ms. acuna, i would like to know if the lack of energy title in the senate markup implies an endorsement of the house bill which undercuts the permanent extension of the itc for solar and reduces the credit for the wind ptc, or does the committee plan on honoring the itc/ptc commitment we made two years ago in a bipartisan way during reconciliation that conference, do you expect to maintain that in the conference? and is that our position? >> thank you. i'm not at liberty to speak whether or not the markup presents an endorsement or lack of endorsement of the house bill. with respect to the energy provisions, that rests with our members. and i'll leave it at that. >> so can silence be read to be acquiescence to the house bill? how should we understand it? what's the administration's position, mr. west, on this question? >> i'm not here to speak to the administration's position today, senator, on that particular provision. >> if the senator would yield, i can speak. >> sure. i would yield to my c

ms. acuna, that the highest income taxpayers on average, no matter which threshold you choose, receive a tax cut in this plan? >> as tom mentioned a moment ago, in every one of the cohorts, the taxpayers receive a tax reduction? >> is the answer yes? >> yes. >> thank you. >> as a chair of the after-tax income, mr. barthold do the taxpayers in the richest tloesh holds get a charger increase than taxpayers with incomes below $100,000 on average? >> i have not made that calculation on a basis of after-tax income. our calculations presented to you in g -- >> i'd like to see that. mr. barthold in the chairman's mark for americans filing as a married couple living in washington, d.c., and making $174,000 per year, how much do they receive from the $1,650 child credit if they have two children? >> the children are under age 18? >> yes. >> and the salary is 174 -- >> the salary is a senator's salary of $174,000. in washington, d.c., with two children. >> they should not be phased out, so it should be t

with that, i do have some quick questions i'd like to ask ms. acuna. first, does the modified mark reduce rates for middle income households? >> yes, it does. >> can i make an opening statement before questions? >> let me just finish these questions. i'll turn to you -- >> i thought we were making opening statements. you had an opening statements. >> you can make your questions, too, at that time. i'm just going to do it this way and then i'll turn to you. the second question and these are just a few questions we've got to get out of the way. does the modified mark lower rates for single parents in the middle income brackets? >> yes, it does. it lowers the rates in the single bracket. >> does the modified mark increase the child tax credit? >> yes, it does. >> i'll be darned. does the modified mark increase the refund ability of the child tax credit? >> yes, it does. first of all it -- >> if it does so, how does it do it? >> index its to inflation and increases it from $1,000 under current law to $1,100. >> does it make the modified tax credit availabl

ms. jennifer acuna from the finance committee majority staff and ms. sarah schaefer, mr. adam caruso, and mr. ryan abraham and mr. drew crouch from the minority staff. in addition, we have mr. tom west, the tax legislative counsel from the treasury. with us today. all are present to answer questions of any member of this committee. members have any questions that members have about the modification, that is. i'm sure there are a number of matters my colleagues would like to discuss at this point, and that's customary. however, i do want to note that members had several hours yesterday to ask questions about the original mark, and through the latter part of the day, they chose to forego those opportunities. therefore, i hope that members will focus most of their attention today on the modification and less on the provisions of the mark that haven't changed. furthermore, i hope that members will focus their questions and discussion on the subject at hand, which once again, is tax reform. health care matters are fine for discussion as long as they relate to the tax code. but