End to Tax Exemption for 'McMansions'
At least one influential Democrat congressman wants to eliminate the mortgage tax deduction on homes larger than 3,000 square feet as part of a larger proposal to cut global warming, the Detroit Free Press reported August 8, 2007.
U.S. Rep. John Dingell revealed the plan at a town hall meeting in Ann Arbor, Michigan.
"Dingell's mention of 'McMansions' and his call to take away the mortgage interest deduction for large homes, which use more energy than smaller ones, drew applause and a few cheers."
The square footage of a house doesn't seem to be a thoughtful way to decide who gets a tax break. What if someone buys a fixer upper that happens to be 3,000 square feet? What if the person fixes up the house with "green" building materials and energy efficient systems? Should that person lose the tax exemption?
If a home owner finishes his or her basement, will he or she lose the tax exemption because the home now has 3,010 square feet. What about someone who expands his or her home to take in an aging parent? Should they lose the tax deduction?
And by the way, who keeps track of the square footage of the millions of homes in the United States? Any one in the real estate business knows the square footage reported by builders or from town records is not always accurate.
If this law passes (and I wouldn't hold your breath), there likely will be a lot of homes with 2,999 square feet.
Another thought: Do the super rich even need mortgages? Will this be another example of the wealthy buying their way out of energy conservation while preaching to the middle class about the threat of global warming? Sounds like the carbon credits shell game.
Comments