Skip to Content
Streetsblog New York City home
Streetsblog New York City home
Log In
Around the Block

Why the Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction Has Got to Go

While the Trump administration pursues massive cuts to HUD that threaten urban neighborhoods, especially poorer ones, there's one form of housing assistance that the White House is much less enthusiastic about reducing: the mortgage interest tax deduction.

The mortgage interest deduction costs the federal government more than all rental subsidies combined, writes David Meni at Greater Greater Washington. And all that money promotes sprawl by encouraging people to buy more house, while transferring wealth to the upper tiers of the income ladder.

While there is bi-partisan support among think tanks for reforming this tax break, the politics of overhauling such a massive giveaway to the affluent are exceptionally difficult. Meni breaks down why the mortgage interest deduction is so regressive:

The MID is currently projected to be a $96 billion program by 2019. And as we recapped in that earlier post, nearly all of that spending goes to high-earners with large mortgages.

This staggering inequity is because of how the benefit is designed. You can only claim the deduction if you itemize your expenses, something that only those with higher incomes tend to do. As a result, the value of the benefit actually goes up as your income rises. This means that the MID actually incentives mortgage debt, rather than homeownership -- you get a larger benefit if you have a more expensive mortgage.

As a result of all these policy design choices, someone making millions of dollars a year -- even if they have multiple homes -- gets an average of $1,236 per month from the MID. That could cover most or all of a month’s rent for low-income households, whose average share is just eight cents, if they can get the benefit at all.

For someone with a $1 million mortgage, the MID means that the federal government gives you back about $22,000 a year -- enough to push a family of three above the poverty line.

More recommended reading today: Streets.mn says the focus on "distracted walking" is a distraction from the real threats that make walking so dangerous. And Bike Portland reports on some good news from Oregon state legislature which should clear the way for a 20 mph default residential speed limit in the city.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog New York City

Friday’s Headlines: City of Yes Edition

There was only one story yesterday: The embattled mayor succeeded in passing what might become the signature initiative of his one term. But there was other news, too.

November 22, 2024

Analysis: Mayor Gets the ‘W,’ But Council Turns His Zoning Plan into ‘City Of Yes … Sort Of’

The City Council took a crucial step towards passing City of Yes, but it also let low density areas opt out of much of the plan.

November 22, 2024

Five Ways New NYPD Boss Jessica Tisch Can Fix Our Dangerous Streets

If the Sanitation Commissioner wants to use her new position to make city streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists, here's where she can start.

November 21, 2024

What Do the Mayoral Candidates Think Of ‘City of Yes’?

Too bad for Hizzoner that challengers Zellnor Myrie, Brad Lander, Scott Stringer, Jessica Ramos and Zohran Mamdani — all Democrats — aren't on the Council. 

November 21, 2024
See all posts