Key starting point:
"When you count both direct spending and tax subsidies, about 75 percent of federal housing dollars support homeownership – though only two-thirds of households own homes. Overall, more than half of federal spending on housing benefits households with incomes above $100,000..."To be clear, CBPP is not proposing a minimum income. In a sad little hedging exercise captioned, "Comparison of Capped and Uncapped Credits," they say they don't think they can ask for more than a kind of less-bureaucratic Section 8, to be received and administered by landlords, not claimed by tenants.
There are some things to dislike about the plan they think is practical. Among much else, the potential increase in bureaucratized ties between person and residence, along some of the lines I was discussing last night re: hotel registers.
But this can start us thinking, can't it? A logical extension of what they're saying is, homeowners already get a kind of minimum income guarantee in the form of the mortgage interest deduction, so why shouldn't renters get something like the same?