Sponsors (29)
Ask me why this bill matters.
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Amends section 610 of title 5 to (1) in subsection (b) add paragraph (6) to require inclusion of any indirect costs described in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis under section 603(b)(6) and any other indirect costs that may have arisen during the 10-year period described in subsection (a), and (2) add a new subsection (d) establishing that failure to conduct the required 10-year review causes the rule to cease to be effective, requires the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to notify the agency, requires the agency to publish a Federal Register notice soliciting comments on reinstatement, gives the agency 180 days to complete a review if it determines reinstatement is appropriate, and provides that upon completion the rule shall be reinstated notwithstanding the notice-and-comment procedures of section 553.
Adds a new subsection (f) requiring that for any rule an agency determines is likely to have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities, the head of the agency must publish all guidance documents and other relevant documents (including updated interpretive guidance) on regulations.gov or a similar website and allow for public comments so small entities can access and provide feedback.
Amends 5 U.S.C. 603(b) by adding a new paragraph (6) requiring, where feasible, inclusion of any reasonably foreseeable potential indirect costs the proposed rule may impose on small entities, and specifying three categories of such small entities (subparagraphs (A)–(C)).
Amends 5 U.S.C. 605(b) by replacing the phrase 'The agency' with 'Not later than 10 days after completing the certification described in this subsection, the agency'.
Adds new section 605A to chapter 6 of title 5 establishing procedures for petitions to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy to review agency certifications under section 605(b), including petition form and content requirements, consultation procedures, prima facie review timetables, full review procedures (including meeting requirements and publication of results), requirements that an agency perform initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses if the Chief Counsel so determines, a penalty that the final rule shall not apply to small entities if the agency fails to cooperate with a full review, and specification of when a certification is considered final agency action for judicial review.
Amends the table of sections for chapter 6 of title 5 by inserting an item for the newly added section (605A) after the item relating to section 605.
Tightens how federal agencies justify claims that a proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. It forces agencies to count foreseeable indirect costs, requires agencies to publish guidance when a rule will significantly affect small entities, and creates a new SBA review and petition process that can trigger additional analysis or temporary suspension of a rule if the Chief Counsel finds likely significant impacts. The bill also adds consequences when agencies miss statutorily required 10‑year retrospective reviews: the SBA Chief Counsel must notify the agency and the rule is treated as ceased until the agency completes a review and, if it reinstates the rule, does so within a short, defined time frame without restarting notice-and-comment. The measure imposes new procedural duties on agencies and expands the Office of Advocacy/SBA Chief Counsel’s oversight role, but it does not provide additional funding to carry out these requirements. That means agencies will have to use existing resources to meet new analysis, publication, petition-response, and timing obligations, and regulated small entities gain a clearer, formal path to challenge agency “no significant impact” certifications and to obtain more accessible explanatory materials for rules that affect them.
Amend section 603(b) to modify paragraph (5) punctuation and add a new paragraph (6) requiring, where feasible, consideration of any reasonably foreseeable potential indirect costs the proposed rule may impose on small entities, including small entities that (A) purchase from, sell to, or otherwise conduct business with entities directly regulated by the rule; (B) are directly regulated by other governmental entities as a result of the rule; or (C) are not directly regulated by the agency as a result of the rule but are otherwise subject to other agency rules as a result of the rule.
Amend section 605(b) by replacing the phrase 'The agency' with 'Not later than 10 days after completing the certification described in this subsection, the agency' to impose a timing requirement related to certification publication.
Insert new section 605A establishing review procedures: any small entity, group of small entities, or organization representing small entities may petition the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration to review a certification under section 605(b) that a proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Require the Chief Counsel to determine and publicly display the method, timing, and form for disseminating petitions on the Office of Advocacy website.
Specify required contents for each petition: petitioner contact information; organizational identification if applicable; specific problems or issues with the certification; supporting non-confidential technical, scientific, or other data; a proposed solution including alternatives; an analysis explaining how the solution addresses the problems; and citation or enclosure of public data supporting the solution.
Who is affected and how:
Small businesses and other small entities: Directly benefit from stronger procedural protections. They must be considered more fully in agency economic impact analyses (including indirect costs) and gain a formal petition process to the SBA Chief Counsel. They also get clearer published guidance and a public comment avenue when a rule is determined to have significant effects on them. This increases transparency and gives small entities more leverage to influence or delay rules that would impose substantial costs.
Federal agencies and agency rulemaking staffs: Face added analytic tasks (identifying and quantifying indirect costs), documentation duties (guidance posting, meetings), new timelines, and new procedural steps when the SBA Chief Counsel finds problems. Agencies may need to reallocate staff time and legal resources to respond to SBA petitions, conduct additional analyses, and complete retrospective reviews on schedule. Because the Act provides no new appropriations, agencies must absorb these costs internally, potentially slowing other regulatory work.
Small Business Administration (Office of Advocacy/Chief Counsel): Gains a stronger, formal oversight and enforcement role. The Chief Counsel will receive petitions, make findings about likely significant impacts, and can trigger mandatory agency follow-up actions and notices. The Office’s workload and influence increase.
Regulated industries and compliance advisers: May face more visible review processes, additional opportunities to influence or block rules, and potential temporary suspension of rules when agencies miss 10‑year reviews. Compliance planning must account for the possibility of lapsed rules or extra rounds of guidance and meetings.
General public and downstream consumers: Could experience both benefits (better-tailored rules that account for small-entity impacts) and costs (slower rule implementation or temporary lapses in regulatory protections if rules lapse due to missed reviews).
Overall effect: the bill raises the procedural bar for agencies to claim minimal small‑entity impacts, gives small entities clearer paths to challenge agency determinations, and creates a sanction (temporary cessation) for agencies that miss legislatively required retrospective reviews. This increases transparency and small-entity input but also increases administrative workload, potential delays, and regulatory uncertainty unless agencies reassign resources to comply.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Prove It Act of 2025
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Small Business, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced February 10, 2025 by Brad Finstad · Last progress February 10, 2025
Ordered to be Reported in the Nature of a Substitute by the Yeas and Nays: 14 - 12.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Small Business. H. Rept. 119-108, Part I.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by the Yeas and Nays: 15 - 11.