About us Login Get email updates
Research
Print

Suggesting "your house will be worth more burned down," Doocy peddled itemized deduction falsehood

March 17, 2009 8:26 am ET

Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.

EMBED

SUMMARY: Fox & Friends' Steve Doocy falsely asserted that President Obama has proposed eliminating the ability of high-income taxpayers to take income tax deductions for their home mortgages. In fact, Obama has not proposed eliminating income tax deductions for any taxpayers; rather, a provision in Obama's budget proposal would, beginning in fiscal year 2011, reduce the tax rate at which families earning more than $250,000 per year can take itemized deductions to 28 percent.

35 Comments

During the March 17 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, co-host Steve Doocy falsely asserted that President Obama has proposed eliminating the ability of high-income taxpayers to take income tax deductions for their home mortgages. Doocy stated: "It's just like a week or so ago, it was revealed that he wanted to go ahead and change the home mortgage deduction for people who are high-income earners -- anybody who makes that much, or charity and stuff like that." He added: "I was talking to some people in some charities and some tax people over the last couple of days, and they just say if that goes through -- where high earners can no longer deduct that -- you might as well just burn down your house, because your house will be worth more burned down than if you actually owned it and it was standing." Doocy later stated: "No. It's just practical, because let's face it, if you cannot deduct your home mortgage payment, you know, and all the interest, why bother having a house -- a big house?"

In fact, Obama has not proposed eliminating income tax deductions for any taxpayers. Rather, a provision in Obama's budget proposal would, beginning in fiscal year 2011, reduce the tax rate at which families earning more than $250,000 per year can take itemized deductions to 28 percent. As Media Matters for America documented, Fox & Friends co-host Brian Kilmeade previously misrepresented Obama's itemized deductions proposal, falsely claiming that Obama has proposed eliminating the ability of taxpayers to take income tax deductions for their charitable contributions.

From the March 17 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends:

DOOCY: It's just like a week or so ago, it was revealed that he wanted to go ahead and change the home mortgage deduction for people who are high-income earners -- anybody who makes that much, or charity and stuff like that. And I was talking to some people in some charities and some tax people over the last couple of days, and they just say if that goes through -- where high earners can no longer deduct that -- you might as well just burn down your house, because your house will be worth more burned down than if you actually owned it --

AINSLEY EARHARDT (guest co-host): Well --

KILMEADE: OK.

DOOCY: -- and it was standing.

KILMEADE: Was it Chuck Grassley you were hanging out with, 'cause he tends to be a little extreme.

DOOCY: No. It's just practical -

KILMEADE: Really?

DOOCY: -- because let's face it, if you cannot deduct your home mortgage --

KILMEADE: Right.

DOOCY: -- payment, you know, and all the interest, why bother having a house --

KILMEADE: So far that's not sitting well --

DOOCY: -- a big house?

KILMEADE: -- in the House or the Senate, though. It doesn't look like that's something that's going to be --

DOOCY: Well, we'll see.

KILMEADE: -- embraced when the budget process gets under way.

Expand All Expand 1st Level Collapse All Add Comment
    • Author by Easy to refute wingnuts (March 17, 2009 8:48 am ET)
         

      It's just Doocy making an ash out of himself once more.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 9:09 am ET)
         

      And five minutes from now doocebag or some other factose-intolerant, gop-slop spewin' nitwit will be peddlin' another fixed news falsehood. What else is new?

      They're just tellin' their scum vote audience what they want to hear.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by IRONY 101 (March 17, 2009 9:20 am ET)
         

      DOOCY: ...you might as well just burn down your house, because your house will be worth more burned down than if you actually owned it --

      So, now Doocy is advocating arson? I guess FOX is truly a public service network...with great tips on home ownership.  ;>)

      Report Abuse
      • Author by thejbomb65 (March 17, 2009 11:03 am ET)
           

        well if you think about it. it's sorta true. i mean if the house burns down and then someone can come in a buy the lot and then build a new house......if this is done enough new house construction will skyrocket.

        Report Abuse
        • Author by IRONY 101 (March 17, 2009 11:55 am ET)
             

          I think Doocy was talking about collecting the insurance money if your house burns down...that's the only way his comment makes any sense. Except that it's illegal to set your house afire for the purpose of collecting the insurance on it...very illegal. So, basically, what Doccy is talking about is insurance fraud. Gotta love that Doocy...a regular fount of wisdom. ;>)

          Report Abuse
          • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 17, 2009 2:08 pm ET)
               

            I know... Soliciting insurance fraud, on the air!  WOW.

            I hope a few of his brain-dead listeners actually take this to heart.  It would put a few dangerously mindless conservatives in jail, and help ease the inventory glut of homes on the market to boot.  Double-win!!

            Report Abuse
          • Author by thejbomb65 (March 18, 2009 8:49 am ET)
               

            thats what im getting at.

            Report Abuse
    • Author by nerzog (March 17, 2009 9:21 am ET)
         

      I know I sound like a broken record, but the Founding Fathers gave the Press a special status in our Constitution.  They singled out that profession for protection from government interference, and therefore gave them a responsibility to inform the public and hold elected officials accountable.

      FOX "News" and the rest of the RNCs smear squad have squandered this mandate and contaminated the profession of journalism.  True, there are some liberals who have participated in this downward spiral, but these Conservative Liars have apparently made it their goal in life to drive a stake through the heart of the American Free Press.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by donaldmaddog5642 (March 17, 2009 10:49 am ET)
           

        Nailed it, Nerzog!

        Report Abuse
      • Author by pete592 (March 17, 2009 11:16 am ET)
           

        QFT. 

        I don't think there's been a single journalistic entity that has contributed to journalism's downfall more openly, recklessly and shamelessly than Fox "News."

        Report Abuse
        • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 17, 2009 2:02 pm ET)
             

          AM Talk radio does about as much damage.  It's the same listeners/viewers anyway.  And the lies need to be reinforced, after all.

          Report Abuse
      • Author by snoopy (March 17, 2009 12:23 pm ET)
           

        It's too bad the constitution didn't make it illegal for a foreigner to own the american press.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 9:26 am ET)
         

      And five minutes from now doocebag or some other factose-intolerant, gop-slop spewin' nitwit will be peddlin' another fixed news falsehood. What else is new?

      They're just tellin' their scum vote audience what they want to hear.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 9:29 am ET)
         

      Doocy doesn't know Caesar from Hugo Chavez or his sorry butt from his elbow. Of course, that doesn't exactly make him unique at fixed news.

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 17, 2009 2:03 pm ET)
           

        Maybe he meant Eric Chavez (3B-Oakland)?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 8:23 pm ET)
             

          Or any number of Chavezes to be named later currently scattered throughout the Major and Minor League rosters of Grapefruit and Cactus League Clubs.

          No matter what he means, like all fixed news nitwits, he doesn't know who or what the hell he's talkin' about.

          That's a lock.

          Report Abuse
    • Author by captfoster2 (March 17, 2009 9:51 am ET)
         

      "where high earners can no longer deduct that -- you might as well just burn down your house, because your house will be worth more burned down than if you actually owned it --"

      Good going sport (Doocy)... you may have motivated one or more of your watchers to burn their house down and commit a felony!

      So if some of the watchers of this moron decide to burn down their house because of this idiotic claim that the house may be worth more burnt to the ground because of his lie about Obama's stance on tax deductions for home owners...

      How much blame does Steve Doocy carry if this occurs even once?

      Report Abuse
      • Author by worrierking (March 17, 2009 10:08 am ET)
           

        Maybe insurance companies should charge Fox viewers extra for homeowner's policies. 

        Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 17, 2009 2:05 pm ET)
           

        I love it!  Soliciting insurance fraud, on the air!  Wonderful!

        I hope a few of his brain-dead listeners actually take this to heart.  It would put a few dangerously mindless conservatives in jail, and help ease the inventory glut of homes on the market to boot.  Double-win!!

        Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 8:26 pm ET)
           

        In other words, their deduction will be cut to the same 28 percent we mere mortals pay.

        The horror. The horror. Life is just so unfair to gops.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Old_Benjamin (March 17, 2009 12:29 pm ET)
         
      So they are saying that the wealthy should not have to pay back the money they borrowed with the interest they agreed to pay because the "socialist" government won't help them out? WTF?
      Report Abuse
    • Author by smarshall1432997 (March 17, 2009 1:59 pm ET)
         

      Steve Doocy is a "true" hater of the Democrat Party and making up 'false arguments' and telling "big" lies is what he does "best" for FoxNoise.  Whenver I see Doocy on FoxNoise I think of how Doocy explained Gov. Palin's foreign policy knowledge i.e., Doocy explained Alaska's close proximity to Russia was "the" main qualifier for Gov. Palin's foreign policy expertise, hee hee. 

      Doocy is a mean-spirited, nasty, cut-throat, liar and FoxNoise "pays" him millions for these "tasteless" talents especially when Doocy's nastiness is against President Obama, Obama's Administration, and the Democrats as a whole.  I have felt so sorry for people who are not Republicans when they go on FoxNoise, because they get ripped apart especially with Steve Doocy.  So sad indeed...

      Report Abuse
      • Author by NiceguyEddie (March 17, 2009 2:06 pm ET)
           

        "Wow."  "You" make a "lot" of good "points," but "what's" with all the "quotes?"

        ;)

        Report Abuse
      • Author by jwcoop715110 (March 17, 2009 8:28 pm ET)
           

        If you can't rip the head off the lunatic-fringe likes of the doocebag, you've got no business being in the Big Leagues.

        He's batting practice.

        Report Abuse
      • Author by my4cents (March 17, 2009 10:21 pm ET)
           

        How can he hate 'Democrat Party'? I am not sure it exists. I believe it is called 'Democratic Party'.

        I do agree with all other good observations you make.

        Report Abuse
    • Author by Ivy Shoots (March 17, 2009 2:04 pm ET)
         

        If Doocy burnt down FOX News while deep frying the stimulus bill, it would definitely be worth more than it is now.

      Report Abuse
    • Author by cpinva (March 17, 2009 2:14 pm ET)
         
      mr. doocy, aside from being a well known idiot, is a poorly informed idiot. as a cpa and tax professional, for nearly 30 years, it's the general concensus among us that any transaction, entered into solely for the tax "benefits", is one that you should seriously re-think entering into. this goes for stock or a personal residence. consider; assuming your total marginal tax rate (fed, state & local) is 50%, for every dollar of mortgage interest you pay, you only get 50 cents back from taxes. you are still out of pocket another 50 cents. and this makes sense to mr. doocy? i can pretty much guarantee you that people who make >250k a year are smart enough to realize this. they bought the house because it was a nice house, was in a nice neighborhood, had good schools nearby. tax effects were well down their list of considerations. mr. doocy, i'm sure, gets well paid for spouting the republican party line on FOX "News". that said, at some point, even the junior ditto heads start to realize that he, and his colleagues, are either stupid (which can't be fixed), or think their audience is. that can be fixed, by their audience, which starts to leave them.
      Report Abuse
      • Author by cpinva (March 17, 2009 2:15 pm ET)
           

        ok, i give up, what happened to my nice, neat paragraphs?

        Report Abuse
        • Author by eweston8542983 (March 17, 2009 6:54 pm ET)
             

          If you find out let me know. It happens with some irregularity

          Report Abuse
      • Author by darkmass (March 18, 2009 12:29 am ET)
           

        And of course, someone buying a house solely for the tax "benefits" would seek out the loan with the highest rate of interest.  That way they'd be maximizing their tax writeoff.  :^)

        Report Abuse

my.MediaMatters.org

Login  Sign Up

Push Back

Phone calls, emails and letters from the public do make a difference. Remember that to be effective you must be polite, and professional. Express your specific concerns regarding that particular news report or commentary, and indicate what you would like the media outlet to do differently in the future.