Your parents boomer probably live in a house too big for them. They are frozen in place because of the taxes, say the best economists

A recent analysis of Moody’s Analytics, led by chief economist Mark Zandi and deputy chief Cristian, directly indicates the capital gains tax sets like the culprit which prevents millions of houses out of the market and out of the reach of families who need it most.

According to the report, the problem begins with too many empty elderly people “locked up” in houses that no longer meet their needs. But instead of selling and reducing the workforce in a small house, the prospect of taxes on steep capital gains keeps them in their biggest houses.

The problem is particularly acute in high -cost metropolitan areas, where decades of appreciation of goods mean that the very sale of a modest house can trigger a six -digit tax bill. This “allowance error” on the housing market is reflected in a “logjam” where nearly 6 million older Americans reside in much larger than necessary houses, while growing families are piled up in too small spaces and millions of young households remain stuck in rental limbo.

This locking effect, which is distinct from that caused by high mortgage rates, stems from the 1997 law on taxpayers’ emergency services, which has introduced an exclusion of capital gains of $ 250,000 for single declarants and $ 500,000 for married couples. But these thresholds have not moved for almost 30 years. If it is indexed to the growth of house prices, today’s exclusions would be $ 885,000 for individuals and $ 1.77 million for couples. Instead, the thresholds remain static and more owners are faced with massive taxes for moving, especially in states such as California and Florida.

In an America full of what UBS calls “millionaires every day” – a sentence that applies to many Americans whose swollen assets make them rich on paper, but quite average in the lifestyle – many people cannot afford to pay taxes on their real estate nest eggs.

The case of the widow who would not sell

Zandi and derice maintain that the most direct remedy is to index the exclusion ceilings to reflect inflation or real growth in house prices. The increase or even the elimination of these caps would immediately release the repressed inventory, helping the nest workers empty to reduce the size of the nest workers and make more family houses available.

Let us take the hypothetical example of a widow with a house of 2,800 square feet, the authors write: it faces capital gains of $ 750,000, and after its exclusion of $ 250,000, it would pay taxes of more than $ 100,000 at federal and static combined prices. This represents more than 20% of its workforce reduction products.

“The deterrent for sale is strong,” they write, and it would naturally promote the alternative to live in the house until it dies. “His heirs would inherit the house on an intensive cost base, completely avoiding capital gains tax.”

The Congressal Research Service estimated that capital gains taxes on sales of houses exceeding the ceilings generate $ 6 billion to $ 10 billion per year of federal income. But changing the tax code does not have to make a hole in government budgets. Zandi’s analysis suggests that a large part of this could be offset by other tax flows if the turnover increases.

Moody’s has found that a larger housing turnover would also stimulate the mobility of the workforce, one of the keys to regional economic growth. When people can move for jobs, metropolitan areas with more housing transactions see a considerably higher job and gross product growth. The increase in sales generate new income for local governments through transfer and land taxes, while additional commissions and renovation purchases pump billions of billions in the economy.

Not just a solution for the rich

Currently, a large part of the tax burden is the responsibility of average income owners in expensive regions – often after a life crisis such as divorce or the death of a spouse – and not on the rich, according to the report. Indeed, high employees have resources to completely bypass taxes. Indexing or elimination of ceilings would move the burden of those who are the least able to pay and smooth the friction of the market injuring families of all ages.

And although some fear that the modification of exclusion floods the market, Moody’s analysis reveals that even a 25% increase in ads would only make sales at normal and pre-crisis levels. Zandi and derice suggest that a limited adjustment in time could “revive” the market without destabilizing prices. They also note significant importance savings for taxpayers and IRS, because millions would no longer need to follow the value of the papers.

America is aging in place

Meanwhile, the number of buyers for the first time has decreased to a historic hollow, and they age that ever, reaching a median age of 38 years. In July, more elderly people actively bought houses than generation Z and generation Y. In April, Jessica Lautz of the National Association of Real Estate Agents said Fortune That the baby boomers “dominated” the housing market, “often buying their next houses with money”.

Zandi is not the only one to denounce the way the housing market has become. Meredith Whitney, the so-called “Wall Street oracle”, calculates that baby boomers now have more than 54% of American houses (compared to 44% in 2008), and 79% are without mortgage.

“This allowed the elderly to keep their homes more easily by explaining some of these equity buildings,” she warned this month. “And growth in such funding will be a major theme for the American economy over the next three to four years.”

Global Forum fortune returns on October 26 to 27, 2025 in Riyadh. CEOs and world leaders will meet for a dynamic event only invitation that shapes the future of business. Request an invitation.