The U.S. House of Representatives is considering the Unfunded Mandates Accountability and Transparency Act of 2025 (“the Act”). This bill would require impact analyses for new rules from the Employee Benefits Security Administration (EBSA), the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), and other federal agencies with an anticipated economic impact of $100 million or more.
According to the Congressional Budget Office, (CBO), if enacted into law, the bill could primarily affect proposed health and labor regulations. Otherwise, the CBO projects that the bill would have little or no direct impact on federal spending or revenue.
In that respect, the bill may be beneficial for employers, brokers, insurers, and other parties in staving off burdensome legal requirements. Previously, employer and benefits groups have actively opposed some benefits regulations, such as those that would affect how employer healthcare plans meet standards for behavioral health plans, or “non-quantitative treatment limits” (NQTLs). In response to this opposition, the Trump administration ultimately blocked implementation of federal NQTL rules earlier this year. Likewise, other benefits industry groups have used comment period, regulatory analysis, and other rules to slow down, alter, or even eliminate other federal proposed rules.
The law would require the federal agency proposing the rule to talk to parties within the private sector, including small businesses, that are likely to be affected. In addition to these mandatory discussions, the federal agency would have to issue a cost-benefit analysis for the proposed rule and evaluate possible alternatives. Furthermore, the Act would allow members of Congress to slow down or block bills that may impose high costs on private industry or other parties. Enforcement of the legal cost-analysis requirements would rest with the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, an office of the White House.
Therefore, if the Act becomes law as written, it could directly impact implementation of any new pharmacy benefit manager (PBM) oversight bills. The Act would enable employers, benefits groups, drug manufacturers, and others to have a direct hand in shaping federal PBM regulations. Likewise, the Act could affect any federal agencies that try to make changes to existing Affordable Care Act (ACA) or the individual coverage health reimbursement arrangement (ICHRA) rules.
Under the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995, federal agencies already are required to prepare impact analyses for many proposed rules. However, that law does not require an impact analysis if they determine that the proposed rule is not a major regulation.
Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., chair of the House Rules Committee, introduced the Act due to cost of compliance requirements that are hidden in many proposed rules. She believes that imposing costly rules on local governments and small businesses should not occur unless policymakers and regulators are aware of the costs of those rules. The bill has two Republican and two Democratic cosponsors.
The House Rules, Oversight and Government Reform, Budget, and Judiciary Committees all have jurisdiction over the bill. The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee voted to support the bill during a May meeting.
HBL has experience in all areas of benefits and employment law, offering a comprehensive solution to all your business benefits and HR/employment needs. We help ensure you are in compliance with the complex requirements of ERISA and the IRS code, as well as those laws that impact you and your employees. Together, we reduce your exposure to potential legal or financial penalties. Learn more by calling 470-571-1007.
Hall Benefits Law, LLC
