It leads to absurd situations, where person has actual negative income (has to borrow money to get by), but on paper is "very rich". But millionaire with couple of properties can claim hardship and ask for social welfare.
It leads to absurd situations, where person has actual negative income (has to borrow money to get by), but on paper is "very rich". But millionaire with couple of properties can claim hardship and ask for social welfare.
A person's net worth is simply defined as assets minus liabilities. Income isn't part of the equation, but having a higher income can sometimes allow you to increase your assets over time.
What sort of social welfare are you referring to? Most welfare programs have cut offs based on income and assets.
a health insurance deduction would likely be regressive anyway. the primary beneficiaries would be the same (upper) middle class people that max out their 401k every year.
imo we should get rid of pretty much every deduction (except maybe for dependants) and slightly raise all the brackets.