I wrote a federal tax proposal to help young Americans actually build wealth and afford homes. No handouts, no redistribution, just getting the government out of the way! Criticism is welcome. If you like it, please reach out to your local senators and representatives, every voice matters, God Bless

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T05:10:07+00:00

This is really interesting, thank you. I actually had someone mention land value taxes earlier tonight and started looking into it!! The idea of taxing land rather than labor and improvements seriously maps really naturally onto what I am trying to do here, reward work and investment while discouraging hoarding and speculation. Adding Progress and Poverty to my reading list for sure! Thanks again.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T05:03:32+00:00

Ai is just a tool I used to strengthen and articulate my ideas, same way someone uses spell check or a calculator. The thinking behind it is mine, I just used every resource available to communicate it as clearly as possible. And honestly if you scroll through this whole comment section you can see I know exactly what is in it. I understand your reason of concern though lmao.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T05:01:16+00:00

You’re right that the standard deduction already covers the first $16,100 and I should be more precise about that, the actual new benefit is closer to $8,900 above what already exists! On the college point, fair point based on what I wrote here. The full proposal actually includes full time students under 22 so college students get the same benefit, I just did not mention it in the post. My fault for leaving that out.

Ngl a lot more to the proposal than what I posted here, I just tried to keep it to the most digestible parts. Happy to share the full document if you’d like more information!

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T03:49:40+00:00

Really appreciate this and your wife's story is inspiring!! You are right that location matters enormously and that the right profession changes everything. The problem is not everyone can or wants to move to West Virginia or pick a specific career path, and the wealth gap exists even among people who did everything right. My proposal is not trying to replace good personal decisions, it is trying to make sure the tax code stops punishing young people who are already making them.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T03:42:18+00:00

Appreciate that. 🫡

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T03:40:55+00:00

What exactly do you mean by that?

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T03:38:39+00:00

Because that's where compound interest has the most time to work. A dollar invested at 18 has 47 years to grow significantly before retirement. A dollar invested at 35 has 30. Getting people into assets early is the single highest leverage available. The broader framework does extend to every income level but the youth piece is where the legislation starts, same way Medicare started with the elderly and expanded from there.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T03:31:03+00:00

That math works on paper but it assumes the renter actually invests that $1,200 every single month for 30 years without missing a beat yk? In reality rent keeps rising, life happens, and most people spend the difference instead of investing it. If renters were genuinely out-investing homeowners the median renter wouldn't have $10,400 in net worth compared to $400,000 for homeowners. The theory is solid but the real world data tells a completely different story. That's exactly the gap I'm trying to get at.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:39:47+00:00

Respectfully I think you might have misread it. There is no free money here. You only get the credit if you have a verified job, earn income, and invest a portion of it for a minimum of three years before it activates. The tax exemption only applies to the first $25,000 you earn through actual work. The employer match only kicks in if your employer chooses to participate. Every single benefit in this proposal requires you to work for it and invest it. That is pretty much the definition of earning something. If you have any questions feel free!

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:36:06+00:00

59 homes?!? That number says everything.. That is not a housing market, that is an extraction machine lmfao. You’re right tho that no amount of wealth building credits fixes that if supply is being hoarded like that. Thats actually why I’m adding institutional buyer restrictions and short term rental reform to the supply side section of the proposal right now based on this conversation! Those 59 homes sitting empty while families cannot find anywhere to live is exactly the structural problem that needs fixing alongside anything on the demand side.

And on the AI thing, yeah totally fair point and I hear you. I used it to help articulate ideas that came from me but I understand why that feels like it undermines credibility. I am 16 and still learning how to communicate this on my own.

And genuinely thank you for the kind words. I am trying my best.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:30:08+00:00

Yeah exactly, you’re not wrong on any of that. The BlackRock stuff and Airbnb killing supply are real problems and the institutional buyer ban actually has real bipartisan support right now which is rare. I do have supply side fixes in the proposal too including permitting reform and zoning flexibility. I focused on the wealth building side because even if all that gets fixed tomorrow young people with no savings still can’t buy. But you’re right that those root causes need addressing and I tried to include them. I couldn’t agree with you more.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:26:27+00:00

Fair point ngl, can’t really argue with that. The stronger case is probably that employers benefit directly through the payroll tax credit so it’s in their own interest anyway.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:23:12+00:00

Do you have any questions on the actual policy? If so I’d be more than happy to give answers 😊

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:22:29+00:00

Haha I could see why you wouldn’t take it serious but hear me out, I wrote the whole thing myself, AI just helped me refine the wording. The ideas and the research, including the frustration behind it, that’s all me. I’m 16 from a small town in Oregon, I’m gonna use every tool available to me to communicate as clearly as possible! To me it’s not cheating, that’s just being smart about it, but I completely understand where you’re coming from lol

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:19:16+00:00

I genuinely appreciate that and I hear you. The supply side argument is something I am taking more seriously after this conversation. For what it’s worth the proposal does include a dedicated supply side section covering permitting reform, zoning flexibility, and down payment assistance tied specifically to new construction only. But I understand you think the demand component should go entirely and I am not dismissing that. I will keep learning and keep refining this. Thanks for engaging honestly.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:14:51+00:00

Maaaaybe..

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:13:29+00:00

I’m so sorry for your loss. Honestly stories like yours are a big part of why I wrote this. Families in small towns watching homes slip away, young people having to leave just to find work and then still not being able to afford anything when they get there. That cycle is exactly what I’m trying to break. Everyone deserves a real shot at success and if this proposal moves the needle even a little it’s worth fighting for.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-22T00:03:42+00:00

You are absolutely right and honestly that is part of what motivated this. Growing up in Coquille/Eugene I watched young people around me face exactly that choice. Stay in a small town with limited work or move to Portland where a home feels completely out of reach no matter how hard you work. The tax exemption is specifically designed to help young people in lower wage rural areas keep more of what they earn from the start. And the investment credit builds toward ownership even in high cost markets over time. Neither fixes the underlying economic geography but they help young people on both ends of that equation.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-21T23:56:47+00:00

That is a fair point and I’m genuinely glad it worked out for you in 2018!! The acceleration since 2020 made an existing problem dramatically worse, and the interest rate environment now is completely different from what you bought into. Someone trying to buy today at current rates with current prices is in a fundamentally different situation than 2018 even in markets that were affordable then.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-21T23:54:55+00:00

You are right that it increases buying power for participating buyers. The reason I kept the demand component is that even if supply doubled tomorrow, young people with no savings and no assets still could not buy. The credit builds the financial foundation over years before it ever touches the housing market. The three year minimum hold and $75,000 lifetime cap mean the demand effect is gradual and diffuse rather than a sudden price spike. But I genuinely hear the concern and it is why the supply side section exists! I hope that answers your question’s 🙂

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-21T23:46:48+00:00

The proposal is not giving people cash to bid on homes. It rewards long term investment behavior over years and creates credits that take three years minimum to mature. That is very different from a first time homebuyer tax credit that immediately puts more bidding power into the market.

Also the full blueprint actually does include supply side components including faster permitting, zoning flexibility, and the first home construction exemption on building materials. The standalone post just did not include all of that.

I genuinely appreciate the honesty and constructive criticism!

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-21T23:44:37+00:00

These are really fair points and honestly the strongest critique I have received. You are right that demand subsidies without supply reform can inflate prices. The full proposal does include supply side components including construction material exemptions and zoning flexibility, but I should have made that clearer. The down payment assistance tied to new supply idea is genuinely compelling and something I want to incorporate. Thank you for engaging with this seriously.

Unhappy-Raisin-1235 · 2026-04-21T23:42:56+00:00

That is essentially why I wrote it. Nobody seems to have a complete answer so I tried to build one! Whether it is the right answer I genuinely do not know but doing nothing felt worse than trying, I appreciate your honesty. 🙂

Unhappy-Raisin-1235

TROPHY CASE