Skip to comments.Gingrich: Romney’s mortgage deduction idea ‘class warfare’
Posted on 04/18/2012 7:21:51 PM PDT by SoConPubbie
Republicans arent shy about lobbing the class warfare charge at Democrats. But now Newt Gingrich is aiming those words at Mitt Romney over Romneys idea to scrap or limit the mortgage-interest deduction for second homes.
Romney, the Republicans all-but-certain presidential nominee, told donors in Florida last weekend that hed take away the deduction for high-income earners. His campaign later said it was just an idea, not a hard-and-fast policy. But Gingrich took it as gospel.
Governor Romneys proposal to limit certain tax deductions based on income, including the deduction for mortgage interest on second homes, is a surrender to the class warfare rhetoric of the Left, said the former House Speaker during a campaign stop in Lititz, Pa.
Gingrich whos still officially in the GOP race says a better idea is an optional 15% flat tax that allows Americans to keep their deductions or move to a one-page tax form.
Romney, meanwhile, doesnt seem to be paying much if any attention to Gingrich. The former Massachusetts governor on Wednesday afternoon is giving what he calls a prebuttal to President Obamas Democratic National Convention speech in Charlotte, N.C. Romney on Wednesday also picked up a big-name endorsement, from Indiana Gov. Mitch Daniels, who said Romney will unify the party.
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.marketwatch.com ...
|"If we must have an enemy at the head of Government, let it be one whom we can oppose, and for whom we are not responsible, who will not involve our party in the disgrace of his foolish and bad measures." - Alexander Hamilton|
|"We don't intend to turn the Republican Party over to the traitors in the battle just ended. We will have no more of those candidates who are pledged to the same goals as our opposition and who seek our support. Turning the Party over to the so-called moderates wouldnt make any sense at all." -- President Ronald Reagan|
|"A thing moderately good is not so good as it ought to be. Moderation in temper is always a virtue; but moderation in principle is always a vice." - Thomas Paine 1792|
It’s so that urban wealthy can live in the city while also buying up rural land, making it unaffordable for the people that actually live there.
Lose the deduction, and the price of houses decreases proportionately.
It's another shell game the government plays to make you think you're getting something from them.
Romney’s idea won’t win any friends among my neighbors. At least two of them are still paying on a second home and they are by no means “wealthy” people. Just regular old 5 figure blue collar people.
He won’t touch the EPA, he won’t touch education, the DOE will continue doing nothing, the green speculators will continue to gamble with tax dollars.....
Wow, another liberal talking point/idea from Romney - not surprised.
I don’t expect him to win but it wouldn’t shock me if he switched parties in the white house if he did.
Whoever it was is a fool - Romney has divided the party more than it has been in four decades.
Thanks for the ping!
“Do you spend all your time posting anti-Romney rants?”
It’s SCP’s time. What do you care how it is spent?
Interest on any investment is an investment expense. Borrowing money to make money is a prime tool of capitalism. Margin interest when trading stocks is also part of the expense involved in investing, and it is also deductible from the profit made on the investment so they only pay income tax on the “net profit”.
When someone buys a vacation home for $200K and sells it 30 years later for $500K, should they be taxed on $300K “gross profit” when they in fact paid more than that amount in investment expenses along the way and were left with zero “net profit” ? That would put the individual at a serious disadvantage compared to businesses that get to deduct their business expenses from their profits and pay income tax only on their “net profit”.
Romney will sink his own boat with his mouth. Today, I’m hearing names being bounced around now for VP slot. Senators that no one has heard of. A losing combo. Rubio was mentioned but Rubio was quite clear last week in that there is no way. Was that just B.S.?
“What it the purpose for a an interest deduction on a vacation home?”
To encourage people to waste money on something not needed, so that they can feel good about sticking it to Uncle Sam. Why do you ask?
Actually, I wouldn’t mind seeing the entire deduction (first and second homes) done away with, just so we can start to get money from the middle class, and maybe get a bit closer to balancing the budget. Better yet, maybe leave the deduction and instead turn SS and Medicare into means-tested welfare programs. But do one of the two...because my kids are going to SUFFOCATE under this debt we’re running up today.
Thought the same thing. If someone needs the deduction when interest rates are so low, maybe he shouldn’t be buying a second home.
Yes, of course. The deduction merely promotes housing. A general deduction, of anything. Would be more valuable than Gov’t helping to pick winners and losers. If you could use the deduction, to purchase a washer, car, porn, guns, etc. But, this only helps to inflate home values.
In other words to pick that the home seller is the winner and the home buyer is the loser?
Getting a deduction on a second home is ridiculous. Since shelter is a basic need I can see it justified for one home. Because if a person loses their home, it could end up being a liability to the government safety net anyway, if they have to offer public housing. But a second home is not a common need and not justifiable as a tax deduction. The government is not going to have to step in and provide a safety net for someone who loses their SECOND home.
And no I'm not pro-tax. I'm pro-lower taxes with less deductions so everyone gets to benefit and not just people who behave in the way the government mandates, dictates or subsidizes.
You go Gingrich!
Nail that RINO Romney to the wall on this!!!
Like many retirement investments, it has had interest deductibility as a tax advantage over the years.
This is why we will spend ourselves into oblivion, even here on FR people are not willing to do away with vacation home welfare. Lower the rates and eliminate all market distorting deductions.
Thank you Newt for making the conservative case. Please stay in it until Texas so I can vote for you. I hope TX is going to change to winner take all!
When I was a kid growing up in Louisiana, my parents had a “vacation home.” They called it a fishing camp, because that’s essentially what it was. My dad bought a military surplus Army barracks complete with cots and had it moved to a small lot the family owned on Little River, about 40 miles from our home. He added a cistern to catch rain water, and his friends helped him pour a slab and build a screened-in front porch onto it.
On weekends and during vacations, we would drive up there and go fishing and swimming. It was hardly the lap of luxury. There was no air conditioning, and a wood stove furnished the only heat. Heck, we didn’t even have electricity for the first couple of years we owned it. Candles and Coleman lanterns sufficed. All cooking was done on a Coleman portable stove until my parents got a new range & oven for our house and moved the old one up to the camp. We made do with ice chests until they did the same with their old refrigerator.
Not all “vacation homes” are palaces.