Home > Personal Finance > The Most Outrageous Tax of the Year

Comments 2 Comments

It just may become the latest outrage during a year of outrages. At the precise moment when the federal government finally delivers a modicum of justice and some economic relief to millions of homeowners victimized by the nation’s largest banks, the government threatens to beat those victims over the head with a punitive old favorite revenue raiser — a tax on forgiven debt.

Here’s the backstory: After years of standing on the sidelines and ignoring evidence that major banks were using their mortgage servicing arms to steal money from innocent consumers and illegally evict homeowners, the federal government finally joined with 49 states to prosecute the banks. It was a frustrating,  agonizingly slow and painful process that led to an even more frustrating, agonizingly slow and painful negotiation.

The result was the National Mortgage Settlement, in which the five largest loan servicers must pay $21.5 billion in reparations and restitution to consumers victimized by their inappropriate conduct. Specifically, many homeowners whose mortgages were serviced by the Big Five — Citi, JPMorgan Chase, Wells Fargo, Bank of America and Ally Financial — may qualify for significant reductions in their mortgage principal and interest rates. And 1.5 million people who lost their homes due to questionable foreclosure practices can apply for a one-time payment of $2,000 (an insultingly low figure considering how much pain is involved in losing one’s house).

Altogether, that’s not an inconsequential number even in an imperfect world. More importantly, it’s desperately needed right now by millions of underwater homeowners, who just might be able to hang onto their homes if they can receive the lower payments that come from interest and principal reductions. That helps individual homeowners, and it also helps everyone else, since our economy needs more foreclosures and more empty houses like it needs another global stock market crash.

But a grid-locked, polarized Congress is about to screw it up (again). You see, unless Congress acts with uncharacteristic speed and bipartisanship, anyone who might receive a principal reduction from the mortgage settlement could face a hefty tax bill.

That’s not supposed to be the way this all goes down. In 2007, Congress enacted the Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act, which prevents homeowners from paying taxes when their mortgage debt is forgiven due to a decline in the owner’s financial life or a drop in the home’s value. (We first covered the debt cancellation tax, known as the 1099-C, early last year, and gave tips on what to do if the IRS taxes you on cancelled debt.)

The law applies to homeowners who participate in the National Mortgage Settlement who receive up to $2 million in reduced principal and interest charges. It is scheduled to expire at the end of 2012 along with all the other tax cuts we have heard about for years.


So, instead of getting the relief they need to save their houses, victimized homeowners will be forced to pay a significant portion of that savings to Uncle Sam. Since the average homeowner will receive about $19,000 in settlement relief, and the average middle class family pays about 25 percent in taxes, approximately one quarter of the forgiven debt — some $4,750 — will have to be paid to the IRS and by those who can least afford to pay it. For some families, that could be enough to tip the scales, pushing them back to the brink of foreclosure and eviction.

This is fiscal insanity. And Congress knows it.

“Suddenly, just when they throw you a life ring, they jerk it back,” Rep. Jim McDermott (D-Wash.), told the Washington Post. “We cannot let this happen. It’s going to be a disaster.”

To his credit, McDermott has introduced a bill that would extend the tax cuts until 2015. But herein lies the first indication of Congressional business as usual on this issue. A different bill, introduced by Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), also would extend the tax cuts, and has a better chance of passing than McDermott’s, since it has bipartisan support from 17 co-sponsors of both parties.

So what’s the problem? McDermott’s bill extends the tax cuts until 2015, the same year in which the major banks must complete distributing restitution to their victims. Stabenow’s more popular bill, on the other hand, extends the tax cuts only until 2014; meaning that even if it passes, some homeowners will be pushed to the precipice of the exact same financial cliff two years hence.

Dumb? Yep. And but that’s only the Democrats’ portion of the stupidity. Republican stupidity is found in the party’s complete legislative blockade, a strategy they have pursued over the last two years to deny President Obama even a sliver of economic success. The odds that the members of the Party of No will find it in their hearts (or their steely-eyed political calculations) to save homeowners from this counter-productive tax in the next two months are only slightly better than the odds of America achieving universal peace by Election Day.

And what happens after the election? That’s anybody’s guess. I rather doubt, however, that forcing  Wall Street megabanks to pay billions of dollars in restitution to regular homeowners will be Priority #1 in the event of a Romney-Ryan administration. Those aren’t the taxes they are looking to cut (wrong bracket).

No matter who wins on Nov. 6, however, this tax is wrong, and it must be allowed to lay dormant where it belongs. Innocent homeowners who were victimized by robosigning, illegal evictions, and loan servicing shenanigans aren’t getting rich here. It’s about keeping people in their homes and preserving neighborhoods. Actually, it is a real stimulus package.

Democrats must get serious and back legislation that protects all the relief won in the National Mortgage Settlement, not just some of it. Republicans must stop their willful obstructionism, and follow through on their oft-repeated promises to prevent taxes that hurt the economy.

If Congress can come together to save homeowners’ lifelines, then it deserves some credit for finally doing its job. But if Congress fails to fix this looming problem, it will become the biggest single outrage of an already outrageous legislative season. As we prepare to vote this November 6, let’s demand action before the election and foreclose upon those congressmen and senators who fail to act before it’s too late.

Image: Matthew G. Bisanz, via Wikimedia Commons

Comments on articles and responses to those comments are not provided or commissioned by a bank advertiser. Responses have not been reviewed, approved or otherwise endorsed by a bank advertiser. It is not a bank advertiser's responsibility to ensure all posts and/or questions are answered.

Please note that our comments are moderated, so it may take a little time before you see them on the page. Thanks for your patience.

Credit.com receives compensation for the financial products and services advertised on this site if our users apply for and sign up for any of them.

Hello, Reader!

Thanks for checking out Credit.com. We hope you find the site and the journalism we produce useful. We wanted to take some time to tell you a bit about ourselves.

Our People

The Credit.com editorial team is staffed by a team of editors and reporters, each with many years of financial reporting experience. We’ve worked for places like the New York Times, American Banker, Frontline, TheStreet.com, Business Insider, ABC News, NBC News, CNBC and many others. We also employ a few freelancers and more than 50 contributors (these are typically subject matter experts from the worlds of finance, academia, politics, business and elsewhere).

Our Reporting

We take great pains to ensure that the articles, video and graphics you see on Credit.com are thoroughly reported and fact-checked. Each story is read by two separate editors, and we adhere to the highest editorial standards. We’re not perfect, however, and if you see something that you think is wrong, please email us at editorial team [at] credit [dot] com,

The Credit.com editorial team is committed to providing our readers and viewers with sound, well-reported and understandable information designed to inform and empower. We won’t tell you what to do. We will, however, do our best to explain the consequences of various actions, thereby arming you with the information you need to make decisions that are in your best interests. We also write about things relating to money and finance we think are interesting and want to share.

In addition to appearing on Credit.com, our articles are syndicated to dozens of other news sites. We have more than 100 partners, including MSN, ABC News, CBS News, Yahoo, Marketwatch, Scripps, Money Magazine and many others. This network operates similarly to the Associated Press or Reuters, except we focus almost exclusively on issues relating to personal finance. These are not advertorial or paid placements, rather we provide these articles to our partners in most cases for free. These relationships create more awareness of Credit.com in general and they result in more traffic to us as well.

Our Business Model

Credit.com’s journalism is largely supported by an e-commerce business model. Rather than rely on revenue from display ad impressions, Credit.com maintains a financial marketplace separate from its editorial pages. When someone navigates to those pages, and applies for a credit card, for example, Credit.com will get paid what is essentially a finder’s fee if that person ends up getting the card. That doesn’t mean, however, that our editorial decisions are informed by the products available in our marketplace. The editorial team chooses what to write about and how to write about it independently of the decisions and priorities of the business side of the company. In fact, we maintain a strict and important firewall between the editorial and business departments. Our mission as journalists is to serve the reader, not the advertiser. In that sense, we are no different from any other news organization that is supported by ad revenue.

Visitors to Credit.com are also able to register for a free Credit.com account, which gives them access to a tool called The Credit Report Card. This tool provides users with two free credit scores and a breakdown of the information in their Experian credit report, updated twice monthly. Again, this tool is entirely free, and we mention that frequently in our articles, because we think that it’s a good thing for users to have access to data like this. Separate from its educational value, there is also a business angle to the Credit Report Card. Registered users can be matched with products and services for which they are most likely to qualify. In other words, if you register and you find that your credit is less than stellar, Credit.com won’t recommend a high-end platinum credit card that requires an excellent credit score You’d likely get rejected, and that’s no good for you or Credit.com. You’d be no closer to getting a product you need, there’d be a wasted inquiry on your credit report, and Credit.com wouldn’t get paid. These are essentially what are commonly referred to as "targeted ads" in the world of the Internet. Despite all of this, however, even if you never apply for any product, the Credit Report Card will remain free, and none of this will impact how the editorial team reports on credit and credit scores.

Your Stories

Lastly, much of what we do is informed by our own experiences as well as the experiences of our readers. We want to tell your stories if you’re interested in sharing them. Please email us at story ideas [at] credit [dot] com with ideas or visit us on Facebook or Twitter.

Thanks for stopping by.

- The Credit.com Editorial Team