We should, if we want to use tax policy to promote home ownership outside of the wealthy, be subsidizing principal payments for owner-occupied primary residences meeting certain local and personal affordability standards, and possibly tax-favoring sale proceeds for sales of property when, after sale, it will be owner-occupied primary residence meeting affordability standards.
The U.S. does that. Loan interest and capital gains are treated much differently by the U.S. tax system if they are on a primary residence rather than on other assets.
(More often than not, I see criticism of this on HN.)
Those benefits are regressive which results in the them barely moving the needle for working or middle class families. It goes back to the original comment in this thread that it is implemented in such a way that it has a nearly opposite result to its supposed intended effect.
