,,iv  #aaeth ,,congress  #b;d ,session  
,h4 ,,con4 ,,res4 #abi  ,,in ,,the      
,,house ,,of ,,representatives  ,july   
#ag1 #bjah,mr4 ,sessions 7for himself1  
,ms4 ,granger1 ,mr4 ,smith of ,texas1   
,mr4 ,culberson1 ,mr4 ,poe of ,texas1   
,mr4 ,weber of ,texas1 ,mr4 ,carter of  
,texas1 ,mr4 ,conaway1 ,mr4 ,barton1    
,mr4 ,babin1 ,mr4 ,posey1 ,mr4 ,wilson  
of ,south ,carolina1 ,mr4 ,bishop of    
,utah1 ,mr4 ,smucker1 ,mr4 ,rutherford1 
,mr4 ,webster of ,florida1 ,mr4         
,marchant1 ,mr4 ,fleischmann1 ,mr4      
,palazzo1 ,mr4 ,luetkemeyer1 ,mr4       
,gianforte1 ,mr4 ,collins of ,georgia1  
,mr4 ,bergman1 ,mr4 ,thornberry1 and    
,mr4 ,walberg7 submitted the following  
concurrent resolution2 which was        
referred to the ,committee on ,ways and 
,means  ,,concurrent ,,resolution       
,recognizing the significance of the    
parsonage allowance to the ,nation's    
religious and spiritual communities4    
,whereas churches1 synagogues1 and other
 religious institutions lie at the heart

 of communities large and small across  
the ,united ,states2 ,whereas these     
institutions are focal points for       
worship1 spiritual devotion1 education1 
neighborhood development1 social        
services1 and many other benefits to the
 communities of which they form an      
integral part2 ,whereas1 for more than  
#bjj years1 tax exemptions and          
exclusions for religious institutions   
have served as essential tools to       
promote religious liberty and prevent   
government entanglement1 enabling these 
institutions to provide such benefits to
 their communities2 ,whereas the        
parsonage allowance under section #ajg  
of the ,internal ,revenue ,code of #aihf
 is one such exclusion2 ,whereas the    
parsonage allowance is available to     
clergy from a wide variety of faith     
traditions in nearly every community in 
the ,united ,states2 ,whereas ,congress 
intended the parsonage allowance to     
facilitate equitable treatment for tax  
purposes between church-provided housing

 for clergy and housing provided to     
secular and military employees by their 
employers2 ,whereas the corresponding   
tax exclusion for secular employees is  
not viable in the religious context1    
given that many clergy are self-employed
 and the practices of religious         
employers vary in accordance with       
denominational structure and polity2    
,whereas the parsonage allowance has    
been reflected in the application of the
 ,internal ,revenue ,code since #aici2  
,whereas throughout its history1 the    
parsonage allowance has allowed         
religious leaders to live near their    
congregations and serve their           
communities2 and ,whereas the parsonage 
allowance is essential to treating the  
faith community fairly and avoiding     
excessive government entanglement in    
religion3 ,now1 therefore1 be it  ,that 
the ,congress recognizes the            
significance of the parsonage allowance 
to the ,nation's religious and spiritual
 communities1 and supports its continued

 retention in the ,internal ,revenue    
,code of #aihf4