Hi all,
I read some of Robert Kiyosaki's stuff and he makes a claim that a house that one lives in is not an asset, it is a liability. His rationale is that the house does not generate an incomer for the owner; it generates expenses.
I want to start a discussion on this topic and see what everyone else thinks.
My point of view:
The accounting definition of an asset is that it is something that provides value to the owner. Thus, the house is an asset, the mortgage is the liability, and the equity is part of the owner's net worth.
A house obviously has expenses associated with them, but that does not necessarily mean that it is a liability. We are taught in accounting that liabilities are separate from expenses, although liability payments do become expenses.
To me, the house is certainly an asset and the mortgage is the liability. However since the house produces so many expenses (regardless of whether or not there is a mortgage), the house is a poor investment. By poor investment, I mean that it is very likely that the house costs more than the return on investment.
So that is my view. What is yours. I think this is a simple question, but has a complicated answer.
I read some of Robert Kiyosaki's stuff and he makes a claim that a house that one lives in is not an asset, it is a liability. His rationale is that the house does not generate an incomer for the owner; it generates expenses.
I want to start a discussion on this topic and see what everyone else thinks.
My point of view:
The accounting definition of an asset is that it is something that provides value to the owner. Thus, the house is an asset, the mortgage is the liability, and the equity is part of the owner's net worth.
A house obviously has expenses associated with them, but that does not necessarily mean that it is a liability. We are taught in accounting that liabilities are separate from expenses, although liability payments do become expenses.
To me, the house is certainly an asset and the mortgage is the liability. However since the house produces so many expenses (regardless of whether or not there is a mortgage), the house is a poor investment. By poor investment, I mean that it is very likely that the house costs more than the return on investment.
So that is my view. What is yours. I think this is a simple question, but has a complicated answer.
Comment