The cost of mortgage interest relief to taxpayers in 2015 was €232 million so we're not talking about small beer. If the objective is to lower the tax burden on middle earners, wouldn't it make more sense to reduce income taxes generally rather than subsidising a random selection of taxpayers?
€232 million ... I wonder how that stands in comparison to the total budget for social housing, rent supplements, HAP, emergency housing?
If you just reduce income taxes the money could go on cars, foreign holidays etc etc.
It's not about reducing the tax burden on middle earners, but on reducing future demands on the public purse, and guiding the income of these middle earners in that direction.
If we got rid of marginal tax relief on pension contributions, how much of the money that would have gone into pension pots would end up not in alternative investments but spent by the end of the year?
I think it's entirely legitimate for the state to guide its citzens with incentives into behaviour that is fiscally responsible in the long run.
Just because something is regressive doesn't mean it's wrong full stop.
Should we stop charging for electricity if it shown that ESB bills are proportionately\relatively a greater burden for poor people than rich? Or do we balance that against the greater demands that would place on our energy supplies?
Giving grants to homeowners to improve the energy efficiency of their homes was regressive - yet we did it.
We have to consider the wider equation.