i think we should have a targeted noncustodial parent eitc benefit. there are ways, i want to get more money into these households, and i think running to the universal benefit is the first answer is premature. >> so now if we were talking to republicans on the hill, i think that the big issue would come up immediate, which is $200 billion, are you kidding me? $20$200 billion a year for this program? who could possibly support that? we are not going to support a $200 billion a year program. even with the office of the proposals, you get it down to 96 billion, down to 96, really? what you think the practical chances are that republicans on hillwood except a program of this magnitude? >> i'm very bad at predicting what ever republicans -- >> we all are. >> i think it's not good at all. i think that it's crazy. the only way it might happen is if you traded in the panoply collection programs, so much work by the way, pretty well, and some which don't and we will see it will close all these and create this money come by the democrats are never going to all

it's designed to manage child poverty problems that we have even when we have an eitc. i think there's a logic for having such a program because there are collective benefits to that investment. again, i think it is useful to think about what problem we're trying to solve and to agree with them, not have the argument only in the context of tanif and whether this is another way to improve work incentive. this isn't. it's an income effect, does not have an effect on wages. it shouldn't have the same negative effect that the eitc has on the positive end because that's not tied to hours of work. >> i was really glad sam brought up the school milk programs. we lump all these things together as anti-poverty programs that total up to a trillion dollars, whatever. the school milk program is -- thank you. that's very special. it should be judged according to whether we think it's a rational program goal to provide milk to kids. if that has nutrition benefits -- i'm not saying it does. i'm saying if that's the goal, that's the benchmark it should be judged, not whether it moves s

we made great strides recently with the expansion of the eitc and the child tax credit. but if we index the credit to inflation, we could support more families. we could support more children. you know, we have managed at the federal level to end the estate tax for the wealthiest americans in this country. but we have left out our children. and because the benefits of the child tax credit are based on earnings, we leave behind many of our youngest children who are the most likely to be living in families that are too poor to receive the full credit. we have the evidence. now we need to align the science with the need and enact the appropriate public policy initiative and have the will to do it. which is why i have proposed the child tax credit improvement act. i don't know what this number is on the act. for families are young children under the age of six. the $3600. it would look to distribute the credit in regular monthly payments. it has earnings requirement and no phase in and it's fully refundable. the bill would improve the child tax credit for older children as w

i was following around eitc recipients to see how they spent the money. ended up in east boston. i just stumbled upon this old dikenzian building, kind of encrusted with 100 years of soot, wire mesh over the windows. both brass letters and carved in to the facade of the building were the words "overseers of the public welfare." to me this was such a powerful symbol of the stigma and shame that it accompanied that program. it was almost as if you had to trade away your citizenship to get relief. so imagine my shock when i then went on bennington street and arrived at the local h&r block where of course about 70% of eitc claimants fill out the tax reforms and actually collect their tax. and standing there with my colleagues wearing sandwich boards to get them to participate in our study, people would come out after giving h&r block $200 to file their taxes saying things like, "i've got people." or, "i feel like a real american." even, "i feel proud to be a taxpayer." now my financial advisor tells me i shouldn't be paying as many taxes as i am. so i've never really felt proud to be

in the u.s., increases in state eitcs have been associated with improvement in birth outcomes. we see similar data coming from canada. it's unclear whether additional income in the case of birth outcomes made a difference because it was used -- the extra money was used for nutritious food because it reduced the stress created by economic pressure or because of other reaso reasons. so we don't have as much research on the environmental stress perspective, but i think that is where, you know, the research is moving. i want to summarize points here. experimental and causal experimental research points to causal effects of income on children's academic achievement. links between family income and children's cognitive development and academic achievement are due in part to differences in the provision of cognitive stimulation in the home. within family improvements. that is the same family, longitudinal research shows the famili same family when they have extra income we see a correspondent increase in the quality of the home environment. suggesting that low income parents use quote

legislative recommendation that was designed around trying to minimize the errors and fraud in the eitc. and we've attached it to my testimony. i do think that most of the errors are attributable to the cox complexity of the law, but the complexity of the law also creates opportunities for others to game it. and a lot of the fraud, the pure fraud comes from some unregulated preparers that, you know, are preying upon an unsophisticated population and selling them something that's too good to be true. so you've got a lot different things playing around there, but i believe that there are things that you can do both administratively and legislatively to minimize the improper payments. some of that is going fot design and others is going into the kind of both outreach and education and oversight that the irs needs to do on this issue. >> i think for the integrity of the program itself we need to be vigilant and mindful but also understand the complexities in terms of the clientele. >> yeah. >> and they're ability to fill out those forms properly. and, mr. chairman, let me thank you for hold

the private sector has really figured this out because fraud is not just problem with eitc.y kind of payment are making as a company, and if you're in the payments business there is a lot of fraud out there. they have made great strides and unlimited substantially in the new technologies that are coming on board are really incredible impressive. to what extent do you think we need to be looking at modern payments technology? it seems as if the irs is not using any of it. >> thank you dirk i will say this. the irs is not in a position to not disclose the stakes that occur or fraud that occurs when it is questioned by congress or the ig or gao. i've worked in the private sector, and i'm not questioning your point directly, but a lot of times banks will not disclose when their systems are breached because he didn't want to shock stockholders or regulators or what have you. the irs is not in a position. there is no question that the irs in three could implement changes in their processes that could make it more difficult for people to engage in unscrupulous behavior. but they ar

legislative recommendation that was designed around trying to minimize the errors and fraud in the eitc and we've attached it to my testimony. i do think it's attributable to the complexity of the law and a lot of the fraud comes from some unregulated prepares and they are selling them something too good to be true. i believe there are things you can do administratively and legislatively to minimize the improper payments. some of that is going to the design and others is going into the kind of outreach and education and oversight that the irs needs to do on this issue. >> for the integrity of the program we need to be mindful and understand the complexity in terms of the clientele and their ability to fill out those forms properly. i want to thank you for holding this form today in a bipartisan spirit. we know it's not always pleasant. we know you don't always get it right and that's why i think we need a committee like this to keep an eye on it, to help you do your job, help us to our job and protect the interests of our constituents the u.s. taxpayer. thank you. >> i now recognize the

it would come out of an account, she gave an official member of the account that is used to provide eitcchecks and tax refund. it's a mandatory appropriation, a permanent appropriation. when you looked at it and you look at the statute, there was zero authority for them not only to do that but to move from one agency to the other where i it'd been very, very clear and explicit. so now you're talking $175 billion program over ten years that was created out of whole cloth, despite congress having used its constitutional prerogative with the power of the purse. this week it into the fund, maybe the head of the pen jurisprudence religious tenet, routed to political questions and so on. bottom line is what is presented to the corps was a very interesting question of when a branch is actually acted and use its constitutional authority, at what point, in the executive branch, has ignored that i'm gone forward anyway despite the clear directive from congress, at what point do the courts come in and referee that? that was the issue that was presented to judge colyer in d.c., and she rolled the ho