Expanding it to everybody? That would certainly be one way to get home values to rise by, say, $8k overnight. Thanks, taxpayers.

If they expand it, it had better be retro-active for the program. I bought a house earlier this year. It was the first home in my name. However, since I was married and my wife owned our previous home, I did not count towards the first time homebuyers credit. If they expand it now where I would qualify but it's too late because I already purchased...

Thanks, Uncle Sam, for giving my tax money away to other people buying their first homes while I work hard to pay for my own.

For the love of the dollar, put a stop to this nonsense.

The media and especially Realtors saying that the First Time Homebuyers Credit is a $8,000 credit is about as obnoxious as everyone calling the 2009 H1N1 vaccine "swine flu."

The fact of the matter is that the credit is 10% of the home price up to $8,000.

[www.irs.gov]

As someone that would like to purchase a home. I really hope it gets extended. Maybe for once I'd really feel like I was getting something for my taxes.

Maybe they could take that $7,500 one from last year and make the payback part go away? I closed on 12-31, missing the $8000 by ONE day.

If they would allow home prices to adjust to their real values, rather than the over-inflated prices still in place, then they wouldn't need a $8,000 tax credit.

But hey, go ahead an extend it. Then next year when home prices finally implode from their unsustainable levels, I'll finally buy.

@nbs2:

The credit only applies to first time homebuyers, not everyone. Suppliers have in my opinion only marginal incentive to raise prices.

I'm still crossing my fingers that the first incarnation of the First Time Home Buyers Credit, the $7,500 in 2008, will make it the same as the current one.

Anyone that got the $7,500 in the last half of 2008 has to pay it back. The 2009, $8,000 credit does not. That really grinds my gears.

I would have waited the extra month had they announced the updated terms and whatnot.

@cabjf:

I see your point, but married couples also get plenty of other tax benefits.

@Jesse: Yeah, I know that. It's the possible expansion that I am taking issue with (of course, subsidizing first time buyers is hitting taxpayers as well...)

I'm building a home and qualify since it's my first home, but regardless this tax credit is almost worthless and considering normal tax forms and my income level more trouble than it is worth.

I really hope they do this. We're building our first home right now (Rural home loan ftw!) and aren't going to close until February.

@Jesse: Correct but in how much of the country can you get a house for less than $80k? That won't pay for a mobile home here.

@cabjf: Condemning it unless there's something in it for you then, in which case you're all for it?

@pb5000: Forgiving existing debts doesn't spur new sales.

@pb5000:

I whole-heartedly agree with this suggestion!!!

@Shappie:

Yes, please make this change...I would be forever grateful.

If $8,000 is going to influence your decision to buy a house, you shouldn't be buying one.

@Josh_G:

Remember, this is a credit, not a deduction. Credits reduce your tax liability dollar for dollar; deductions reduce your income which your tax liability is based on.

The homebuyer credit is even refundable, which means that if you have a zero tax liability, you will still get the full amount of the credit if you qualify.

And with tax software nowadays, claiming the credit shouldn't be rocket science.

Also, contrary to what you may or may not have heard, you do not need to amend your 2008 return for 2009 purchases. If you qualify for 2008, just push the credit through on your 09 return. It's nearly the end of the year anyways.

@Jesse:

I meant qualify for the credit because of an 09 purchase.

@holocron: +10 internets to you good sir, that is my plan as well

Why not let it expire? If it continues, it reduces the sense of urgency, because there's no deadline to close by.

Why not a new incentive? The government pays points on any home purchase for homeowners with an income up to a certain amount.

This would be a bigger long-term benefit since it would apply to lots more homebuyers. Since the buy down of points would be a lifetime benefit (lower interest rate and lower payments) it would likely have a bigger impact in reducing foreclosures than a one time $8K gift that will be quickly spent.

2 points on a $200K home is only $4K, have of the current benefit, yet 2 points would significantly reduce an interest rate and make a lot more homes a lot more affordable.

@EBounding: Why do you say that? $8K is $8K, regardless of whether it's a drop in the bucket or a substantial amount to you.

@cabjf: You could have bought the house in your name only and qualified. You chose to buy it in both your names.

You knew the rules and made a choice. No whining please.

@Unsolicited Advice:
+1

From what I've seen, this $8000 credit simply encourages people who shouldn't be buying a home to try to do so in order to get a free $8000.

That would be awesome... We FINALLY found a house we like enough to buy, but I'm not sure we'll be able to close by Nov 30 to qualify for the bonus. We're hoping to, but I also don't want to rush into it.

I'm kind of hoping they are not so keen to do this, or at least wait until after the beginning of November to extend it. My parents finally sold their house in Phoenix after 3 months, and it goes into closing at the end of November. The buyers are folks who wanted to get a house ASAP because the tax credit was expiring, and if it is extended, they could screw my parents by deciding to walk away and look for another house instead because they'll have more time.

@SkokieGuy: Nope, it's only in my name. There is a catch in the way the government defines a first time homebuyer. If your spouse has owned a home in the last 3 years, you don't count.

Married couples get tax benefits? Then what was that so-called marriage tax that Bush tried to get rid of? The entire tax system is set up against married couples from the start. Married couples are the IRS's bread and butter after all. If my wife and I were simply cohabiting without the marriage license (as many people now do), I could have taken advantage of the program.

I'm whining because it was a poorly conceived program to begin with. Much like Cash for Clunkers, which barely affected overall fuel economy, and now that it's over, everyone's sales are back in the gutter. Now we have home builders and realtors arguing that they need more taxpayer-funded incentives to keep their business up.

@cabjf: You raise an important point, I do believe the government has, for the better part of the past year, held up the economy through its billions of dollars in incentives and summarily sent the national debt through the roof.

But it can't keep going forever, the government cannot keep throwing money at the problem and hope it goes away. Cash for clunkers was great...while it lasted. We don't need short term fixes we need long term solutions.

Eventually the economy will have to reach a point where it can stand on its own without these "incentives" and "bonus programs" because from where I sit, the government isn't fixing the economy so much as delaying the inevitable.

@h3llc4t has a slow work day: Oh I know $8K is a lot of money and I know homebuyers like it. But it's inconsequential when you're loading up on thousands upon thousands of dollars of debt to get the house. If you have $40K to put down for a $200K house, is an extra $8K really going to be the deciding factor?

The people buying houses today would be buying them regardless of the credit:

[www.msnbc.msn.com] [3rd paragraph]

To me, this $8K is just rewarding people who were going to buy a house soon anyway. What's actually spurring house buying today is LOWER PRICES. But policy like this just keeps the housing bubble inflated.

I love this idea. My S.O. and I were contemplating cohabitation but didn't think we were ready to do it. We'd thought about doing it anyway just to get the credit. If they're extending it, I think it'll help us next year, when we're actually ready to buy a house together.

@fantomesq:

I know. I'm being nitpicky :)

@EBounding: I don't like the $8k credit, but I do think it influences people. I know several people who would have waited a couple more years before buying a house (recently married, unsure of what neighborhood they wanted to live in, unsure of how many kids they plan to have...) but are going ahead and trying to close before November 30 in order to get the credit.

According to the NAHB this would result in 383,000 additional home sales. Dividing $40 billion by 383 thousand gives $104,400 per additional home sold!

[www.nahb.org]

Over $100k to sell one additional house, it would be crazy for congress to extend the program.

Gee, it was difficult to see this coming...I thought they'd just let it expire and watch home prices that they're so desperate to prop up, fall.

@fantomesq: But forgiving existing debts could spur new spending...

Bought my first 11/25/08.

Once an entitlement starts, its very difficult to get it killed. RIP fiscal conservatism.

@EBounding: What you say about rewarding people who were going to buy anyways is not accurate in all cases. There are tons of cases, like me, where people wanted to buy a house, were very much capable of affording a monthly payment on a house, but just didn't have enough cash sitting around to seal the deal between the expenses of closing costs, down payments, initial insurance policy costs, and the initial taxes. All of which need to be paid upfront and you need to prove you have all of that cash around before you will be given a loan.

That has changed thanks to this $8k credit. Banks started allowing these kinds of people that I speak of to apply that 8k towards down payments and closing costs even though the actual credit has not be received yet since it is a guarantee that they will be getting regardless.

The result for me, as I am sure it was for many people, was that I was able to get my house sooner than later which is precisely what we need right now. We need more people spending now rather than later.

@Jesse: And not even all first time homebuyers. My husband is buying his first home with me, who is a previous home owner. We don't qualify. Even if we filed separately we wouldn't.

@Esquire99: Those people who "shouldn't be buying a home" will not be able to do so regardless of this credit. The banks are still being very conservative with lending and they will not let those kinds of people get a loan. If you don't have the income, the credit history, or the liquid cash in the bank(beyond what the 8k covers) then it's no mortgage loan for you.

@dragonfire81: Exactly, much of the bailout money should have been spent (if spent at all) on transforming the economy instead of propping it up. For example, instead of pouring money into failing banks, why couldn't the government have put that money into some sort of government backed lending pool funneled through whatever banks and credit unions were still function? Now we have companies that were run into the ground through high risk schemes that are still around to repeat their mistakes.

I'm just extra bitter about the homebuyers tax credit because, even though I thought it was a bad idea for a bill, I might as well take advantage of it while they're handing out money. Plus, it looked like we might qualify. Then the final version of the bill came out. And being disqualified due to a technicality is the worst way to be disqualified. Just ask that runner who was listening to her iPod and disqualified for using an electronic device. [gizmodo.com]

@cabjf: i rent. my taxes pay for your interest write-offs. your welcome.

@Elcheecho: you're

how about extending it retroactively so i dont have to pay my 7500 government tax house credit loan back?

@dragonfire81: You are partially correct. The idea behind these incentives is to get us to the point where they are no longer needed as painlessly as possible for Americans. We could potentially recover without them, but the odds of most Americans suffering much longer and much harder if we didn't utilize them is a subject that no econ experts are disputing regardless of where their opinions stand.

At this point, the experts in the field of economics are not being controversial over whether or not these incentives have slowed down the negative impact of the economic slump. They all agree that they have successfully slowed down or possibly even halted the free fall. Where some of them disagree is whether or not what we have done so far has been enough and how to make sure that we result in recovery as soon as possible.

I believe that what we have done is not enough quite yet and we need to do more work, but that doesn't mean that I think the answer lies solely amongst stimulus incentives. I think those have their purpose and they are necessary, but we need to do a lot more to create jobs effectively.

Obama has already stated that once Healthcare is done he is intending to focus on job creation very heavily next. Let's hope that what he and Congress come up with is successful.

@chiieddy: It may be worth waiting this bill out. If Isakson and Dodd get their way, you could see that $8k. The taxpayer in me would rather you didn't, but the consumer advocate side says good luck (the two sides will be dueling at dawn).

@EBounding: $8000 can pay for a lot of repairs and may influence a buyer to purchase a home needing a little more work. It may also drop a $310,000 house into a price range someone can afford. Also, if you take that $8000 and apply it towards principal on your mortgage (assuming $300k mortgage at 5.5% APR) it could take 21 months off your loan. Combine that with an extra payment per year and you can take 72 months off your loan.