Sponsors
Want to know what is actually in this bill?
This is not an official government website.
Copyright © 2026 PLEJ LC. All rights reserved.
Strengthens protections for small businesses and increases transparency in federal rulemaking by tightening the process agencies must use when they certify a rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. It requires agencies to consider foreseeable indirect costs, publish guidance and supporting documents online for public comment, and creates a new petition and review avenue by which the SBA Chief Counsel for Advocacy can review and potentially require remedial analysis or penalties for improper certifications. Also revises how agencies perform 10‑year retrospective reviews of rules (including consideration of indirect costs and consequences if a required review is missed), applies those review rules to rules issued in the five years prior to enactment and afterward, and prohibits any new appropriations to implement these changes (meaning agencies must use existing funds to comply).
Adds a new requirement to section 603(b) that, where feasible, agencies must include in the initial regulatory flexibility analysis any reasonably foreseeable potential indirect costs the proposed rule may impose on small entities, including (A) small entities that do business with entities directly regulated by the rule, (B) small entities directly regulated by other governmental entities as a result of the rule, and (C) small entities not directly regulated by the agency but subject to other agency rules as a result of the rule.
Modifies section 605(b) language by replacing the phrase 'The agency' with 'Not later than 10 days after completing the certification described in this subsection, the agency'. (Text replacement as specified.)
Inserts a new section 605A titled 'Review procedures relating to initial regulatory flexibility analysis certifications' that establishes procedures for petitions and reviews of agency certifications under section 605(b).
Allows any small entity, group of small entities, or organization representing small entities to petition the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the SBA to review a certification that a proposed rule will not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Requires the Chief Counsel to determine and publicly display the method, timing, and form for disseminating petitions and for requesting consultations on the Office of Advocacy website.
Who is affected and how:
Small businesses and other small entities: Directly benefit from increased transparency, mandatory publication of guidance/analyses, new opportunity to petition the SBA for review, and a stronger requirement that agencies consider indirect costs. These changes make it easier for small entities to see supporting documents, comment, and challenge certifications that their economic impacts were underestimated.
Federal agencies and rulewriters: Face added procedural requirements (considering indirect costs, faster internal deadlines, mandatory publication and comment handling, responding to SBA petitions, and performing potentially additional remedial analyses). These are operational burdens that increase staff time and legal exposure. Because the law forbids new appropriations, agencies must implement these tasks using existing resources, which could strain budgets and slow other work.
SBA Office of the Chief Counsel for Advocacy: Gains a formalized review role and new authorities to publish findings, require meetings, and seek remedial work. That office will need to allocate staff time to handle petitions and perform independent reviews.
The public and regulated parties: Will have greater access to agency guidance related to impactful rules and a clearer administrative path to raise concerns; this may increase public participation and administrative record development.
Regulatory outcomes and timelines: Likely to slow or complicate rulemaking in some cases because agencies must meet tighter procedural steps and may need to conduct additional analyses or engage in remediation following SBA review. Missed retrospective reviews can temporarily suspend rules or require administrative notices, adding uncertainty.
Litigation and administrative disputes: The new review and publication mechanisms may increase legal challenges or administrative appeals, since failures in process or inadequate analysis become more visible and actionable.
Overall effect: The legislation tilts the administrative process toward greater small‑entity protections and public transparency while imposing procedural burdens on agencies, all without providing new funding to cover the added workload.
Adds a new paragraph (6) to subsection (b) requiring consideration 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 review period.
Adds a new subsection (d) establishing that if an agency fails to conduct the required 10-year review, the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business Administration shall notify the agency that the rule has ceased to be effective; the agency must publish a Federal Register notice soliciting comments on reinstatement; if the agency determines the rule should be reinstated based on comments, it has 180 days to complete the review and, upon completion, the rule shall be reinstated notwithstanding the notice-and-comment procedures of section 553.
Modifies subsection (b) of 5 U.S.C. 605 by inserting a timing requirement that the agency act 'not later than 10 days after completing the certification' and adds procedures and related provisions by inserting a new section 605A after section 605.
Adds new section 605A establishing procedures for review of agency certifications under section 605(b), including who may petition, petition form and content requirements, consultation parameters, prima facie and full review processes, timelines for notice and publication, requirements for convening meetings with agency representatives and the Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, mandatory performance of initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses if the Chief Counsel finds significant impact, a penalty that a final rule shall not apply to small entities if the agency fails to assist in review, and specification of when certain Chief Counsel actions constitute final agency action for judicial review.
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 and other relevant documents (including updated interpretations) on regulations.gov or a similar website and allow for public comment to enable feedback from small entities.
Expand sections to see detailed analysis
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced February 10, 2025 by Joni Ernst · Last progress February 10, 2025
Prove It Act of 2025
Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship. Hearings held.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
Introduced in Senate