilitating the trade-up trade-down aspect of the market which has more expensive homes hung up. My suggestion would be some formula that cuts off at a maximum loss of $8,000, mirroring the current buyer subsidy, but in a useful way for cash-strapped sellers. Mortgage lenders could enable sales by upside-down sellers by making them bridge loans tied to the tax break...

  Sep 24 10:54 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Carlos Lam: 
  • Comments (563)
  •  • Instablog (2)
  •  • StockTalk (2)
  Without the "sugar" of the tax credit, sales are simply not going anywhere. Indeed, Sen. Johnny Isakson (a "Republican" from GA and former real estate exec) is pushing for nearly doubling the credit to $15,000 and extending it through the end of 2010. Never mind the fact that (a) prices should be allowed to come down to reflect the reality on the ground and (b) the feds don't have the money to dole out; they have to borrow it.

  Sep 24 11:34 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • paulseglund: 
  • Comments (39)
  Why not just let the market sort it out without subsidies & tax breaks? Yes you should be able to claim a corresponding capital loss if you did lose money on a transaction but that is subject to fraud based upon claimed capital improvements.

  Sep 24 11:35 AM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • conceptwizard: 
  • Comments (1044)
  The housing rebate of $8000 has initiated an estimated 350,000 more homes sold at a overall cost of 16 Billion, that's a cost to taxpayers of $45,000 per home sold, not very efficient.

  Sep 24 01:27 PM | Link | Reply
•  
  

  • Michael Clark: 
  • Comments (1917)
  •  • Instablog (255)
  •  • StockTalk (71)

  • •
  • Clark's Gate Timing System ©
  We need to face the fact that the party is over and we need to pay for our excesses; and this means letting deflation run its course. Of course, the people rich in assets don't like this idea, because their total wealth will be skewered. The Lord gives; and the Lord takes away. (There is a law of physics hidden in that slice of scripture.)

  Sep 24 02:26 PM | Link | Reply