A Crazy Idea Appears in the New York Times
June 3, 2015
In the New York Times op-ed page today, I noticed an article on residential areas that have suffered since the housing crisis. I don’t have much to say on housing; I’m sure the author knows much more about distressed residential areas than I do. However, the tax proposal in the article caught my eye: “For longtime owner-occupants in such neighborhoods, we should consider a fully refundable tax credit for the total cost of home repairs.”
This is, simply put, a disastrous idea. To be clear, the general idea that owner-occupants should get some help in repairing their homes to improve overall neighborhood quality is a reasonable one. The specific implementation of that general sentiment is the problem.
A tax credit is distinct from a tax deduction, in that a credit is worth its face value; a $100 credit means you pay $100 less in taxes. (In contrast, a deduction just means you subtract $100 from your taxable income.) Furthermore, a refundable tax credit is a provision that allows one’s tax liability to go below zero.
So if the government is offering a fully refundable tax credit for the total cost of home repairs, it is paying 100% of the bill for the repairs – or rather, it is reimbursing the taxpayer in the full amount of whatever the taxpayer says she paid for home repairs.
If someone spent $50,000 on a home renovation and billed the IRS for the full $50,000, I imagine that would raise a few eyebrows. And refundable credits can be notoriously difficult to verify. These issues are avoidable. The policy proposal needs some revision.
In any event, this is much more of a spending program than a tax program, and it should be enacted on the spending side of the ledger.
Was this page helpful to you?
The Tax Foundation works hard to provide insightful tax policy analysis. Our work depends on support from members of the public like you. Would you consider contributing to our work?Contribute to the Tax Foundation
Let us know how we can better serve you!
We work hard to make our analysis as useful as possible. Would you consider telling us more about how we can do better?Give Us Feedback