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 Video: Amtrak Is Way More Successful Than You Think

Why do so many people still treat Amtrak as a failure — and what would it take to deliver the rail investment that American riders deserve?

October 24, 2025

Hundreds of Community Groups — From the Conservatives to the Socialists! — Demand Daylighting

Two hundred New York City groups from across the ideological spectrum joined calls to ban parking at corners in order to improve safety and visibility, also known as daylighting.

October 24, 2025

OPINION: Canal Street — Not The Vendors — Is the Problem

If Zohran Mamdani becomes mayor — and is true to his vision for a fair, livable city — he will have to take on this long-ignored corridor. Here's how.

October 24, 2025

Vision Zero Cities: Bicycles Are Not Cars So They Shouldn’t Have to Follow the Same Rules

The default in nearly all states is to impose the same traffic rules on bicycles as on motor vehicles even though the needs of cyclists are so different.

October 24, 2025

Friday’s Headlines: Today’s the Day Edition

Mayor Adams's new 15 mph speed limit is officially goes into effect today. Plus more news.

October 24, 2025

Cough, Cough: DEP Considers Largest Ever Exemption Request to City’s Anti-Idling Law

Academy Bus claims no technological alternatives exist for heating and cooling buses without idling. Advocates warn an exemption would "gut" the city's 50-year-old idling ban.

October 23, 2025
See all posts