Referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means.
This resolution is a nonbinding statement by Congress expressing support for the current federal mortgage interest tax deduction and opposing the President's proposal to reduce the deduction rate for higher-income taxpayers. It does not change the tax code or create law; instead it records Congress's position. If adopted by both chambers, it would signal legislative disagreement but would not require any change to tax rules.
Concurrent resolutions must be approved by both the House and the Senate but are not sent to the President and do not have the force of law. This resolution expresses Congress's view but does not change tax policy.
This concurrent resolution expresses Congress’s support for maintaining the current mortgage interest deduction under section 163 of the Internal Revenue Code.
It opposes President Obama’s fiscal year 2010 budget recommendation to reduce the value of that deduction for taxpayers in the 33 percent and 35 percent brackets from 35 percent to 28 percent.
The resolution asserts that the proposed reduction would raise taxes on affected households and harm the housing market and economy.
As a concurrent resolution it is non‑binding and cannot become law; adoption by both chambers is possible but not legally enactable.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, well-focused concurrent resolution that clearly states support for maintaining the existing mortgage interest deduction and opposition to the specified presidential proposal; its brevity and lack of operational detail are appropriate for an expressive resolution.
Progressives see deduction as regressive; conservatives see it as essential homeowner support.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives see deduction as regressive; conservatives see it as essential homeowner support.
Likely opposes the resolution.
Progressives typically view the mortgage interest deduction as a regressive subsidy that benefits wealthier homeowners more than renters.
They may prefer reform or limitation of the deduction to raise revenue for social programs and improve tax progressivity.
Mixed view.
Concerned about housing market stability and avoiding sudden tax increases, but also cautious about fiscal costs and fairness.
Would prefer a measured compromise—protect housing now while designing targeted, revenue-aware reforms.
Strongly supportive.
Conservatives are likely to welcome a resolution that defends the mortgage interest deduction, opposes higher effective tax rates on homeowners, and emphasizes homeownership as public policy priority.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
As a concurrent resolution it is non‑binding and cannot become law; adoption by both chambers is possible but not legally enactable.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives see deduction as regressive; conservatives see it as essential homeowner support.
As a concurrent resolution it is non‑binding and cannot become law; adoption by both chambers is possible but not legally enactable.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a straightforward, well-focused concurrent resolution that clearly states support for maintaining the existing mortgage interest deduction and opposition to the sp…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.