eitc enjoyed years of bipartisan support. and i have to say that i'm frustrated and let down by some of the recent conversations that have taken a most unconstructive turn towards the eitc. so you know, i'd love to hear your ideas for ways in which we could possibly strengthen the eitc. i understand that we need to combat the fraud that exists in that program, but it's kind of hard, i think, for an agency to do its best work when it's being underfunded. any comments on eitc, commissioner? >> well, i've been around awhile. and so i was actually working in the senate. i was an administrative assistant during the nixon administration when the eitc program was passed with the support of that administration and somebody reminded me recently that president reagan referred to it as his favorite poverty program for the reasons you noted. it encouraged working poor, encouraged people to work, and provided them added incentives. so we have a balancing act. we have a responsibility because we're running the program, in addition to colle

folks that claim the eitc generally are trying to make ends meet. it's the under utilization of the credits by the people that needed the most in hard-working americans. many of whom are trying to support a family, and i think somewhere between 3.5 to 5 million eligible families ever even claimed that credit. eitc has been one of the most powerful working incentives and we should be promoting it quite frankly, not cutting the budget of the irs and not getting rid of programs that help the tax filers understand how to file a tax return and how to claim the credit. i would be much more in favor of the constructive discussion by this committee instead of a partisan witch hunt at the issues at the irs. eitc enjoyed years of bipartisan support, and i have to say that i'm frustrated and put down by the recent conversations that have taken the unconstructive turned towards the eitc. i would love to hear your ideas on ways that we could possibly strengthen the eitc. i understand that we need to combat the fraud exists in the program, but it's kind of hard i

if requiring a social security number is a bad thing for families, why do you tolerate it for the eitc? the reason you wouldn't propose that change is because people in treasury would say you'd be crazy, because now you've got an additional tax credit, something new on top of the eitc, that senator ayotte has found, without a social security number, you have $19 billion in frawvmentd so aifraud. if you think requiring a social security number for a child to get an earned-income additional tax credit is destroying a family, why don't you come down here and change the law for the eitc? if you did that you would get blistered by the auditors saying you're opening up a new line of fraud. so can you tell us, what would happen to the american taxpayer, what benefit would inure to the american taxpayer if we followed our proi proposal and accepted r amendment of requiring a social security number? ms. ayotte: the american taxpayer would save d 20 billion over the next ten years. this is about protecting the american taxpayer, because let me just talk about some of the fraud that was found. in

one thing that i would like to say about the eitc, i know that we focus on the improper payment rate, but the eitc to administer it costs about 1% of all -- it's a very low cost program for the urs to administer. and that contrasts to food stamps or welfare or anything like that which has caseworkers, etc. food stamps and welfare may have a lower error rate where we have our high cost is in the improper payment rate. but if you look at error and cost of administration, it really evens out. i'm not defending the improper payment rate, and i have real pragmatic suggestions about how to address that. but i'm just saying to put it in context, there's a cost one way or another in these kinds of benefit programs. and it's cheap to administer it through the internal revenue code, but cost is on improper payment side. >> thank you so much. >> well, thank you both. if that answers the question, time has expired. thank you all. it was a time, we're having such a good time, time just flew by. but thanks for being here. thanks or for all the work you do. and with that, this hearing is adjourned.

of the eitc program. >> sure. >> frankly going eitc is better than trying to raise the minimum wageeffects on unemployment. >> i take your point about employment. i've been listening to the show for a while. i know bruce is there. i agree, you're talking about long-term structures. in the near term, one positive thing that's happening this year relative to last year, there will be less fiscal drag from the government sector. that should help a bit in 2014 versus '13. >> it will but we haven't dealt with the three structural problems there. we haven't dealt with social insurance programs, rationalized health care promises and done enough to control costs and we haven't done comprehensive tax reform. until we do, there's going to be a great deal of uncertainty and we're not going to get the level of growth we need. >> i don't see the trickle down a pejorative. you hope everyone benefits. i must begin my journey, which will cause me to miss the end of the game. the x1 entertainment operating system lets your watch live tv anywhere. can i watch it in butterfly valley? sure. can i watch

the eitc, they're welfare programs, you send checks to poor people to make them somewhat less poor. i think it makes much more sense for workers to get a reasonable paycheck so the taxpayer doesn't have to make up the difference. and what's really outrageous is that marco rubio and a number of other prominent republicans are saying that the solution to america's poverty problem right now is more government welfare. that's not what the republican party advocated when i originally became a republican under ronald reagan. >> are you getting any traction with fellow conservatives on this? >> i think some kind of consensus around minimum wage at least politically really disintegrates during this particular fight. >> i think we're making a lot of progress, take for example, the most prominent conservative on tv, bill o'reilly, just a couple weeks ago, he endorsed the $10 an hour minimum wage that's proposed in congress by the democrats. an iconic conservative figure said the same thing, we should raise the minimum wage so as to reduce social welfare spending. a prominent economic writer f