FEES Act of 2026

Bill Number

H.R. 9536

Origin Chamber

House

Congress

119th Congress, Session 2

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-06-30: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.

Last Updated

2026-07-06T13:38:29Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose This legislation aims to modify rules for awarding attorney's fees in certain federal agency proceedings and civil actions against the United States, impose limits on such awards, restrict fee payments in specific settlement agreements, and require an assessment of effects on federally managed lands.

Key Provisions

• Amends section 504 of title 5, United States Code, to limit eligibility for fee awards in agency adversary adjudications to prevailing parties with a direct and personal monetary interest, such as from personal injury, property damage, or unpaid disbursements.
• Adds caps of $200,000 per adjudication or no more than three adjudications per calendar year, with exceptions for class actions or cases involving the Social Security Administration or Department of Veterans Affairs.
• Amends section 2412 of title 28, United States Code, to apply similar eligibility limits and caps to civil actions (excluding tort cases), require courts to reduce awards for pro bono work, and expand denial authority for cases involving obdurate, dilatory, mendacious, oppressive, or bad-faith conduct.
• Prohibits inclusion of attorney's fees or litigation costs in settlement agreements or consent decrees that result in federal regulations or guidance documents.
• Defines "guidance document" broadly to include memoranda, bulletins, directives, and similar agency statements without the force of law, and defines "regulation" as agency rules intended to have the force of law under informal or formal rulemaking.
• Directs the Secretary of the Interior to convene an independent scientific panel within five years to assess impacts on ecological, social, and economic sustainability of federally managed lands, covering forest health, wildfire risk, biodiversity, watershed quality, and economic productivity.
• Requires the panel to include at least two hunters or anglers, one forest products industry affiliate, one rural water utility affiliate, and one wildlife biologist, with a report to congressional committees.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Narrows the scope of the Equal Access to Justice Act by adding a "direct and personal monetary interest" requirement and annual or per-case monetary and numerical limits on awards.
• Alters judicial discretion in fee reductions by mandating adjustments for pro bono elements and broadening grounds for denial beyond "unduly and unreasonably" prolonging litigation.
• Introduces a new statutory bar on fee payments in settlements tied to regulations or guidance documents.
• Establishes a delayed, unrelated review mechanism focused on land management outcomes.

Potential Impacts

• Government agencies may face reduced exposure to fee awards, potentially lowering litigation costs and influencing decisions on settlements or defenses.
• Citizens and organizations pursuing claims against agencies could encounter stricter eligibility rules and lower maximum recoveries, affecting access to legal representation.
• No direct effects on international relations are specified.
• The land assessment could generate data on federal forest and rangeland management but appears disconnected from the fee-related provisions.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Federal agencies involved in adjudications, civil litigation, or rulemaking.
• Individuals and entities filing claims or suits against the United States, particularly those without direct monetary interests.
• Attorneys handling such cases.
• Groups involved in class actions or matters involving the Social Security Administration or Department of Veterans Affairs.
• Entities participating in settlement negotiations over regulations or guidance.
• Parties connected to federally managed lands, including hunters, anglers, forest products industry, rural water utilities, and wildlife biologists.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• The eligibility restrictions and caps represent targeted limits on a longstanding fee-shifting statute, potentially raising questions about equal access to judicial review.
• The settlement prohibition applies only to outcomes producing regulations or guidance, leaving other settlements unaffected.
• The independent panel requirement introduces a science-based reporting obligation on land sustainability, though its connection to fee reforms is not explained in the text.

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

Sponsor

Rep. Tiffany, Thomas P. [R-WI-7]

Cosponsors (1)

Rep. Hageman, Harriet M. [R-WY-At Large]

Recent Actions

• 2026-06-30: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
• 2026-06-30: Introduced in House
• 2026-06-30: Introduced in House

Bill Versions

• Fixing Egregiously Expensive Suits Act of 2026 — issued 2026-06-30 — PDF (8 pages)