The European Tribune is a forum for thoughtful dialogue of European and international issues. You are invited to post comments and your own articles.
Please REGISTER to post.
Think about a negative-amortisation loan as an interest-only loan plus some fictional interest. This extra interest increases the bank's assets but not its liabilities, compared to an interest-only loan at a correspondingly lower interest. It's free funny-money for the bank, in that it comes with no funding cost - no extra liabilities means no need to borrow more from the CB.
Taxes don't work like that, because they have to be paid in real money, not Monopoly money. So a consumer loan to pay taxes actually increases the bank's liabilities, making it less attractive on paper.
(That, and mortgages typically come with stickier strings attached than consumer loans.)
Of course there are no regulations that a sufficiently incompetent or corrupt regulator cannot fuck up. Foolproof systems do not exist in economics, and even if they did nature is ever at work improving the stock of fools. But as a first line of defence, property taxes are not bad.
Friends come and go. Enemies accumulate.
by Migeru - Aug 24 8 comments
by Melanchthon - Aug 23 12 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 18 62 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 6 117 comments
by gmoke - Jul 29 8 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 3 19 comments
by ARGeezer - Aug 5 4 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 29 17 comments
by Migeru - Aug 248 comments
by Melanchthon - Aug 2312 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 1862 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 6117 comments
by gmoke - Aug 5
by ARGeezer - Aug 54 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Aug 319 comments
by Democrats Ramshield - Jul 303 comments
by gmoke - Jul 298 comments
by ARGeezer - Jul 2917 comments
by Frank Schnittger - Jul 2869 comments
by gmoke - Jul 282 comments