Sponsors (5)
The bill increases transparency, earlier stakeholder input, and analytic rigor around expensive 'major' federal rules—potentially improving rule fit and predictability—but it also centralizes review and adds procedural requirements that raise costs, slow rulemaking, and risk undervaluing non‑monetizable public benefits.
State, local, Tribal governments, small businesses, and the public will get earlier, clearer, and more accessible notice and opportunities to influence major federal rules (through early notices, consultations, and electronic dockets), improving transparency and the fit of rules to affected communities.
Businesses, state and local governments, and taxpayers will see more consistent and predictable estimates of which rules are 'major' and what their quantified costs, benefits, and job impacts are (including a clear $100M threshold adjusted by CPI-U), helping budgeting, planning, and public comment.
Regulated entities (including businesses and governments) will benefit from requirements that agencies analyze alternatives and select the regulatory option that maximizes quantified net benefits within the statute, which can reduce unnecessary compliance costs and encourage more cost-effective rule choices.
All Americans may experience slower issuance of major rules and delayed public protections or benefits because earlier consultations, expanded analyses, added notices, OIRA oversight, and potential litigation add procedural steps that lengthen rulemaking timelines.
Taxpayers and small agencies will face higher administrative and compliance costs (to perform detailed analyses, consultations, maintain dockets, and respond to OIRA), and smaller agencies with limited analytic capacity may struggle or divert resources away from enforcement and service delivery.
Regulatory decisionmaking could become more centralized and politicized at OIRA, concentrating power to override agency choices and risking that significant non-monetary harms escape 'major rule' scrutiny if OIRA declines designation or overrides agency judgments.
Based on analysis of 10 sections of legislative text.
Tightens UMRA: redefines major rules, requires detailed initial and final impact analyses and early consultation, strengthens OIRA oversight, adds judicial review, and narrows agency choices to maximize net benefits.
Introduced January 21, 2025 by Virginia Ann Foxx · Last progress January 21, 2025
Requires federal agencies to treat more regulations as “major rules,” produce much more detailed regulatory impact analyses early and at final rule stages, and consult broadly with State, local, Tribal, and private‑sector stakeholders before proposing major rules. Gives the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) stronger oversight and reporting duties, requires agencies to choose the alternative that maximizes net benefits (with limited exceptions and OIRA approval to deviate), creates an electronic docket and a 90‑day initiation notice for rulemakings that may become major rules, extends some UMRA requirements to independent regulatory agencies (but exempts Federal Reserve monetary policy), and creates an express right to judicial review of agency compliance for affected parties.