REG Budgeting Act of 2025

Bill Number

H.R. 3279

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Government Operations and Politics

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2025-05-08: Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.

Last Updated

2025-06-05T14:29:49Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The REG Budgeting Act of 2025 aims to control the growth of federal regulations by requiring the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to set annual limits on "additional unfunded regulatory costs." These are new costs imposed on individuals or businesses by federal rules without dedicated funding. The goal is to promote efficiency in government by ensuring regulations do not impose excessive new burdens each fiscal year, while allowing Congress to oversee and approve increases.

Key Provisions

• Establishment of Limits:
• By September 30 each year, the OMB Director must set an overall limit on total additional unfunded regulatory costs for all federal agencies in the next fiscal year, plus individual limits for each agency.
• Agencies must submit proposed limits 90 days in advance, with detailed justifications.
• Limits may require agencies to reduce existing cumulative unfunded costs to offset new ones.
• No net increase in costs is allowed without congressional approval via joint resolution; until approved, a "no net increase" default applies.

• Reports and Transparency:
• OMB must submit reports to congressional committees within 7 days of setting limits, explaining the basis (e.g., costs considered), and publish them on a designated public website.
• Agencies cannot finalize rules imposing new costs until these reports are submitted.
• An annual report to Congress by October 30 details compliance, exceedances, and justifications.

• Procedures for Exceeding Limits:
• If a rule would exceed a limit, it cannot take effect without congressional approval via joint resolution.
• Agencies must notify OMB before finalizing such rules, providing justifications, exceedance amounts, alternatives considered, and compliance with any offset requirements.
• OMB reviews and responds; if it agrees to exceed, it notifies Congress with details.
• Rule notices must include statements on exceedances, justifications, and OMB's determinations.

• Exceptions:
• Rules can proceed without limits if the President issues an executive order for emergencies (e.g., health/safety threats), criminal law enforcement, national security, or international trade agreements.
• Monetary policy rules by the Federal Reserve are fully exempt.

• Enforcement and Oversight:
• Creates an Associate Administrator for Regulatory Budgeting in OMB (appointed by the President, paid at Executive Schedule Level IV) to oversee implementation and issue guidelines within 90 days of enactment.
• Provides for judicial review: Affected parties can challenge agency non-compliance in court under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), with courts able to order remedies.

• Definitions:
• "Additional unfunded regulatory cost": New costs from federal rules not required in prior years.
• "Unfunded regulatory cost": Any direct or quantifiable cost (estimated per OMB Circular A-4 guidelines) imposed by a rule.
• Applies to "rules" under the APA (agency regulations with legal force).

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a new "regulatory budgeting" framework, absent in current law, which amends 44 U.S.C. § 3503 to add the Associate Administrator position.
• Shifts rulemaking authority by requiring congressional joint resolutions for net cost increases or exceeding rules, unlike the current process where agencies finalize rules after public notice and comment under the APA (5 U.S.C. § 553).
• Adds mandatory cost statements in rule notices and pre-finalization notifications to OMB, enhancing transparency beyond existing requirements like regulatory impact analyses.
• No changes to core APA rulemaking, but overlays procedural hurdles for cost-imposing rules.

Potential Impacts

• On Government Agencies: Federal agencies (e.g., EPA, FDA) will face stricter constraints on issuing new rules, potentially delaying or scaling back regulations to stay within limits. This could reduce administrative burdens but increase coordination with OMB and Congress.
• On Citizens and Businesses: Individuals and entities subject to regulations may experience fewer new compliance costs, easing economic burdens (e.g., on small businesses). However, it could slow protections in areas like environment or health if rules are limited.
• On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though exceptions for trade agreements ensure compliance with global commitments without delays.
• Overall, aims to curb regulatory overreach, potentially lowering annual federal regulatory costs estimated in billions, but could hinder timely responses to emerging issues.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal Agencies: Primary targets, as heads must propose limits, justify exceedances, and alter rulemaking to fit budgets.
• Congress: Gains oversight via approvals and reports, affecting committees like House Oversight and Government Reform and Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
• Businesses and Regulated Entities: Benefit from cost caps but may challenge rules in court if non-compliant.
• OMB and President: OMB leads implementation; President appoints key personnel and can waive via executive orders.
• General Public: Indirectly affected through changes in regulatory protections and costs passed to consumers.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Enhances APA judicial review for compliance, allowing courts to strike non-conforming rules, but may lead to litigation over cost estimates or limit interpretations. Definitions tie to established OMB guidelines, reducing ambiguity.
• Constitutional: Increases congressional role in executive rulemaking, potentially reinforcing separation of powers by checking agency independence (no direct delegation issues, as limits are advisory until approved). Could face challenges if seen as unduly burdening executive functions.
• Political: Politically neutral in text but aligns with efforts to reduce regulatory burdens (e.g., similar to past REINS Act proposals). May spark partisan debates on balancing oversight with agency expertise; implementation depends on OMB's guidelines and congressional action on resolutions.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Rep. Fallon, Pat [R-TX-4]

Cosponsors (2)

Rep. Comer, James [R-KY-1], Rep. Foxx, Virginia [R-NC-5]

Recent Actions

• 2025-05-08: Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
• 2025-05-08: Referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, 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.
• 2025-05-08: Introduced in House
• 2025-05-08: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Renewing Efficiency in Government by Budgeting Act of 2025 — issued 2025-05-08 — PDF (18 pages)