Sounds like a worthy cause to me
A new ad over there on the right says:
Congress is debating altering mortgage interest deductions, putting your homeownership at risk. Under U.S. tax code, mortgage interest on your home is currently deductible. If Congress changes or removes mortgage interest deductions you could be paying many thousands of dollars more each year.
Update: In comments, sailorcourt is unimpressed.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:09 am
Not to be a spoilsport or anything but they don’t back up their assertions with any facts. What committee is dabating this under the auspices of what bill or resolution? What congress critters are pushing for such a change?
Their “solution” seems to speak volumes. They don’t urge anyone to contact their congresscritters, they don’t suggest writing letters or sending emails and faxes, they don’t single out congresspeople to vote out of office. Their solution: “Sign up today”.
Sounds more like a typcial tactic designed to scare people into joining their organization more than a legitimate threat.
If there really IS a serious discussion of eliminating the Mortgage Interest deduction, someone please enlighten me as to the details glaringly missing from the AHAA plea and I’ll be the first to start writing letters, making phone calls etc. I may even consider joining their group…probably not based upon first impressions, but you never know.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:49 am
Upon further review, I don’t think I’ll be joining any time soon.
First of all, their membership application doesn’t bother to mention the $60 per year membership fee. You have to go to the FAQ to find that.
Secondly, the FAQ provides this wisdom: Additionally, AHAA provides its members with homeownership-related information and products. You can be assured that if AHAA endorses it, the information, service or product has been screened by your association to be sure it is appropriate for our members and is of the best quality.
But if you read the “Terms and Conditions” (you know, the actual, legally binding contract), you find: Disclaimer of Endorsement. Any reference on this Website to any product or service does not constitute an endorsement or recommendation by AHAA or its affiliates.
So; you “can be assured” that IF they endorse it it’s good stuff. They just don’t endorse anything…even if they imply they are doing so by advertising it on their site. Can you say “misleading”? Sure you can.
Next up, the “Member Benefits and Services” section states Be a Charter Member and join AHAA today for just $2 a month!. But if you read the FAQ section under the question “What is a Charter Membership” you find: Beginning October 1, 2005 the doors will be closed to Charter Membership. On October 1, 2005, price of membership will become $60 a year.. So, it seems that you CAN become a Charter member today as long as you can travel back in time so that today is September 30, 2005.
That brings up another question. If they haven’t updated their web site since before October 1, 2005, why should I believe that their contention that congress is “considering removing mortgage interest deductions” is current and accurate and why should believe that they will be diligent in keeping me current and up-do-date on happenings regarding homeownership?
Finally, I note the glaring lack of privacy policy in any section of their web site. I would have to imagine this lapse was quite intentional. There is no guarantee that they won’t sell your personally identifiable information to advertisers etc because that is exactly what they intend to do with your personally identifiable information.
No, I don’t think I’ll be joining any time soon.
Hey, congress is ALWAYS considering reinstating the draft. I’m starting an organization of draft-age people to fight against this egregious proposal. All you have to do to join is send me $60 per year ($24 per year as long as you join no later than last year) and I’ll make sure your voice is heard etc. etc. etc. Incidentally, I’ll also sell your name, email address, snail mail address and phone number to every mass marketer in the country and some outside of it. Just think, for just $60 per year you will not only have the immense privelege of having my organization trying to sell you things, but every day, your malbox, email and telephone will be jammed full of wonderful bargains for viagra, cheap second mortgages and replacement windows. Just send your name, address, email address, phone number, mortgage account number, social security number, mother’s maiden name and credit card authorization for $60 to theresasuckerborneveryminute@pleasespamme.com
September 15th, 2006 at 9:55 am
I’m sure like any organization they’re motivated to get members and fund themselves. But it looks like there has been some consideration of removing the mortage interest deductions. See here and here.
September 15th, 2006 at 10:48 am
I’m not debating that some are talking about it. The liberals tout it as a “rich get richer” tax deduction and, therefore, evil. It doesn’t help poor people in section eight housing (who pay minimal taxes if any by the way) so it is just a sop for the rich.
Ron Paul introduces a bill to eliminate the Federal Income tax and abolish the IRS every year; it could be said that congress is “considering” it, but that doesn’t mean our tax salvation is imminent. They consider it every year and then reject it out of hand.
Of course AHAA is motivated to fund themselves as any organization should be, but that doesn’t excuse the use of (what appears to be) misleading and unethical tactics to do so. I have no problem with any organization funding themselves in any manner they see fit as long as they are clear to potential customers/members as to what they are getting themselves into.
AHAA does not do that…at least not on their web site and in a manner that allows people to know exactly what they are doing BEFORE providing their personal information.
Whether the home mortgage interest deduction is in jeopardy or not is irrelavant to the issue of whether this is a reputable, worthy organization to join. Your riposte didn’t speak to any of my concerns.
September 15th, 2006 at 10:54 am
I’m not defending them. Just noted I thought it was a worthy cause. You did far more looking into it than I did.
September 15th, 2006 at 5:44 pm
I wish they would eliminate the mortgage interest deduction. Why does a homeowner, but not a home renter, deserve to have what amounts to getting their housing costs subsidized throught the tax code? Why is the interest on a loan for a house deductible but not interest for car loans, credit cards, etc.?
September 15th, 2006 at 9:47 pm
Hey Stormy, what do you think the rent would be on a home if the owner didn’t get the deduction? You can bet the rental cost would go through the roof. It’s not just the purchaser that gets the benefit of the deduction.
September 15th, 2006 at 9:51 pm
Oh, BTW, most people need a place to live. No one really needs a new car (or even a used one so expensive as to require a loan) or the use of a credit card. Those items are luxuries.
September 15th, 2006 at 10:19 pm
joated…rental properties are allowed to deduct the interest on their mortgage as a business expense. The home mortgage interest deduction benefits homeowners at the expense of renters. Having said that, it would be impossible to repeal as a lot of people depend on it to make ends meet.
September 18th, 2006 at 7:13 pm
Manish: I believe the point is to encourage home ownership, so that’s not a bug, it’s a feature. (Not that anyone I know thinks renting is a great idea, anyway. Buying builds equity, while rent is money thrown away, from the renter’s POV.
Different criteria, of course, override that if one is very risk-averse or must or prefers to move a lot…)
I’m not quite sure how it’s “at the expense of renters”, however, unless you mean in the general sense of reducing the total tax take and thus government services, but such an expense would affect owners, too, so…
The mortgage interest deduction is simple social engineering. It’s just social engineering that some leftists don’t like, rather than the kind they do like. (Libertarians often oppose it on principle, as well.)