Skip to main content
×
×
Home

One Step Forward, Two Steps Back? The New U.S. Regulatory Budgeting Rules in Light of the International Experience

  • Andrea Renda (a1)
Abstract

Executive Order (EO) 13771 on “Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs” introduces a new regulatory budgeting system in the U.S. federal rulemaking process. International experience suggests that the new rule, aimed both at reducing the number of regulations and the volume of regulatory costs, will focus on a subset of regulatory impacts, most certainly the direct costs imposed by regulation on businesses, or even a subset thereof. The paper discusses possible ways to make sense of the new rule, without undermining the soundness of benefit-cost analysis mandated by EO12866. The paper concludes that the new system, while potentially promoting more retrospective regulatory reviews, will risk fundamentally affecting the quality of regulation in the United States, generating frictions and inefficiencies throughout the administration, to the detriment of social welfare.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Administrative Conference of the United States (2014). Retrospective review of agency rules. Available online at https://www.acus.gov/research-projects/retrospective-review-agencyrules.
Boeheim, Michael & Renda, Andrea (2006). Pilot project on administrative burdens. Report by WiFo and CEPS for the European Commission, DG Enterprise, Nr. B2/ENTR/05/091-FC.
House of Commons (2016). Committee on Public Accounts, “Better Regulation. Eighteenth Report of Session 2016–17”, 14 September 2016.
Livermore, Michael(2014). Cost-Benefit Analysis and Agency Independence. In University of Chicago Law Review (Vol. 81, p. 609).
Mendelson, Nina A. & Wiener, Jonathan B. (2014). Responding To Agency Avoidance of OIRA. Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 37(2), 448521 at p. 459.
Renda, Andrea(2017). Feasibility Study on the Introduction of EU Reduction Targets on Regulatory Costs. Study for RegWatchEurope, CEPS Research Report no. 2017/10.
Renda, Andrea, Luchetta, Giacomo, Schrefler, Lorna & Zavatta, Roberto(2013). “Assessing the Costs and Benefits of Regulation”, a Study for the European Commission. At http://ec.europa.eu/smart-regulation/impact/commission_guidelines/docs/131210_cba_study_sg_final.pdf.
UK National Audit Office (2016). The Business Impact Target. Cutting the Cost of Red Tape. At https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/The-Business-Impact-Target-cutting-the-cost-of-regulation.pdf.
U.S. Office of Management and Budget (2003). Circular A-4 of September 17, 2003, Regulatory Analysis.
U.S. President (1993). Regulatory Planning and Review. Executive Order 12866 of 30 September 1993. Federal Register, 58(190), 58 FR 51735; October 4, 1993, at www.archives.gov/federal-register/executiveorders/pdf/12866.pdf.
U.S. President (2011). Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review. Executive Order 13563. Federal Register, 76(14), 3821.
Wiener, Jonathan B. & Ribeiro, Daniel(2017). Environmental Regulation Going Retro: Learning Foresight from Hindsight. Journal of Land Use & Environmental Law, forthcoming.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Benefit-Cost Analysis
  • ISSN: 2194-5888
  • EISSN: 2152-2812
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-benefit-cost-analysis
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Keywords

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed