Sponsors
The bill increases transparency and forces budget‑neutral rulemaking to limit regulatory costs, but at the risk of eliminating beneficial protections, discouraging significant new safeguards, and slowing agency action through added complexity and uncertainty.
Taxpayers, small businesses, and middle-class families will face lower net regulatory costs because agencies must identify offsets and repeal existing rules so new major rules are budget‑neutral.
Citizens, stakeholders, and watchdogs get clearer information and accountability because agencies must estimate rule costs (including compliance/understanding costs) and publicly state budget neutrality for each major rule.
Federal employees, small businesses, and others gain stronger procedural protections because the definition of 'rule' is expanded to include guidance and interpretive rules, bringing more agency actions under notice and cost scrutiny.
Middle‑class families and businesses could lose existing health, safety, or consumer protections because agencies must repeal an existing rule before issuing a new major rule, increasing the risk that beneficial regulations are eliminated and creating regulatory uncertainty.
People and businesses may be deprived of economically significant protections because the $100 million threshold and offset requirement could discourage agencies from issuing rules that exceed that cost cutoff.
Federal employees, nonprofits, and regulated entities could see slower, less flexible agency action because expanding the scope of what counts as a 'rule' (to include guidance) is likely to slow routine agency processes and reduce regulatory agility.
Based on analysis of 2 sections of legislative text.
Requires federal agencies to estimate major-rule costs, repeal offsetting agency rules before issuing them, and publish whether the rule is budget-neutral; expands "rule" to include guidance and policy statements.
Introduced March 6, 2025 by Beth Van Duyne · Last progress March 6, 2025
Requires federal agencies, before issuing any "major rule," to estimate that rule’s cost, identify existing agency rule(s) that could be repealed to offset the cost, and repeal any such identified rule(s); agencies must also publish with each major rule a statement saying whether the rule is "budget neutral." The bill expands the legal definition of "rule" to cover interpretative rules, general policy statements, and most guidance documents, and defines "budget neutral" and "cost" (including costs to understand or implement a rule). It uses the existing major-rule tests (including an annual economic effect threshold of $100 million) for determining when these requirements apply. The change makes agencies responsible for finding and eliminating prior rules to counterbalance new regulatory costs and brings many guidance documents and policy statements under the formal rule definition, which may slow or change how agencies use guidance and issue major regulations.