Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Trump to propose new tax break on car loan interest

Discussion in 'Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by okeechobee, Oct 10, 2024 at 1:08 PM.

  1. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    This is hot off the wire, so the details are not in the CNBC article yet. I suppose the first question I'd have is would the car loan interest deduction be in addition to the standard deduction or pointless for those who would be better off taking the standard deduction regardless. Waiting for the details....

    Trump to propose new tax break on car loan interest
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    Donald Trump on Thursday will support making interest on car loans fully tax deductible, the latest in a suite of tax-cut promises the Republican presidential nominee has made in the weeks before Election Day. Trump, in a speech to the Detroit Economic Club, will compare the plan to an existing tax deduction on mortgage interest, according to excerpts provided beforehand by the Trump campaign. The plan “will stimulate massive domestic auto production, and make car ownership dramatically more affordable for millions of working American families,” Trump will say.

    The former president will also promise to bar Chinese-made autonomous vehicles from driving on American roads if he defeats Democratic nominee Kamala Harris in the Nov. 5 election.

    Any plan to change the tax code would have to go through Congress, which holds the power of the purse under the U.S. Constitution.

    Trump to propose new tax break on car loan interest
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  3. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    I see what he's going for. Brilliant. Now if he can come up with a plan that would increase home building, that would be even better. The reason Kamala's plan is stupid is because ability to repay the mortgage is the issue and hindrance for 99% of people who can't buy a home. Most state and local governments already have down-payment assistance programs readily available. You need to incentivize home builders to build more homes to keep the prices in check.

    Back to the car loan interest deduction: still a great idea and of course, he's putting the finishing touches on Michigan with this proposal...
     
  4. docspor

    docspor GC Hall of Fame

    5,509
    1,772
    3,078
    Nov 30, 2010
    What would make cars affordable is to allow cheap Chinese EVs to be sold here sans tariffs. But, once you get the socialist train chuggin' (new NAFTA, Tariffs) you gotta keep on doing BIG GOV shit like this. Big Gov likes to create a problem that it then can "fix".
     
  5. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,720
    1,053
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    Kamala’s plan is triadic. It addresses supply (build 3 million new homes, particularly lower cost homes), rental costs (limiting corporate landlords driving rental prices), and downpayment assistance. You can argue the efficacy or soundness of any of those but it certainly trumps “concepts of a plan.”
     
    • Come On Man Come On Man x 1
  6. philnotfil

    philnotfil GC Hall of Fame

    17,591
    1,748
    1,718
    Apr 8, 2007
    I think that is the point that sinks this. I just can't imagine there are people out there who aren't itemizing that this would be enough to push them over the line.
     
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  7. gatorchamps960608

    gatorchamps960608 GC Hall of Fame

    4,258
    893
    2,463
    Jul 4, 2020
    Pointless. Not to mention his tariffs are going to crush people's incomes and the economy and they won't be able to afford new car loans.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  8. dangolegators

    dangolegators GC Hall of Fame

    Apr 26, 2007
    Yeah only 10% of tax returns itemize deductions, so this is just a tax break for the top 10%. Does nothing for the other 90% of the country.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
  9. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,720
    1,053
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    To your point:

    Who Itemizes?
    High-income taxpayers are much more likely to itemize than others. In tax year 2020, nearly two-thirds of tax returns reporting adjusted gross income (AGI) over $500,000 itemized deductions, compared with 11 percent of those with AGI between $50,000 and $100,000 and two percent of those with AGI under $30,000 (figure 2).”
    What are itemized deductions and who claims them?
     
  10. exiledgator

    exiledgator Gruntled

    10,875
    1,855
    3,128
    Jan 5, 2010
    Maine
    Yeah, pointless. We're pretty high earners and take standardized deduction, but it plays well. Like not taxing tips.

    Two Santas.
     
  11. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    If Kamala's plan is for the government to build 3 million new homes, then I'm sorry your mother dropped you that many times as a baby and you actually believe that will happen. Considering that there are already roughly 1.5 million homes being built each year without her plan, she will likely sign that legislation and claim she did it in just two years. But if you believe the government is going to build 3,000,000 new homes on top of that total themselves, you're taking some potent stuff and I would strongly consider laying off of it. If you believe she means she's going to get private builders to build 3,000,000 new homes on top of the 1,500,000 they were already going to build, she hasn't even proposed that she has "concepts of a plan" to make that happen. Note that she never specifies who is going to actually build the 3,000,000 new homes, which is kinda important when talking in terms of "concepts of a plan."
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  12. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    Prior to this proposal, you could say that about most tax deductions. But if you take a family with a teenager or two, you have 3 or 4 cars in your home. Add the SALT deduction, medical expenses deduction, mortgage interest deduction, tuition, plus more... it would put a lot of families over the standard deduction.

    Interest on two cars loans can easily be upwards of $6,000+ per year, if not more. If there are three car loans in the home, you might be looking at $10,000+ per year in auto loan interest. It would be a significant deduction. Even if only 5% of taxpayers benefit from it. That's well over 10,000,000 people.
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  13. channingcrowderhungry

    channingcrowderhungry Premium Member

    8,672
    1,927
    3,013
    Apr 3, 2007
    Bottom of a pint glass
    With one month to go Trump is busting out all kinds of shit to see if it'll stick. He's had 4 years to come up with actual plans but he was too busy whining on social media and playing golf.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  14. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,720
    1,053
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    This is patently false. She has proposed expanding LIHTC and implementing a new starter home tax incentive.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Disagree Bacon! Disagree Bacon! x 1
  15. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,720
    1,053
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    More like 9 years since he first announced he was running for President and his plans are always 2 weeks out.
     
    • Winner Winner x 3
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
  16. Gator40

    Gator40 Avada Kedavra

    13,980
    434
    488
    Apr 3, 2007
    And those are just concepts....
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  17. citygator

    citygator VIP Member

    10,764
    2,422
    3,303
    Apr 3, 2007
    Charlotte
  18. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    How does expanding the LIHTC or a tax credit to first-time homebuyers build 3,000,000 new houses? Might it increase demand a little? Sure, but demand is already elevated. Demand is not the problem. There's a known shortage in housing. Supply is the problem. If government spends more money to increase demand, that'll simply elevate home prices even more, making them even less affordable. The affordability issue has almost nothing to do with a down payment or lack of a tax incentive for first-time buyers. It's the ability to repay the note. And do you really think home builders are going to put blind faith in people who otherwise would not have been able to buy a home without a government subsidy and build 3,000,000 more homes than they were already planning to?

    You're putting your faith in someone who is as blind as a bat when it comes to economics. Her proposal of food cost controls (when food costs have actually stabilized) proves that. Who's going to build the 3,000,000 new homes?
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. demosthenes

    demosthenes Premium Member

    8,720
    1,053
    3,218
    Apr 3, 2007
    I’m very well aware of what the problem is since my company is in the homebuilding industry and how good of a year we have almost directly corresponds to the number of new home starts.

    Regardless, it’s clear you don’t understand what has been proposed; both the LIHTC and starter home tax incentive programs are builder-side incentives, not home buyers. Currently home builders are incentivized to build larger homes with more expensive finishes due to available margin compared to lower cost homes. Labor is certainly an issue (and something my company has been working on alleviating through technology). Supply chain issues have eased up in the past year. Shifting to building smaller homes or more multifamily is a more “efficient” use of labor in that you can build more units with the same number of workers. Both of these proposals are intended to incentivize that behavior. Will it work? I don’t know, but it’s certainly incorrect to claim it hasn’t been thought about and planned for on the supply side.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  20. okeechobee

    okeechobee GC Hall of Fame

    8,607
    1,067
    328
    Sep 11, 2022
    I stand corrected. They are builder-side incentives, indeed. But can see the potential pitfalls a mile away. For one, define "starter home". But more importantly, how many cities are going to sign up for more low income neighborhoods being built en masse? Is the federal government going to force certain jurisdictions to allow mass construction of low income homes? It still seems as though companies such as yours would be risking diverting their resources to low income home building, with no doubt thinner profit margins even after the tax incentive. I'm sure there will be some caps in place.. there would almost have to be or else what's the guarantee low income is going to be able to afford the payment? Would need to see the details to give final comment on its viability. But on its face it sounds like it will have a million bureaucratic strings attached. That is just the nature of low-income housing. Not to knock it.. I'm all for people having a home.