Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
an
Participant[quote=bearishgurl]More taxes at SCP … I agree, AN. But let’s presume all-cash sales in each subject sold comp.[/quote]
OK, lets assume all-cash sales, do you think the buyer will pay off the MR too? IIRC, in another post, you suggest not to pay off the MR. So, lets assume such buyer don’t pay off the MR, they will be paying $224k less for the house. If you can get 4% return on that $224k, then the interest would probably be enough to cover your MR (depending on your tax bracket). So, you’re not really paying $77k more, but closer to $224k (depending on your rate of return and tax bracket) more for the SCP home.ParticipantIt’s all about the total cost of living in a place. BG, if you count in the cost MR, then you have to count in the cost of interest as well. After 30 years you might pay $146,885 more in MR in Stonebridge, but you’ll be paying ~$209k less in interest. This is not counting in the tax differences as well, which should be about $2k/yr or $60k after 30 years.
ParticipantIt’s all about the total cost of living in a place. BG, if you count in the cost MR, then you have to count in the cost of interest as well. After 30 years you might pay $146,885 more in MR in Stonebridge, but you’ll be paying ~$209k less in interest. This is not counting in the tax differences as well, which should be about $2k/yr or $60k after 30 years.
ParticipantIt’s all about the total cost of living in a place. BG, if you count in the cost MR, then you have to count in the cost of interest as well. After 30 years you might pay $146,885 more in MR in Stonebridge, but you’ll be paying ~$209k less in interest. This is not counting in the tax differences as well, which should be about $2k/yr or $60k after 30 years.
ParticipantIt’s all about the total cost of living in a place. BG, if you count in the cost MR, then you have to count in the cost of interest as well. After 30 years you might pay $146,885 more in MR in Stonebridge, but you’ll be paying ~$209k less in interest. This is not counting in the tax differences as well, which should be about $2k/yr or $60k after 30 years.
ParticipantIt’s all about the total cost of living in a place. BG, if you count in the cost MR, then you have to count in the cost of interest as well. After 30 years you might pay $146,885 more in MR in Stonebridge, but you’ll be paying ~$209k less in interest. This is not counting in the tax differences as well, which should be about $2k/yr or $60k after 30 years.
Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=FormerSanDiegan]I also disagree with the thesis that eliminaiton of the mortgage interest deduction would result in increased tax revenue for Government.
There’s no way they would reap the $100 Billion claimed (see #1 below). I think there can lso be an argument made that the end result might even result in a loss in revenue to state & local governments equal to or larger than the $100 billionHere’s why:
1. People respond to changes in tax code. I, for example would rent out my primary and move into a rental. The mortgage interest I currently pay would turn into a business expense.
2. Elimination in MID would put downward pressure on home prices. In the long-run property prices will be lower than they would have been if the MID were in effect, resulting in decreased property tax revenues to local/state governments.[/quote]
Excellent idea that #1. My MIL lives next door with same floor plan- we could swap houses. Better yet, why bother doing that and just write up a rental contract while staying in the same house- who’s to know eh?[/quote]
Better yet, you can create rental contracts for rent below market value. Then you can write off the “losses”. In essence, you’ll have something similar to MID.Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=FormerSanDiegan]I also disagree with the thesis that eliminaiton of the mortgage interest deduction would result in increased tax revenue for Government.
There’s no way they would reap the $100 Billion claimed (see #1 below). I think there can lso be an argument made that the end result might even result in a loss in revenue to state & local governments equal to or larger than the $100 billionHere’s why:
1. People respond to changes in tax code. I, for example would rent out my primary and move into a rental. The mortgage interest I currently pay would turn into a business expense.
2. Elimination in MID would put downward pressure on home prices. In the long-run property prices will be lower than they would have been if the MID were in effect, resulting in decreased property tax revenues to local/state governments.[/quote]
Excellent idea that #1. My MIL lives next door with same floor plan- we could swap houses. Better yet, why bother doing that and just write up a rental contract while staying in the same house- who’s to know eh?[/quote]
Better yet, you can create rental contracts for rent below market value. Then you can write off the “losses”. In essence, you’ll have something similar to MID.Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=FormerSanDiegan]I also disagree with the thesis that eliminaiton of the mortgage interest deduction would result in increased tax revenue for Government.
There’s no way they would reap the $100 Billion claimed (see #1 below). I think there can lso be an argument made that the end result might even result in a loss in revenue to state & local governments equal to or larger than the $100 billionHere’s why:
1. People respond to changes in tax code. I, for example would rent out my primary and move into a rental. The mortgage interest I currently pay would turn into a business expense.
2. Elimination in MID would put downward pressure on home prices. In the long-run property prices will be lower than they would have been if the MID were in effect, resulting in decreased property tax revenues to local/state governments.[/quote]
Excellent idea that #1. My MIL lives next door with same floor plan- we could swap houses. Better yet, why bother doing that and just write up a rental contract while staying in the same house- who’s to know eh?[/quote]
Better yet, you can create rental contracts for rent below market value. Then you can write off the “losses”. In essence, you’ll have something similar to MID.Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=FormerSanDiegan]I also disagree with the thesis that eliminaiton of the mortgage interest deduction would result in increased tax revenue for Government.
There’s no way they would reap the $100 Billion claimed (see #1 below). I think there can lso be an argument made that the end result might even result in a loss in revenue to state & local governments equal to or larger than the $100 billionHere’s why:
1. People respond to changes in tax code. I, for example would rent out my primary and move into a rental. The mortgage interest I currently pay would turn into a business expense.
2. Elimination in MID would put downward pressure on home prices. In the long-run property prices will be lower than they would have been if the MID were in effect, resulting in decreased property tax revenues to local/state governments.[/quote]
Excellent idea that #1. My MIL lives next door with same floor plan- we could swap houses. Better yet, why bother doing that and just write up a rental contract while staying in the same house- who’s to know eh?[/quote]
Better yet, you can create rental contracts for rent below market value. Then you can write off the “losses”. In essence, you’ll have something similar to MID.Participant[quote=outtamojo][quote=FormerSanDiegan]I also disagree with the thesis that eliminaiton of the mortgage interest deduction would result in increased tax revenue for Government.
There’s no way they would reap the $100 Billion claimed (see #1 below). I think there can lso be an argument made that the end result might even result in a loss in revenue to state & local governments equal to or larger than the $100 billionHere’s why:
1. People respond to changes in tax code. I, for example would rent out my primary and move into a rental. The mortgage interest I currently pay would turn into a business expense.
2. Elimination in MID would put downward pressure on home prices. In the long-run property prices will be lower than they would have been if the MID were in effect, resulting in decreased property tax revenues to local/state governments.[/quote]
Excellent idea that #1. My MIL lives next door with same floor plan- we could swap houses. Better yet, why bother doing that and just write up a rental contract while staying in the same house- who’s to know eh?[/quote]
Better yet, you can create rental contracts for rent below market value. Then you can write off the “losses”. In essence, you’ll have something similar to MID.Participant[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.
I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.Participant[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.
I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper.Participant[quote=briansd1]RP being consistently wrong is not confidence inspiring.
Abolishing the Federal Reserve and letting individual banks issue notes does not make me feel financially secure.
I think that it’s important to change strategies to match new facts and realities. Isn’t it stupid to insist that the earth is flat when all the evidence points to it being round?[/quote]
Wrong to you, right for others. Consistency and predictability is much better than flip flopper. -
AuthorPosts
