Sec. 201 Plan for review of existing rules
In general— The DOGE shall conduct a review of the Code of Federal Regulations to identify and, in coordination with the Director of the Office of Management and Budget and any relevant agency head, repeal rules and sets of rules that collectively implement a regulatory program that should be repealed to lower the cost of regulation to the economy.
Priority— The DOGE shall give priority in the review to rules or sets of rules that—
are major rules or include major rules;
have been in effect more than 15 years;
impose paperwork burdens that could be reduced substantially without significantly diminishing regulatory effectiveness;
impose disproportionately high costs on entities that qualify as small entities within the meaning of section 601(6) of title 5, United States Code; or
could be strengthened in their effectiveness while reducing regulatory costs.
Goal— The DOGE shall have as a goal to achieve a reduction of at least 33 percent in the cumulative costs of Federal regulation with a minimal reduction in the overall effectiveness of such regulation by no later than July 4, 2026, by coordinating with the Director, the Administrator, and relevant agency heads to repeal rules or sets of rules identified pursuant to subsection (d) of this section.
Nature of review— To identify which rules and sets of rules should be repealed to lower the cost of regulation to the economy, the DOGE shall apply the following criteria:
Whether the original purpose of the rule or set of rules was achieved, and the rule or set of rules could be repealed without significant recurrence of adverse effects or conduct that the rule or set of rules was intended to prevent or reduce.
Whether the implementation, compliance, administration, enforcement or other costs of the rule or set of rules to the economy are not justified by the benefits to society within the United States that are directly attributable to the rule or set of rules produced by the expenditure of those costs.
Whether the rule or set of rules has been rendered unnecessary or obsolete, taking into consideration the length of time since the rule was made and the degree to which technology, economic conditions, market practices, or other relevant factors have changed in the subject area affected by the rule or set of rules.
Whether the rule or set of rules is ineffective at achieving the purposes of the rule or set of rules when evaluated using data analytics and statistical relationships, or unable to be evaluated using such standards.
Whether the rule or set of rules overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other Federal rules, and to the extent feasible, with State and local governmental rules.
Whether the rule or set of rules has excessive compliance costs or is otherwise excessively burdensome, as compared to alternatives that—
specify performance objectives rather than conduct or manners of compliance;
establish economic incentives to encourage desired behavior;
provide information upon which choices can be made by the public;
incorporate other innovative alternatives rather than agency actions that specify conduct or manners of compliance; or
could in other ways substantially lower costs without significantly undermining effectiveness.
Whether the rule or set of rules inhibits innovation in or growth of the United States economy, such as by impeding the introduction or use of safer or equally safe technology that is newer or more efficient than technology required by or permissible under the rule or set of rules.
Whether or not the rule or set of rules harms competition within the United States economy or the international economic competitiveness of enterprises or entities based in the United States.
Whether the rule or set of rules concerns a major economic or policy question but lacks an explicit statutory basis.
Whether the rule or set of rules imposes costs or burdens disproportionately and predominantly on one segment of society or one industry if the benefits of such rule or set of rules accrue to a distinct segment of society or industry.
Whether the rule or set of rules is justified in whole or in part by a benefit accrued by one or more foreign nations while costs are borne by American consumers, businesses, other entities, or individuals.
Whether the rule or set of rules are not based on the best meaning and plain reading of the enabling statute for the rule or set of rules.
Such other criteria as the DOGE devises to identify rules and sets of rules that can be repealed to eliminate or reduce unnecessarily burdensome costs to the United States economy.
No substantially similar rule To be reissued— A rule that is repealed under subsection (a) of this section or section 101 may not be reissued in substantially the same form, and a new rule that is substantially the same as such a rule may not be issued, unless the reissued or new rule is specifically authorized by a law enacted after the date of the repeal of the original rule.