De hypotheekrentaftrek wordt door links (inclusief D66, uiteraard) graag een 'subsidie' genoemd. Onzin natuurlijk, zoals hier op z'n duidelijkst wordt uitgelegd. Waarom links de hypotheekrenteaftrek dan toch een subsidie noemt? Zie de laatste zin uit het citaat hieronder:
It is incorrect and dangerous to equate tax loopholes with government spending.
The tax codes countless credits, deductions, and exclusions let people keep a portion of their earnings, provided they use the money how the government wants them to use it. Tax loopholes therefore have a lot in common with government spending: they give power to politicians, inhibit freedom, reduce economic output, unjustly enrich special-interest groups, et cetera.
But to call them tax expenditures or tax subsidies or backdoor spending in the tax code is to claim that when the government fails to take a dollar from you, it is spending that dollar. It implies that your dollar actually belongs to the government, which is graciously letting you keep it. And it implies that eliminating a tax loophole is not a tax increase, because that dollar already belonged to the government anyway. The government has simply decided to spend its money somewhere else.
When you hear a politician use the terms tax expenditure, tax subsidy, or backdoor spending in the tax code, beware. Hes about to raise your taxes.