Read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs.
The Prove It Act of 2025 amends the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require agencies to consider reasonably foreseeable indirect costs to small entities and to increase transparency and review when agencies certify rules won’t have significant economic impacts on small entities. It creates a petition and review process at the SBA Office of Advocacy (Chief Counsel) for such certifications, sets short timelines for prima facie and full reviews, and can require agencies to perform full initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses if the Chief Counsel finds significant impact.
Liberals worry procedural tools will weaken protections; conservatives view them as deregulatory checks
Technocratic, small-business oriented reforms could find House support, but administrative opposition and committee scrutiny create moderate hurdles.
The Prove It Act of 2025 amends the Regulatory Flexibility Act to require agencies to consider reasonably foreseeable indirect costs to small entities and to increase transparency and review when agencies certify rules won’t have significant economic impacts on small entities.
It creates a petition and review process at the SBA Office of Advocacy (Chief Counsel) for such certifications, sets short timelines for prima facie and full reviews, and can require agencies to perform full initial and final regulatory flexibility analyses if the Chief Counsel finds significant impact.
The bill also requires publication of guidance for rules likely to affect many small entities, strengthens factors for 10-year periodic rule reviews (including indirect costs), and provides that rules not reviewed within 10 years may cease to be effective unless reinstated after a public notice period.
Technocratic deregulatory procedural bill with limited fiscal impact but meaningful administrative and legal consequences; enactment depends on cross-chamber consensus and agency pushback.
How solid the drafting looks.
Liberals worry procedural tools will weaken protections; conservatives view them as deregulatory checks
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Liberals worry procedural tools will weaken protections; conservatives view them as deregulatory checks
Supports greater transparency and small-business input in theory but is cautious.
Concerned the bill creates procedural hurdles, judicially reviewable certifications, and a penalty that could exempt small entities from protections if agencies are deemed noncooperative.
Sees reasonable goals in increasing small-business input and transparency but worries about administrative burden and legal uncertainty.
Likely to favor measured fixes and clarifications to timelines, funding, and penalty language before full support.
Likely supportive because the bill strengthens small-business protections, forces agencies to account for indirect costs, and creates mechanisms to limit burdensome regulation.
Views SBA oversight and rules-forfeiture incentives as effective deregulatory tools.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Technocratic deregulatory procedural bill with limited fiscal impact but meaningful administrative and legal consequences; enactment depends on cross-chamber consensus and agency pushback.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Liberals worry procedural tools will weaken protections; conservatives view them as deregulatory checks
Technocratic deregulatory procedural bill with limited fiscal impact but meaningful administrative and legal consequences; enactment depend…
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for Prove It Act of 2025.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.