50-State Research: Fiscal Analysis in Rulemaking

Administrative State

Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control • Executive control • Judicial control •Legislative control • Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.

Most states require a fiscal analysis as a part of agency rulemaking. Depending on the state, statute may require an analysis of the anticipated costs of a new rule (cost analysis), analysis of costs and benefits weighed together (cost-benefit analysis), or (in a minority of states) may not require a fiscal analysis as part of rulemaking. This page summarizes the findings of a Ballotpedia study conducted in 2025, which compared statuatorily-mandated fiscal analysis requirements for state agency rulemaking. Ballotpedia identified 47 states with statutory fiscal analysis requirements, and also documented additional requirements in various states, such as providing for different analyses for different types of rules, for other organizations to conduct an analysis, and for the state legislature to review and approve of a rule found to exceed a cost threshold.

This research analyzed each state's legal requirements by answering the following four questions:

What triggers a fiscal analysis requirement under a particular state's laws?
What is in a required fiscal analysis?
Who conducts a required fiscal analysis?
Does a fiscal analysis trigger an additional event?

This page features the following sections:

Key findings
Summary of key research findings
Read more
Research tagging system
The tagging system used for this research
Read more
Table summarizing findings
Table summarizing fiscal analysis requirements for rulemaking in the states
Read more
Text of state statutes
Text of state statutory provisions providing for rulemaking fiscal analysis
Read more

Summary of findings

Ballotpedia's survey of state statutes produced the following key insights (as of October 2025):

Most states (47) require a fiscal analysis for rulemaking, with a majority (31) requiring a fiscal analysis for all rulemaking.
Most required fiscal analyses are conducted by the rulemaking agency.
Fiscal analysis triggers additional requirements (for example, legislative review) in a minority (17) of states.

Most states require a fiscal analysis for rulemaking

Ballotpedia's survey of state statutes found that 47 states required a fiscal analysis as a part of rulemaking. Ballotpedia identified three states (New Mexico, Wyoming, and Hawaii^[1]) that did not generally require a fiscal analysis before promulgating rules.

Of the 47 states with fiscal analysis requirements, 31 required a fiscal analysis for all rulemaking, and 16 required a fiscal analysis for some rulemaking.

A majority of states (28) required a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking, in which the reviewing body weighs the benefits of a proposed rule along with its expected costs. Nineteen states required an analysis of expected costs alone.

The following map shows states that Ballotpedia has identified as requiring cost and cost-benefit analyses (indicated by green and orange colors, respectively), whether those states require analysis for all or some rules (darker and lighter shades of color, respectively), and whether a state requires an additional action following the analysis (indicated by diagonal lines):

Most fiscal analyses are conducted by the rulemaking agency

Of the 47 states Ballotpedia has identified as requiring a fiscal analysis as part of rulemaking, a majority (35) require the rulemaking agency to conduct the analysis. Three other states require the rulemaking agency to conduct an analysis using standards developed by another agency, while six states require the rulemaking agency to collaborate with another agency when conducting an analysis, and one state (Montana) requires the rulemaking agency to collaborate with a legislative organization to conduct an analysis. Two states (Indiana and Virginia) require another agency to conduct required fiscal analyses.

Fiscal analyses trigger additional requirements in a minority (17) of states

Of the 47 states identified as having a fiscal analysis requirement, 17 states require additional actions (such as legislative or executive review) after an analysis is completed. Thirty states do not have additional requirements for fiscal analyses conducted as part of rulemaking.

In 13 of the 17 states where state law requires additional actions after a fiscal analysis, the fiscal analysis is required to be a cost-benefit analysis. In four states (Florida, Louisiana, South Dakota, and Utah), the fiscal analysis required is a cost analysis.

Fiscal analysis tagging system

For its 50-state analysis, Ballotpedia used a tagging system to classify statutory requirements. The tags are divided into four groups (see below), organized around four questions:

What triggers a fiscal analysis requirement?
What is in a required analysis?
Who conducts a required analysis?
(when an analysis is conducted) Does the analysis trigger an additional event?

The tags used to answer each question can be found in the drop-down menu below.

Expand All

What triggers a fiscal analysis requirement?

Analysis is:

Required for all rulemaking
Regulatory action cost threshold
Required for specific types of rule
Required for rules with economic impact
Required following legislative request
Required following business/public request
Exception: emergency rulemaking
Exception: implementation of federal law or rule
Exception: implementation of existing state law or rule
Exception: specific type of rule

What is in a required analysis?

Analysis includes:

Costs to agency
Some rules: cost to agency
Costs to regulated entities
Some rules: costs to regulated entities
Costs to economy
Costs to public
Some rules: costs to public
Costs to state/local governments
Some rules: costs to state/local governments
Benefit to public
Costs and benefits to public weighed together
Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together
Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together
Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness
Data-driven analysis specified
Consideration of public-provided analysis required

Who conducts a required analysis?

Does analysis trigger an additional event?

Analysis leads to:

Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold
Legislative approval of rule action required: all rules
Legislative review of rule action: above cost threshold
Legislative review of rule action: all rules
Discretionary legislative review of rule
Judicial review of analysis required
Executive review of analysis required
Government entity can request additional review: all rules
Government entity can request additional review: some rules
Opens citizen challenge mechanism: rules above cost threshold
Opens citizen challenge mechanism: all rules
Demonstration of cost offset required: rules above cost threshold
Demonstration of cost offset required: all rules
Demonstration of costs weighed with benefits: all rules
Demonstration of costs weighed with benefits: some rules
Publication of analysis required
No further action required

These tags are used to derive a top-line classification of each state, identifying whether a fiscal analysis is required:

for all or some rules (or not generally required at all)
to analyze costs or to weigh costs and benefits together
to lead to an additional event (like a cost threshold-based legislative review), or to be published as an otherwise routine part of rulemaking.

For example, Ballotpedia has identified the following tags for California:

Required for all rulemaking
Cost to regulated entities
Cost to economy
Cost to public
Benefit to public
Agency conducts analysis
Standards developed by specified entity required
Publication of analysis required

Because the "Required for all rulemaking" tag, cost and benefit tags, and the "Publication of analysis required" tags are used, California is identified as a state in the All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking top-line category.

Conversely, the following tags have been identified for Florida:

Regulatory action cost threshold
Exception: emergency rulemaking
Costs to agency
Costs to regulated entities
Costs to economy
Costs to public
Costs to state/local governments
Agency conducts analysis
Other executive agency conducts analysis
Collaboration between tagged organizations required
Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold
Opens citizen challenge mechanism: all rules
Publication of analysis required

This results in a top-line categorization of Florida as Some rules: cost analysis for further review (because "All rules" and "benefit" tags are not used, and because a "Legislative approval" tag is used to answer the "Does analysis trigger an additional event?" question).

Rulemaking fiscal analysis in the states

The table below includes each state in alphabetical order and indicates requirements for cost or cost-benefit analysis in rulemaking.

50-state fiscal analysis overview
State	Top-line summary	Fiscal analysis details*
State	Top-line	What triggers a fiscal analysis requirement?	What is in a required analysis?	Who conducts a required analysis?	Does fiscal analysis trigger an additional event?
Alabama	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for rules with economic impact, Required following business/public request, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Cost to economy, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Alaska	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Some rules: cost to regulated entities, Some rules: costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Arizona	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: specific type of rule	Costs to economy, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis	Executive review of analysis required, Publication of analysis required
Arkansas	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Regulatory action cost threshold	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments, Costs and benefits to public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Demonstration of cost weighed with benefits: some rules, Publication of analysis required
California	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Cost to regulated entities, Cost to economy, Cost to public, Benefit to public	Agency conducts analysis, Standards developed by specified entity required	Publication of analysis required
Colorado	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required following business/public request	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments, Benefit to public, Costs and benefits to public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis, Standards developed by specified entity required	Executive review of analysis required, Publication of analysis required
Connecticut	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Cost to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Delaware	Some rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for rules with economic impact, Exception: emergency rulemaking, Exception: implementation of federal law or rule, Exception: specific type of rule	Cost to regulated entities	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Florida	Some rules: cost analysis for further review	Regulatory action cost threshold, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to public, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis, Collaboration between tagged organizations required	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Opens citizen challenge mechanism: all rules, Publication of analysis required
Georgia	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities	Agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Hawaii	Analysis not generally required for rulemaking	Required following business/public request	Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Idaho	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for rules with economic impact, Required following legislative request	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs and benefits to public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action: all rules, Publication of analysis required
Illinois	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for rules with economic impact	Costs to regulated entities, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Indiana	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Regulatory action cost threshold	Costs to economy, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Other executive agency conducts analysis, Standards developed by specified entity required	Legislative review of rule action: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Iowa	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to public, Costs to state/local governments, Costs and benefits to public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Kansas	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs and benefits to public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Kentucky	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Louisiana	All rules: cost analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative review of rule action: above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Maine	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Maryland	Some rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for rules with economic impact	Costs to economy	Agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Massachusetts	Some rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for rules with economic impact	Costs to economy	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Michigan	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking, Exception: specific type of rule	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to public, Benefit to the public, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together, Costs and benefits to the public weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Minnesota	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated agencies, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis, Collaboration between tagged organizations required	Publication of analysis required
Mississippi	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Cost to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments, Benefit to public, Costs and benefits to the public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Missouri	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking, Required for rules with economic impact, Regulatory action cost threshold	Costs to agency, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments, Costs to state/local governments weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Montana	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required following legislative request, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to public, Benefit to public, Costs to state/local governments, Costs and benefits weighted for effectiveness	Agency conducts analysis, Legislative organization conducts analysis	Discretionary legislative review of rule, Publication of analysis required
Nebraska	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Nevada	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to economy, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
New Hampshire	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to economy, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together	Agency conducts analysis, Standards developed by specified entity required	Publication of analysis required
New Jersey	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to economy	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
New Mexico	Analysis not generally required for rulemaking	-	-	-	-
New York	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
North Carolina	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to state/local governments, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis, Collaboration between tagged organizations required	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
North Dakota	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Regulatory action cost threshold, Required for rules with economic impact, Required following legislative request	Costs to agency, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Ohio	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Oklahoma	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Some rules: costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments, costs to economy, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Oregon	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to agency, Costs to economy, Costs to public, Costs to state/local governments, Consideration of public-required analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Pennsylvania	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking	Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness, Benefit to public, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis	Executive review of analysis required
Rhode Island	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
South Carolina	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required following legislative request, Exception: emergency rulemaking, Exception: specific type of rule	Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together, Costs to economy, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis, Other executive agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: all rules
South Dakota	All rules: cost analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to state/local governments, Costs to economy	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative review of rule action: all rules
Tennessee	All rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Government entity can request additional review: all rules, Publication of analysis required
Texas	All rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for all rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Some rules: costs to agency, Some rules: costs to regulated entities, Some rules: costs to public, Some rules: costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
Utah	All rules: cost analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments, Costs to economy, Consideration of public-provided analysis required	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Publication of analysis required
Vermont	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits to regulated entities weighed together, Costs and benefits to state/local government weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative review of rule action: all rules
Virginia	Some rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking**	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: specific type of rule	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments	Other executive agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Washington	Some rules: cost-benefit analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for specific types of rule, Exception: emergency rulemaking, Exception: implementation of federal law or rule	Costs and benefits to public weighed together, Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness	Agency conducts analysis	Publication of analysis required
West Virginia	Some rules: cost analysis routine part of rulemaking	Required for specific types of rule	Costs to regulated entities, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	No further action required
Wisconsin	All rules: cost-benefit analysis for further review	Required for all rulemaking, Exception: emergency rulemaking	Costs and benefits weighed for effectiveness, consideration of public-provided analysis required, Costs to regulated entities, Costs to public, Costs to economy, Costs to state/local governments	Agency conducts analysis	Legislative approval of rule action required: rules above cost threshold, Government entity can request additional review: some rules, No further action required
Wyoming	Analysis not generally required for rulemaking	-	-	-	-
Information based on 2025 Ballotpedia 50-state survey of fiscal analysis requirements for executive agency rulemaking. *Note: according to a January 15, 2022 executive order, all Virginia regulations must receive a cost-benefit analysis.^[2]

Text of state statutory provisions providing for rulemaking fiscal analysis

This section contains text from state statutes that require fiscal analysis to be conducted as a part of agency rulemaking.

Expand All

Alabama

: See also: Alabama Constitution and Alabama Administrative Procedure Act

Alabama has a clear provision for cost-benefit analysis for proposed rules but a negatively affected business must request the analysis. Agencies are also not required to comply in the case of emergency rules defined as an immediate threat to public welfare, health, or safety.

AL Code § 41-22-5.1 (2024) (c):

"... If, prior to the end of the notice period, a business notifies an agency that it will be negatively impacted by an action proposed under subsection (b), the agency shall prepare and submit to the committee the information provided by the affected business as well as a business impact analysis of the proposed action. The analysis shall estimate the number of businesses subject to the agency’s proposal as well as the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for compliance with the proposal. An agency shall prepare the business impact analysis using information available to the agency in the normal course of business and utilizing the expertise and experience of existing agency employees."^[3]

AL Code § 41-22-5 (2024) (b)(1):

"... Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter to the contrary, if an agency finds that an immediate danger to the public health, safety, or welfare requires adoption of a rule upon fewer than 35 days’ notice or that action is required by or to comply with a federal statute or regulation which requires adoption of a rule upon fewer than 35 days’ notice and states in writing its reasons for that finding to the committee, the agency may proceed without prior notice or hearing or upon any abbreviated notice and hearing that it finds practicable, to adopt an emergency rule."^[4]

Alaska

: See also: Alaska Constitution and Alaska Administrative Procedure Act

Alaska statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

AK Stat § 44.62.190 (2024):

"(d) Along with a notice furnished under (a)(2), (4)(A), or (6) of this section, the state agency, except the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, the Board of Fisheries, the Board of Game, and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, shall include
(1) the reason for the proposed action, including, if applicable, an identification of the law, order, decision, or other action of the federal government or a federal or state court that is the basis for the proposed action; in this paragraph, “federal government” means a department, agency, corporation, or instrumentality of the United States government;
(2) the initial cost to the state agency of implementation;
(3) the estimated annual costs, based on a good faith effort to estimate the costs in the aggregate for each of the following categories using the information available to the state agency, to
(A) private persons to comply with the proposed action;
(B) the state agency for implementation and to other state agencies to comply with the proposed action; and
(C) municipalities to comply with the proposed action;
(4) the name of the contact person for the state agency; and
(5) the origin of the proposed action.
(e) Notwithstanding (a) of this section, if a person who is to receive a notice under (a) of this section requests that the state agency mail the notice, the state agency shall furnish the notice to the person by mail.
(f) To the extent feasible, the subject line of electronic mail and the title of a written publication providing the information required by (d) of this section must give the reader a fair idea of the substance of the proposed new regulation, the proposed amended regulation, or the regulation proposed for repeal.
(g) Along with a notice furnished under (a)(2), (4)(A), or (6) of this section, the Regulatory Commission of Alaska, the Board of Fisheries, the Board of Game, and the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission shall include the reason for the proposed action, the initial cost of implementation to the state agency, the estimated annual costs of implementation to the state agency, the name of a contact person, and the origin of the proposed action."^[5]

Arizona

: See also: Arizona Constitution and Arizona Administrative Procedure Act

Arizona has a Governor's review council in with specific direction not to approve a rule if it does not contain a generally accurate economic, small business and consumer impact statement. The statute further specifies that agencies must produce an economic small business and consumer impact statement that lists the impacts to agencies, political subdivisions and businesses that are affected.

Arizona specifies several exemptions including the cost-benefit analysis requirement under § 41-1005 for certain agency rules.

AZ Rev Stat § 41-1055 (2024):

"B. The economic, small business and consumer impact statement shall include: ...3. A cost benefit analysis of the following:
(a) The probable costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rulemaking. The probable costs to the implementing agency shall include the number of new full-time employees necessary to implement and enforce the proposed rule. The preparer of the economic, small business and consumer impact statement shall notify the joint legislative budget committee of the number of new full-time employees necessary to implement and enforce the rule before the rule is approved by the council.
(b) The probable costs and benefits to a political subdivision of this state directly affected by the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rulemaking.
(c) The probable costs and benefits to businesses directly affected by the proposed rulemaking, including any anticipated effect on the revenues or payroll expenditures of employers who are subject to the proposed rulemaking."^[6]

AZ Rev Stat § 41-1052 (2024):

AZ Rev Stat § 41-1005 (2024):

"A. This chapter does not apply to any:
1. Rule that relates to the use of public works, including streets and highways, under the jurisdiction of an agency if the effect of the order is indicated to the public by means of signs or signals.
2. Order or rule of the Arizona game and fish commission that does the following:
(a) Opens, closes or alters seasons or establishes bag or possession limits for wildlife.
(b) Establishes a fee pursuant to section 5-321, 5-322 or 5-327.
(c) Establishes a license classification, fee or application fee pursuant to title 17, chapter 3, article 2.
(d) Limits the number or use of licenses or permits that are issued to nonresidents pursuant to section 17-332.
3. Rule relating to section 28-641 or to any rule regulating motor vehicle operation that relates to speed, parking, standing, stopping or passing enacted pursuant to title 28, chapter 3.
4. Rule concerning only the internal management of an agency that does not directly and substantially affect the procedural or substantive rights or duties of any segment of the public.
5. Rule that only establishes specific prices to be charged for particular goods or services sold by an agency.
6. Rule concerning only the physical servicing, maintenance or care of agency owned or operated facilities or property.
7. Rule or substantive policy statement concerning inmates or committed youths of a correctional or detention facility in secure custody or patients admitted to a hospital if made by the state department of corrections, the department of juvenile corrections, the board of executive clemency or the department of health services or a facility or hospital under the jurisdiction of the state department of corrections, the department of juvenile corrections or the department of health services."^[8]

Arkansas

: See also: Arkansas Constitution and Arkansas Administrative Procedure Act

Arkansas statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking. Arizona specifies several exemptions including the cost-benefit analysis requirement under § 41-1005 for certain agency rules.

AR Code § 25-15-202 (2024):

AR Code § 25-15-204 (2024):

"(2) An agency shall adopt the least costly rule considered under this section, unless:
(A) The additional benefits of the more costly rule justify its additional cost;
(B) The agency explains its reason for adoption of the more costly rule in writing;
(C) The reason is based on the interests of public health, safety, or welfare; and
(D) The reason is within the scope of the agency's statutory authority."^[10]

California

: See also: California Constitution and California Administrative Procedure Act

California statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

CA Govt Code § 11346.3 (2024):

"(a) A state agency proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal any administrative regulation shall assess the potential for adverse economic impact on California business enterprises and individuals, avoiding the imposition of unnecessary or unreasonable regulations or reporting, recordkeeping, or compliance requirements. For purposes of this subdivision, assessing the potential for adverse economic impact shall require agencies, when proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal a regulation, to adhere to the following requirements, to the extent that these requirements do not conflict with other state or federal laws:
(1) The proposed adoption, amendment, or repeal of a regulation shall be based on adequate information concerning the need for, and consequences of, proposed governmental action.
(2) The state agency, before submitting a proposal to adopt, amend, or repeal a regulation to the office, shall consider the proposal’s impact on business, with consideration of industries affected including the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states. For purposes of evaluating the impact on the ability of California businesses to compete with businesses in other states, an agency shall consider, but not be limited to, information supplied by interested parties.
(3) An economic impact assessment prepared pursuant to this subdivision for a proposed regulation that is not a major regulation or that is a major regulation proposed before November 1, 2013, shall be prepared in accordance with subdivision (b), and shall be included in the initial statement of reasons as required by Section 11346.2. An economic assessment prepared pursuant to this subdivision for a major regulation proposed on or after November 1, 2013, shall be prepared in accordance with subdivision (c), and shall be included in the initial statement of reasons as required by Section 11346.2.
(b) (1) A state agency proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal a regulation that is not a major regulation or that is a major regulation proposed before November 1, 2013, shall prepare an economic impact assessment that assesses whether and to what extent it will affect the following:
(A) The creation or elimination of jobs within the state.
(B) The creation of new businesses or the elimination of existing businesses within the state.
(C) The expansion of businesses currently doing business within the state.
(D) The benefits of the regulation to the health and welfare of California residents, worker safety, and the state’s environment.
(2) This subdivision does not apply to the University of California, the college named in Section 92200 of the Education Code, or the Fair Political Practices Commission.
(3) Information required from a state agency for the purpose of completing the assessment may come from existing state publications.
(4) (A) For purposes of conducting the economic impact assessment pursuant to this subdivision, a state agency may use the consolidated definition of small business in subparagraph (B) in order to determine the number of small businesses within the economy, a specific industry sector, or geographic region. The state agency shall clearly identify the use of the consolidated small business definition in its rulemaking package.
(B) For the exclusive purpose of undertaking the economic impact assessment, a “small business” means a business that is all of the following:
(i) Independently owned and operated.
(ii) Not dominant in its field of operation.
(iii) Has fewer than 100 employees.
(C) Subparagraph (A) shall not apply to a regulation adopted by the Department of Insurance that applies to an insurance company.
(c) (1) Each state agency proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal a major regulation on or after November 1, 2013, shall prepare a standardized regulatory impact analysis in the manner prescribed by the Department of Finance pursuant to Section 11346.36. The standardized regulatory impact analysis shall address all of the following:
(A) The creation or elimination of jobs within the state.
(B) The creation of new businesses or the elimination of existing businesses within the state.
(C) The competitive advantages or disadvantages for businesses currently doing business within the state.
(D) The increase or decrease of investment in the state.
(E) The incentives for innovation in products, materials, or processes.
(F) The benefits of the regulations, including, but not limited to, benefits to the health, safety, and welfare of California residents, worker safety, and the state’s environment and quality of life, among any other benefits identified by the agency.
(2) This subdivision shall not apply to the University of California, the college named in Section 92200 of the Education Code, or the Fair Political Practices Commission.
(3) Information required from state agencies for the purpose of completing the analysis may be derived from existing state, federal, or academic publications.
(d) Any administrative regulation adopted on or after January 1, 1993, that requires a report shall not apply to businesses, unless the state agency adopting the regulation makes a finding that it is necessary for the health, safety, or welfare of the people of the state that the regulation apply to businesses.
(e) Analyses conducted pursuant to this section are intended to provide agencies and the public with tools to determine whether the regulatory proposal is an efficient and effective means of implementing the policy decisions enacted in statute or by other provisions of law in the least burdensome manner. Regulatory impact analyses shall inform the agencies and the public of the economic consequences of regulatory choices, not reassess statutory policy. The baseline for the regulatory analysis shall be the most cost-effective set of regulatory measures that are equally effective in achieving the purpose of the regulation in a manner that ensures full compliance with the authorizing statute or other law being implemented or made specific by the proposed regulation.
(f) Each state agency proposing to adopt, amend, or repeal a major regulation on or after November 1, 2013, and that has prepared a standardized regulatory impact analysis pursuant to subdivision (c), shall submit that analysis to the Department of Finance upon completion. The department shall comment, within 30 days of receiving that analysis, on the extent to which the analysis adheres to the regulations adopted pursuant to Section 11346.36. Upon receiving the comments from the department, the agency may update its analysis to reflect any comments received from the department and shall summarize the comments and the response of the agency along with a statement of the results of the updated analysis for the statement required by paragraph (10) of subdivision (a) of Section 11346.5."^[11]

CA Govt Code § 11346.36 (2024):

"(a) Prior to November 1, 2013, the Department of Finance, in consultation with the office and other state agencies, shall adopt regulations for conducting the standardized regulatory impact analyses required by subdivision (c) of Section 11346.3.
(b) The regulations, at a minimum, shall assist the agencies in specifying the methodologies for:
(1) Assessing and determining the benefits and costs of the proposed regulation, expressed in monetary terms to the extent feasible and appropriate. Assessing the value of nonmonetary benefits such as the protection of public health and safety, worker safety, or the environment, the prevention of discrimination, the promotion of fairness or social equity, the increase in the openness and transparency of business and government and other nonmonetary benefits consistent with the statutory policy or other provisions of law.
(2) Comparing proposed regulatory alternatives with an established baseline so agencies can make analytical decisions for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of regulations necessary to determine that the proposed action is the most effective, or equally effective and less burdensome, alternative in carrying out the purpose for which the action is proposed, or the most cost-effective alternative to the economy and to affected private persons that would be equally effective in implementing the statutory policy or other provision of law.
(3) Determining the impact of a regulatory proposal on the state economy, businesses, and the public welfare, as described in subdivision (c) of Section 11346.3.
(4) Assessing the effects of a regulatory proposal on the General Fund and special funds of the state and affected local government agencies attributable to the proposed regulation.
(5) Determining the cost of enforcement and compliance to the agency and to affected business enterprises and individuals."^[12]

Colorado

: See also: Colorado Constitution and Colorado Administrative Procedure Act

Colorado statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking, as well as a review of the analysis by the Department of Regulatory Agencies.

CO Rev Stat § 24-4-103 (2024):

(2.5)(a) At the time of filing a notice of proposed rule-making with the secretary of state as the secretary may require, an agency shall submit a draft of the proposed rule or the proposed amendment to an existing rule and a statement, in plain language, concerning the subject matter or purpose of the proposed rule or amendment to the office of the executive director in the department of regulatory agencies. The executive director, or his or her designee, shall distribute the proposed rule or amendment, the agency's statement concerning the subject matter or purpose of the proposed rule or amendment, and any cost-benefit analysis prepared pursuant to this section to all persons who have submitted a request to receive notices from the department of regulatory agencies about proposed rule-making. Any person may, within five days after publication of the notice of proposed rule-making in the Colorado register, request that the department of regulatory agencies require the agency submitting the proposed rule or amendment to prepare a cost-benefit analysis. The executive director, or his or her designee, shall determine, after consultation with the agency proposing the rule or amendment, whether to require the agency to prepare a cost-benefit analysis. If the executive director, or his or her designee, determines that a cost-benefit analysis is required, the agency shall complete a cost-benefit analysis at least ten days before the hearing on the rule or amendment, shall make the analysis available to the public by posting the analysis on the agency's official website, and shall submit a copy to the executive director or his or her designee. The executive director, or his or her designee, shall post the analysis on the department of regulatory agencies' official website. By filing an additional notice published in the Colorado register, the agency may postpone the hearing on the rule or amendment to comply with the requirement to complete the cost-benefit analysis at least ten days before the hearing. Failure to complete a requested cost-benefit analysis pursuant to this subsection (2.5) shall preclude the adoption of such rule or amendment. Such cost-benefit analysis shall include the following:
(I) The reason for the rule or amendment;
(II) The anticipated economic benefits of the rule or amendment, which shall include economic growth, the creation of new jobs, and increased economic competitiveness;
(III) The anticipated costs of the rule or amendment, which shall include the direct costs to the government to administer the rule or amendment and the direct and indirect costs to business and other entities required to comply with the rule or amendment;
(IV) Any adverse effects on the economy, consumers, private markets, small businesses, job creation, and economic competitiveness; and
(V) At least two alternatives to the proposed rule or amendment that can be identified by the submitting agency or a member of the public, including the costs and benefits of pursuing each of the alternatives identified.
(b) The executive director, or his or her designee, shall study the cost-benefit analysis and may urge the agency to revise the rule or amendment to eliminate or reduce the negative economic impact. The executive director, or his or her designee, may inform the public about the negative impact of the proposed rule or the proposed amendment to an existing rule.
(c) Any proprietary information provided to the department of revenue by a business or trade association for the purpose of preparing a cost-benefit analysis shall be confidential.
(d) If the agency has made a good faith effort to comply with the requirements of paragraph (a) of this subsection (2.5), the rule or amendment shall not be invalidated on the ground that the contents of the cost-benefit analysis are insufficient or inaccurate.
(e) This subsection (2.5) shall not apply to orders, licenses, permits, adjudication, or rules affecting the direct reimbursement of vendors or providers with state funds.
(f) Repealed.
(g) Each state rule-making agency with a website containing rule-making information shall include the following information on its website:
(I) Information about the cost-benefit analysis process set forth in this subsection (2.5); and
(II) A link to the online regulatory notice enrollment form created by the executive director of the department of regulatory agencies or the executive director's designee and listed on the department's website."^[13]

Connecticut

: See also: Connecticut Constitution and Connecticut Administrative Procedure Act

Connecticut statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

CT Gen Stat § 4-168. (2024):

"4-168 (a) Except as provided in subsections (g) and (h) of this section, an agency, not less than thirty days prior to adopting a proposed regulation, shall
... (6) prepare a fiscal note, including an estimate of the cost or of the revenue impact (A) on the state or any municipality of the state, and (B) on small businesses in the state, including an estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the proposed regulation and the projected costs, including, but not limited to, reporting, recordkeeping and administrative, associated with compliance with the proposed regulation and, if applicable, the regulatory flexibility analysis prepared under section 4-168a. The governing body of any municipality, if requested, shall provide the agency, within twenty working days, with any information that may be necessary for analysis in preparation of such fiscal note. On and after January 1, 2017, each such agency shall mail a paper copy of the notice posted pursuant to subdivision (1) of this subsection, not later than five days after posting such notice, to any person who has requested advance notice of the agency's regulation-making proceedings on or after October 1, 2016."^[14]

Delaware

: See also: Delaware Constitution and Delaware Administrative Procedure Act

A Regulatory Impact Statement required for rules that are "substantially likely" to impose additional costs on individuals/businesses. This includes "a good-faith estimate by the agency of the potential cost of compliance." Various exceptions (emergency rules, licensure, implementing federal requirements) are specified in statute.

29 DE Code § 10404A (2024):

"(a) Any agency that proposes to adopt or amend any regulation under the Administrative Procedures Act, § 10101 et seq. of this title, that is substantially likely to impose additional costs or burdens upon individuals and/or small businesses shall submit a regulatory impact statement to be published by the Registrar of Regulations as part of the notice requirements set forth in § 10115 of this title. Each regulatory impact statement shall include:
(1) A specific reference to the statutory provision which allows for the adoption or amendment of the rule or regulation and the statutory provisions which address the subject matter of the rule or regulation;
(2) A description of the purpose of the regulation;
(3) An identification of the individuals and/or small businesses that would be subject to compliance under the regulation;
(4) A good-faith estimate by the agency of the potential cost of compliance for individuals and/or small businesses, which at minimum shall include the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required to comply with the proposed regulation; and
(5) A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed regulation, to the extent such methods are not otherwise described herein.
(b) The following regulations are exempt from this section:
(1) Regulations that are not substantially likely to impose additional costs or burdens upon individuals and/or small businesses; provided, however, that any agency making such a determination shall include a statement to that effect as part of the notice requirements set forth in § 10115 of this title;
(2) Emergency regulations adopted pursuant to § 10119 of this title;
(3) Regulations that are exempt from the procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act, § 10101 et seq. of this title, pursuant to § 10113(b) of this title;
(4) Regulations that define standards of conduct or qualifications of individuals applying for licensure or as licensed professionals;
(5) Regulations that are required by federal law and have already complied with the federal Regulatory Flexibility Act [5 U.S.C. § 601 et seq.]; and
(6) Such other regulations as may be determined from time to time in accordance with this chapter."^[15]

Florida

: See also: Florida Constitution, Florida Administrative Procedure Act, and Florida REINS-style state law

Note: Florida passed a state-level REINS law in 2010, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Florida REINS-style state law page.

A citizen may challenge an agency cost estimate after 21 days. Certification (of agency compliance with requirements) by Department of State is required by state statute.

FL Stat § 120.54 (2024):

"(3) ADOPTION PROCEDURES.—
(a) Notices.—
1. Prior to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any rule other than an emergency rule, an agency, upon approval of the agency head, shall give notice of its intended action, setting forth a short, plain explanation of the purpose and effect of the proposed action; the full text of the proposed rule or amendment and a summary thereof; a reference to the grant of rulemaking authority pursuant to which the rule is adopted; and a reference to the section or subsection of the Florida Statutes or the Laws of Florida being implemented or interpreted. The notice must include a summary of the agency’s statement of the estimated regulatory costs, if one has been prepared, based on the factors set forth in s. 120.541(2); a statement that any person who wishes to provide the agency with information regarding the statement of estimated regulatory costs, or to provide a proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative as provided by s. 120.541(1), must do so in writing within 21 days after publication of the notice; and a statement as to whether, based on the statement of the estimated regulatory costs or other information expressly relied upon and described by the agency if no statement of regulatory costs is required, the proposed rule is expected to require legislative ratification pursuant to s. 120.541(3). The notice must state the procedure for requesting a public hearing on the proposed rule. Except when the intended action is the repeal of a rule, the notice must include a reference both to the date on which and to the place where the notice of rule development that is required by subsection (2) appeared.
2. The notice shall be published in the Florida Administrative Register not less than 28 days prior to the intended action. The proposed rule shall be available for inspection and copying by the public at the time of the publication of notice.
3. The notice shall be mailed to all persons named in the proposed rule and to all persons who, at least 14 days prior to such mailing, have made requests of the agency for advance notice of its proceedings. The agency shall also give such notice as is prescribed by rule to those particular classes of persons to whom the intended action is directed.
4. The adopting agency shall file with the committee, at least 21 days prior to the proposed adoption date, a copy of each rule it proposes to adopt; a copy of any material incorporated by reference in the rule; a detailed written statement of the facts and circumstances justifying the proposed rule; a copy of any statement of estimated regulatory costs that has been prepared pursuant to s. 120.541; a statement of the extent to which the proposed rule relates to federal standards or rules on the same subject; and the notice required by subparagraph 1.
(b) Special matters to be considered in rule adoption.—
1. Statement of estimated regulatory costs.—Before the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any rule other than an emergency rule, an agency is encouraged to prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs of the proposed rule, as provided by s. 120.541. However, an agency must prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs of the proposed rule, as provided by s. 120.541, if:
a. The proposed rule will have an adverse impact on small business; or
b. The proposed rule is likely to directly or indirectly increase regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate in this state within 1 year after the implementation of the rule."^[16]

FL Stat § 120.541 (2024):

"20.541 Statement of estimated regulatory costs.—
(1)(a) Within 21 days after publication of the notice required under s. 120.54(3)(a), a substantially affected person may submit to an agency a good faith written proposal for a lower cost regulatory alternative to a proposed rule which substantially accomplishes the objectives of the law being implemented. The proposal may include the alternative of not adopting any rule if the proposal explains how the lower costs and objectives of the law will be achieved by not adopting any rule. If such a proposal is submitted, the 90-day period for filing the rule is extended 21 days. Upon the submission of the lower cost regulatory alternative, the agency shall prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs as provided in subsection (2), or shall revise its prior statement of estimated regulatory costs, and either adopt the alternative or provide a statement of the reasons for rejecting the alternative in favor of the proposed rule.
(b) If a proposed rule will have an adverse impact on small business or if the proposed rule is likely to directly or indirectly increase regulatory costs in excess of $200,000 in the aggregate within 1 year after the implementation of the rule, the agency shall prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs as required by s. 120.54(3)(b).
(c) The agency shall revise a statement of estimated regulatory costs if any change to the rule made under s. 120.54(3)(d) increases the regulatory costs of the rule.
(d) At least 21 days before filing the rule for adoption, an agency that is required to revise a statement of estimated regulatory costs shall provide the statement to the person who submitted the lower cost regulatory alternative and to the committee and shall provide notice on the agency’s website that it is available to the public.
(e) Notwithstanding s. 120.56(1)(c), the failure of the agency to prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs or to respond to a written lower cost regulatory alternative as provided in this subsection is a material failure to follow the applicable rulemaking procedures or requirements set forth in this chapter.
(f) An agency’s failure to prepare a statement of estimated regulatory costs or to respond to a written lower cost regulatory alternative may not be raised in a proceeding challenging the validity of a rule pursuant to s. 120.52(8)(a) unless:
1. Raised in a petition filed no later than 1 year after the effective date of the rule; and
2. Raised by a person whose substantial interests are affected by the rule’s regulatory costs.
(g) A rule that is challenged pursuant to s. 120.52(8)(f) may not be declared invalid unless:
1. The issue is raised in an administrative proceeding within 1 year after the effective date of the rule;
2. The challenge is to the agency’s rejection of a lower cost regulatory alternative offered under paragraph (a) or s. 120.54(3)(b)2.b.; and
3. The substantial interests of the person challenging the rule are materially affected by the rejection.
(2) A statement of estimated regulatory costs shall include:
(a) An economic analysis showing whether the rule directly or indirectly:
1. Is likely to have an adverse impact on economic growth, private sector job creation or employment, or private sector investment in excess of $1 million in the aggregate within 5 years after the implementation of the rule;
2. Is likely to have an adverse impact on business competitiveness, including the ability of persons doing business in the state to compete with persons doing business in other states or domestic markets, productivity, or innovation in excess of $1 million in the aggregate within 5 years after the implementation of the rule; or
3. Is likely to increase regulatory costs, including any transactional costs, in excess of $1 million in the aggregate within 5 years after the implementation of the rule.
(b) A good faith estimate of the number of individuals and entities likely to be required to comply with the rule, together with a general description of the types of individuals likely to be affected by the rule.
(c) A good faith estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state and local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed rule, and any anticipated effect on state or local revenues.
(d) A good faith estimate of the transactional costs likely to be incurred by individuals and entities, including local government entities, required to comply with the requirements of the rule. As used in this section, “transactional costs” are direct costs that are readily ascertainable based upon standard business practices, and include filing fees, the cost of obtaining a license, the cost of equipment required to be installed or used or procedures required to be employed in complying with the rule, additional operating costs incurred, the cost of monitoring and reporting, and any other costs necessary to comply with the rule.
(e) An analysis of the impact on small businesses as defined by s. 288.703, and an analysis of the impact on small counties and small cities as defined in s. 120.52. The impact analysis for small businesses must include the basis for the agency’s decision not to implement alternatives that would reduce adverse impacts on small businesses.
(f) Any additional information that the agency determines may be useful.
(g) In the statement or revised statement, whichever applies, a description of any regulatory alternatives submitted under paragraph (1)(a) and a statement adopting the alternative or a statement of the reasons for rejecting the alternative in favor of the proposed rule.
(3) If the adverse impact or regulatory costs of the rule exceed any of the criteria established in paragraph (2)(a), the rule shall be submitted to the President of the Senate and Speaker of the House of Representatives no later than 30 days prior to the next regular legislative session, and the rule may not take effect until it is ratified by the Legislature.
1(4) Subsection (3) does not apply to the adoption of:
(a) Federal standards pursuant to s. 120.54(6).
(b) Triennial updates of and amendments to the Florida Building Code which are expressly authorized by s. 553.73.
(c) Triennial updates of and amendments to the Florida Fire Prevention Code which are expressly authorized by s. 633.202.
(5) For purposes of subsections (2) and (3), adverse impacts and regulatory costs likely to occur within 5 years after implementation of the rule include adverse impacts and regulatory costs estimated to occur within 5 years after the effective date of the rule. However, if any provision of the rule is not fully implemented upon the effective date of the rule, the adverse impacts and regulatory costs associated with such provision must be adjusted to include any additional adverse impacts and regulatory costs estimated to occur within 5 years after implementation of such provision."^[17]

Georgia

: See also: Georgia Constitution and Georgia Administrative Procedure Act

Agencies are required to analyze the costs that proposed rules would impose on the regulated people and entities and then choose an alternative that would minimize unnecessary costs while accomplishing the goals of the rule or regulation.

GA Code § 50-13-4 (2024):

"(a) Prior to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any rule, other than interpretive rules or general statements of policy, the agency shall:
...(5) In the formulation and adoption of any rule, an agency shall choose an alternative that does not impose excessive regulatory costs on any regulated person or entity which costs could be reduced by a less expensive alternative that fully accomplishes the stated objectives of the statutes which are the basis of the proposed rule.
...(c) It is the intent of this Code section to establish basic minimum procedural requirements for the adoption, amendment, or repeal of administrative rules. Except for emergency rules which are provided for in subsection (b) of this Code section, the provisions of this Code section are applicable to the exercise of any rule-making authority conferred by any statute, but nothing in this Code section repeals or diminishes additional requirements imposed by law or diminishes or repeals any summary power granted by law to the state or any agency thereof."^[18]

Hawaii

: See also: Hawaii Constitution and Hawaii Administrative Procedure Act

Hawaii does not require state agencies to conduct or publish a cost analysis before adopting a rule. Agencies are required to provide a concise statement detailing their reasoning for their determinations regarding their rules upon request. Agencies are required to weigh costs when engaging in procurement proceedings.

HI Rev Stat § 91-3 (2024):

"§91-3 Procedure for adoption, amendment, or repeal of rules. (a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, prior to the adoption of any rule authorized by law, or the amendment or repeal thereof, the adopting agency shall:
(1) Give at least thirty days' notice for a public hearing. The notice shall include:
(A) A statement of the topic of the proposed rule adoption, amendment, or repeal or a general description of the subjects involved; and
(B) A statement that a copy of the proposed rule to be adopted, the proposed rule amendment, or the rule proposed to be repealed will be mailed to any interested person who requests a copy, pays the required fees for the copy and the postage, if any, together with a description of where and how the requests may be made;
(C) A statement of when, where, and during what times the proposed rule to be adopted, the proposed rule amendment, or the rule proposed to be repealed may be reviewed in person; and
(D) The date, time, and place where the public hearing will be held and where interested persons may be heard on the proposed rule adoption, amendment, or repeal.
The notice shall be mailed to all persons who have made a timely written request of the agency for advance notice of its rulemaking proceedings, given at least once statewide for state agencies and in the county for county agencies. Proposed state agency rules shall also be posted on the Internet as provided in section 91-2.6; and
(2) Afford all interested persons opportunity to submit data, views, or arguments, orally or in writing. The agency shall fully consider all written and oral submissions respecting the proposed rule. The agency may make its decision at the public hearing or announce then the date when it intends to make its decision. Upon adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule, the agency, if requested to do so by an interested person, shall issue a concise statement of the principal reasons for and against its determination.
(b) Notwithstanding the requirements of subsection (a), if an agency finds that an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or morals, to livestock and poultry health, or to natural resources requires adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule upon less than thirty days' notice of hearing, and states in writing its reasons for such finding, it may proceed without prior notice or hearing or upon such abbreviated notice and hearing, including posting the abbreviated notice and hearing on the Internet as provided in section 91-2.6, as it finds practicable to adopt an emergency rule to be effective for a period of not longer than one hundred twenty days without renewal."^[19]

Idaho

: See also: Idaho Constitution and Idaho Administrative Procedure Act

Idaho statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking.

ID Code § 67-5223 (2024):

"67-5223. INTERIM LEGISLATIVE REVIEW — STATEMENT OF ECONOMIC IMPACT. (1) After notice of proposed rulemaking is filed with the coordinator, the coordinator, after making technical corrections as authorized in section 67-5202, Idaho Code, shall provide the notice, accompanied by the full text of the rule under consideration in legislative format, as well as a statement of the substance of the intended action, to the director of legislative services. If the proposed rulemaking is based upon a requirement of federal law or regulation, a copy of that specific federal law or regulation shall accompany the submission to the director of legislative services. The director of legislative services shall analyze and refer the material under consideration to the germane joint subcommittee created in section 67-454, Idaho Code.
(2) An agency shall prepare and deliver to the germane joint subcommittee a statement of economic impact with respect to a proposed rule if the germane joint subcommittee files a written request with the agency for such a statement. The statement shall contain an evaluation of the costs and benefits of the rule, including any health, safety, or welfare costs and benefits.
(3) An agency shall prepare for inclusion with the filing of the proposed rule change a statement of economic impact on all proposed rules in which a fee or charge is imposed or increased. The cost/benefit analysis shall include reasonably estimated costs to the agency to implement the rule and the reasonably estimated costs borne by citizens, or the private sector or both. The adequacy of the contents of the statement of economic impact in subsections (1) and (2) of this section is not subject to judicial review and the accuracy of a fiscal impact statement provided pursuant to this subsection shall not affect the validity or the enforceability of the rule.
(4) An agency proposing to adopt amendments to materials previously incorporated by reference in a rule shall prepare for inclusion with the filing of the proposed rule change a brief written synopsis that details the substantive differences between the previously incorporated material and the latest revised edition or version of the incorporated material being proposed for incorporation by reference. This synopsis shall accompany the submission to the director of legislative services and shall be provided to the germane joint subcommittee created in section 67-454, Idaho Code."^[20]

Illinois

: See also: Illinois Constitution and Illinois Administrative Procedure Act

Illinois statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking.

5 ILCS 100/5-30:

"5 ILCS 100/5-30 (c) Prior to the filing for publication in the Illinois Register of any proposed rule or amendment that may have an adverse impact on small businesses, each agency must prepare an economic impact analysis which shall be filed with the proposed rule and publicized in the Illinois Register together with the proposed rule. The economic impact analysis shall include the following:
...
(2) The projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for compliance with the proposed rule or amendment, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record.
(3) A statement of the probable positive or negative economic effect on impacted small businesses."^[21]

Indiana

: See also: Indiana Constitution, Indiana Administrative Procedure Act, and Indiana REINS-style state law

Note: Indiana passed a state-level REINS law in 2024, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Indiana REINS-style state law page.

Indiana statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking.

IN Code § 4-3-22-1 (2024):

IN Code § 4-22-2-19.5 (2024):

"Sec. 19.5. (a) To the extent possible, a rule adopted under this article or IC 13-14-9 shall comply with the following:
(1) Minimize the expenses to:
(A) regulated entities that are required to comply with the rule;
(B) persons who pay taxes or pay fees for government services affected by the rule; and
(C) consumers of products and services of regulated entities affected by the rule.
(2) Achieve the regulatory goal in the least restrictive manner.
(3) Avoid duplicating standards found in state or federal laws.
(4) Be written for ease of comprehension.
(5) Have practicable enforcement."^[23]

IN Code § 4-22-2-22.7 (2024):

"Sec. 22.7. (a) Before complying with section 22.8, 37.1, or 37.2 of this chapter, an agency shall conduct a regulatory analysis for the proposed rule that complies with the requirements of this section.
(b) The office of management and budget shall set standards for the criteria, analytical method, treatment technology, economic, fiscal, and other background data to be used by an agency in the regulatory analysis. The regulatory analysis must be submitted in a form that can be easily loaded into commonly used business analysis software and published in the Indiana Register using the format jointly developed by the publisher, the office of management and budget, and the budget agency. The office of management and budget may provide more stringent requirements for rules with fiscal impacts and costs above a threshold amount determined by the office of management and budget."^[24]

IN Code § 4-3-22-13 (2024):

"Sec. 13. The OMB and the budget agency shall review a regulatory analysis and proposed rule submitted by an agency under IC 4-22-2-22.8. In reviewing a regulatory analysis and proposed rule under this section, the OMB shall consider in its analysis any verified data provided voluntarily by interested parties, regulated persons, and nonprofit corporations whose members may be affected by the proposed rule. A regulatory analysis reviewed under this section is a public document, subject to the following:^[25]

Iowa

: See also: Iowa Constitution and Iowa Administrative Procedure Act

Iowa statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

IA Code § 17A.4A (2024):

"17A.4A Regulatory analysis.
1. An agency shall issue a regulatory analysis of a proposed rule that complies with subsection 2, paragraphs “a” and “b”, prior to submitting a notice of intended action to the administrative rules coordinator and the administrative code editor pursuant to section
17A.4, subsection 1, paragraph “a”.
2. a. The regulatory analysis must contain all of the following:
(1) A description of the classes of persons who probably will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will benefit from the proposed rule."^[26]

IA Code § 17A.4B (2024):

"17A.4B Jobs impact statement.
1. a. “Benefit” means the reasonably identifiable and quantifiable positive effect or outcome that is expected to result from implementation of a rule.
b. “Cost” means reasonably identifiable, significant, direct or indirect, economic impact that is expected to result from implementation of and compliance with a rule.
c. “Jobs” means private sector employment including self-employment and areas for potential for employment growth.
d. “Jobs impact statement” means a statement that does all of the following:
(1) Identifies the purpose of a rule and the applicable section of the statute that provides specific legal authority for the agency to adopt the rule.
(2) Identifies and describes the cost that the agency anticipates state agencies, local governments, the public, and the regulated entities, including regulated businesses and self-employed individuals, will incur due to implementing and complying with a rule."^[27]

Kansas

: See also: Kansas Constitution, Kansas Administrative Procedure Act, and Kansas REINS-style state law

Note: Kansas passed a state-level REINS law in 2024, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Kansas REINS-style state law page.

Kansas statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

KS Stat § 77-416 (2024):

"77-416. Filing rules and regulations; citation of statutory authority; numbering; economic impact statement; review of economic impact statement by director of the budget; environmental benefit and economic impact statement.
(a) Every state agency shall file with the secretary of state every rule and regulation adopted by it and every amendment and revocation thereof in the manner prescribed by the secretary of state. Each rule and regulation shall include a citation to the statutory section or sections being implemented or interpreted and a citation of the authority pursuant to which it, or any part thereof, was adopted. Every rule and regulation filed in the office of the secretary of state shall be accompanied by a copy of the economic impact statement required by subsection (b) and a copy of the environmental benefit statement if required by subsection (d). A copy of any document adopted by reference in a rule and regulation shall be available from the state agency that adopted the rule and regulation upon request by any individual interested therein. The state agency, under the direction of the secretary of state, shall number each section with a distinguishing number and, in making a compilation of the rules and regulations, the sections shall be arranged in numerical order. A decimal system of numbering shall be prohibited.
(b) (1) At the time of drafting a proposed rule and regulation or amendment to an existing rule and regulation, the state agency shall consider the economic impact of the proposed rule and regulation. The state agency shall prepare an economic impact statement that shall include:
(A) An analysis, brief description, and cost and benefit quantification of the proposed rules and regulations and what is intended to be accomplished by their adoption. If the approach chosen by the Kansas agency to address the policy issue is different from that utilized by agencies of contiguous states or of the federal government, the economic impact statement shall include an explanation of why the Kansas agency's rule and regulation differs;
(B) whether the proposed rule and regulation is mandated by federal law as a requirement for participating in or implementing a federally subsidized or assisted program and whether the proposed rules and regulations exceed the requirements of applicable federal law;
(C) an analysis specifically addressing the following factors:
(i) The extent to which the rule and regulation will enhance or restrict business activities and growth;
(ii) the economic effect, including a detailed quantification of implementation and compliance costs, on the specific businesses, business sectors, public utility ratepayers, individuals and local governmental units that will be affected by the proposed rule and regulation and on the state economy as a whole;
(iii) the businesses that would be directly affected by the proposed rule and regulation;
(iv) the benefits of the proposed rule and regulation compared to the cost;
(v) measures taken by the agency to minimize the cost and impact of the proposed rule and regulation on business and economic development within the state of Kansas, local government and individuals; and
(vi) an estimate of the total annual implementation and compliance costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units or individuals and a determination of whether those costs will exceed $1,000,000 over the initial five-year period following adoption of the proposed rule and regulation."^[28]

Kentucky

: See also: Kentucky Constitution, Kentucky Administrative Procedure Act, and Kentucky REINS-style state law

Note: Kentucky passed a state-level REINS law in 2025, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Kentucky REINS-style state law page.

Kentucky statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

KY Rev Stat § 13A.250 (2024):

"13A.250 Consideration of costs to local and state government and to regulated entities --Fiscal note.
(1) An administrative body that promulgates an administrative regulation shall consider the cost that the administrative regulation may cause state or local government and regulated entities to incur.
(2)(a) A two (2) part cost analysis shall be completed for each administrative regulation.
(b)The first part of the cost analysis shall include the projected cost or cost savings to the Commonwealth of Kentucky and each of its affected agencies, and the projected cost or cost savings to affected local governments, including cities, counties, fire departments, and school districts.
(c)The second part of the cost analysis shall include the projectedcost or cost savings to the regulated entities affected by the administrative regulation."^[29]

Louisiana

: See also: Louisiana Constitution, Louisiana Administrative Procedure Act, and Louisiana REINS-style state law

Note: Louisiana passed a state-level REINS law in 2025, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Louisiana REINS-style state law page.

Louisiana statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

LA Rev Stat § 49:961 (2024):

"§961. Procedure for adoption of rules
A.(1) An agency shall give notice of its intention to adopt, amend, or repeal any rule and a copy of the proposed rules at least ninety days prior to taking action on the rule.
(2) The notice shall include all of the following:
(a) A statement by the agency clearly describing the proposed action being taken.
(b) A statement by the legislative fiscal office on whether the proposed action will result in a fiscal impact.
(c) A statement by the legislative fiscal office on whether the proposed action will result in an economic impact.
...
C.(1) The statement of fiscal impact shall be prepared by the proposing agency and submitted to the legislative fiscal office for its approval. The fiscal impact statement shall include a statement of the receipt, expenditure, or allocation of state funds or funds of any political subdivision of the state.
(2) The statement of economic impact shall be prepared by the proposing agency and submitted to the legislative fiscal office for its approval. The economic impact statement shall include an estimate of the cost to the agency to implement the proposed action, including the estimated amount of paperwork; an estimate of the cost or economic benefit to all persons directly affected by the proposed action; an estimate of the impact of the proposed action on competition and the open market for employment, if applicable; and a detailed statement of the data, assumptions, and methods used in making each of the above estimates."^[30]

Maine

: See also: Maine Constitution and Maine Administrative Procedure Act

Maine statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

5 ME Rev Stat § 8052 (2024):

"5-A. Impact on small business. In adopting rules, the agencies shall seek to reduce any economic burdens through flexible or simplified reporting requirements and may seek to reduce burdens through flexible or simplified timetables that take into account the resources available to the affected small businesses. The agency may consider clarification, consolidation or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements. For the purposes of this subsection, "small business" means businesses that have 20 or fewer employees. Prior to the adoption of any proposed rule that may have an adverse impact on small businesses, the agency shall prepare an economic impact statement that includes the following:
A. An identification of the types and an estimate of the number of the small businesses subject to the proposed rule;
B. The projected reporting, record-keeping and other administrative costs required for compliance with the proposed rule, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
C. A brief statement of the probable impact on affected small businesses; and
D. A description of any less intrusive or less costly, reasonable alternative methods of achieving the purposes of the proposed rule."^[31]

5 ME Rev Stat § 8063 (2024):

"§8063. Fiscal impact
Every rule proposed by an agency must contain a fiscal impact note at the end of the rule. The note must be placed on the rule prior to any public hearing and, in the case of rules adopted without a hearing, prior to the sending of notice under section 8053. The fiscal impact note must describe the estimated cost to municipalities and counties for implementing or complying with the proposed rule. If the proposed rule will not impose any cost on municipalities or counties, the fiscal impact note must state that fact."^[32]

5 ME Rev Stat § 8063-A (2024):

"§8063-A. Analysis of benefits and costs
In addition to the economic impact statement required under section 8052, subsection 5‑A and the fiscal impact note required under section 8063, an agency may, within existing budgeted resources and in instances in which the consideration of costs is permitted, conduct an analysis of the benefits and costs of a proposed rule to evaluate the effects of the rule on the distribution of benefits and costs for specific groups and on the overall economic welfare of the State.
1. Contents of a cost-benefit analysis. To the extent permitted within existing resources, a cost-benefit analysis conducted under this section must include, at a minimum, the following information:
A. Specification of the baseline condition for the analysis, including all required parameters for the analysis, all assumptions made in specifying the baseline condition and specification of the analysis period;
B. A description of the methods used to discount future benefits and costs, preferably based on the federal Office of Management and Budget's discount rate for federal projects;
C. An analysis of changes in the level of economic activity in the State as measured by employment, income and outputs; and
D. An estimate of the discounted benefits and costs of the proposed rule over the baseline condition, including benefits and costs to specific groups and changes in the economic welfare of the State as a whole over the baseline condition. Prior to conducting a cost-benefit analysis under this section, an agency shall determine that sufficient staff expertise and budgeted resources exist within the agency to complete the analysis. The agency shall include a cost-benefit analysis with a copy of a proposed rule when responding to a request for the proposed rule under section 8053, subsection 3‑A. When the analysis is conducted on a provisionally adopted major substantive rule, the analysis must be included with the materials submitted to the Executive Director of the Legislative Council under section 8072, subsection 2. A cost-benefit analysis conducted under this section is not subject to judicial review under section 8058."^[33]

Maryland

: See also: Maryland Constitution and Maryland Administrative Procedure Act

Maryland statute requires a cost analysis as part of some rulemaking.

MD State Government Code § 10-124 (2024):

"MD State Government Code § 10-124 (a) In this section, “business” means a trade, professional activity, or other business that is conducted for profit.
(b)(1) Before a unit adopts a proposed regulation, the unit shall evaluate whether the proposed regulation has any impact on businesses.
(2) To evaluate the impact, the unit shall:
(i) on the basis of the sizes of the businesses that the proposed regulation might affect, divide those businesses into any classes that the unit considers appropriate for the proposed regulation; and
(ii) particularly consider:
1. the costs that the proposed regulation would impose on each class; and
2. the difficulty of compliance for each class."^[34]

Massachusetts

: See also: Massachusetts Constitution and Massachusetts Administrative Procedure Act

The state APA requires a small business impact statement, including an estimate of administrative costs of compliance, but does not otherwise mention cost analysis.

MA Gen L ch 30a § 2 (2023):

Michigan

: See also: Michigan Constitution and Michigan Administrative Procedure Act

Michigan statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking, as well as a review by the Office of Regulatory Reform.

MI Comp L § 24.245 (2024):

"MI Comp L § 24.245 Sec. 45 (3) (3) Except as provided in subsection (6), an agency shall prepare and include with a notice of transmittal under subsection (2) the request for rule-making and the response from the office, a small business impact statement prepared under section 40, and a regulatory impact statement. The regulatory impact statement must contain all of the following information:
...(f) An identification of the businesses, groups, or individuals who will be directly affected by, bear the cost of, or directly benefit from the rule.
...(i) An estimate of the cost of rule imposition on the agency promulgating the rule.
(j) An estimate of the actual statewide compliance costs of the proposed rule on individuals.
...(l) An estimate of the actual statewide compliance costs of the proposed rule on businesses and other groups.
...(n) An identification of the nature of any report required and the estimated cost of its preparation by small businesses required to comply with the proposed rule.
(o) An analysis of the costs of compliance for all small businesses affected by the proposed rule, including costs of equipment, supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs.
(p) An identification of the nature and estimated cost of any legal consulting and accounting services that small businesses would incur in complying with the proposed rule.
(q) An estimate of the ability of small businesses to absorb the costs estimated under subdivisions (n) to (p) without suffering economic harm and without adversely affecting competition in the marketplace.
(r) An estimate of the cost, if any, to the agency of administering or enforcing a rule that exempts or sets lesser standards for compliance by small businesses.
...(v) An estimate of the primary and direct benefits of the rule.
(w) An estimate of any cost reductions to businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or governmental units as a result of the rule.
...(z) An identification of the sources the agency relied on in compiling the regulatory impact statement, including the methodology used in determining the existence and extent of the impact of a proposed rule and a cost-benefit analysis of the proposed rule.
...(6) Subsections (2), (3), and (4) do not apply to a rule that is promulgated under section 33 or 48 or a rule to which sections 41 and 42 do not apply as provided in section 44."^[36]

Minnesota

: See also: Minnesota Constitution and Minnesota Administrative Procedure Act

The state APA requires "probable costs" to agencies and "probable costs of complying" to be included in required public reporting (statute requires a copy to be sent to the legislative reference library). A cost-benefit analysis (in consultation with commissioner of management) of the rule's impact on local government is also required.

MN Stat § 14.131 (2024):

"14.131 STATEMENT OF NEED AND REASONABLENESS.
By the date of the section 14.14, subdivision 1a, notice, the agency must prepare, review, and make available for public review a statement of the need for and reasonableness of the rule. The statement of need and reasonableness must be prepared under rules adopted by the chief administrative law judge and must include the following to the extent the agency, through reasonable effort, can ascertain this information:
(1) a description of the classes of persons who probably will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will benefit from the proposed rule;
(2) the probable costs to the agency and to any other agency of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule and any anticipated effect on state revenues;
(3) a determination of whether there are less costly methods or less intrusive methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule;
(4) a description of any alternative methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule that were seriously considered by the agency and the reasons why they were rejected in favor of the proposed rule;
(5) the probable costs of complying with the proposed rule, including the portion of the total costs that will be borne by identifiable categories of affected parties, such as separate classes of governmental units, businesses, or individuals;
(6) the probable costs or consequences of not adopting the proposed rule, including those costs or consequences borne by identifiable categories of affected parties, such as separate classes of government units, businesses, or individuals;
(7) an assessment of any differences between the proposed rule and existing federal regulations and a specific analysis of the need for and reasonableness of each difference; and
(8) an assessment of the cumulative effect of the rule with other federal and state regulations related to the specific purpose of the rule.
The statement must describe how the agency, in developing the rules, considered and implemented the legislative policy supporting performance-based regulatory systems set forth in section 14.002.
For purposes of clause (8), "cumulative effect" means the impact that results from incremental impact of the proposed rule in addition to other rules, regardless of what state or federal agency has adopted the other rules. Cumulative effects can result from individually minor but collectively significant rules adopted over a period of time.
The statement must also describe the agency's efforts to provide additional notification under section 14.14, subdivision 1a, to persons or classes of persons who may be affected by the proposed rule or must explain why these efforts were not made.
The agency must consult with the commissioner of management and budget to help evaluate the fiscal impact and fiscal benefits of the proposed rule on units of local government. The agency must send a copy of the statement of need and reasonableness to the Legislative Reference Library when the notice of hearing is mailed under section 14.14, subdivision 1a."^[37]

MN Stat § 14.127 (2024):

"14.127 LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL REQUIRED.
Subdivision 1. Cost thresholds. An agency must determine if the cost of complying with a proposed rule in the first year after the rule takes effect will exceed $25,000 for: (1) any one business that has less than 50 full-time employees; or (2) any one statutory or home rule charter city that has less than ten full-time employees. For purposes of this section, "business" means a business entity organized for profit or as a nonprofit, and includes an individual, partnership, corporation, joint venture, association, or cooperative.
Subd. 2. Agency determination. An agency must make the determination required by subdivision 1 before the close of the hearing record, or before the agency submits the record to the administrative law judge if there is no hearing. The administrative law judge must review and approve or disapprove the agency determination under this section.
Subd. 3. Legislative approval required. If the agency determines that the cost exceeds the threshold in subdivision 1, or if the administrative law judge disapproves the agency's determination that the cost does not exceed the threshold in subdivision 1, any business that has less than 50 full-time employees or any statutory or home rule charter city that has less than ten full-time employees may file a written statement with the agency claiming a temporary exemption from the rules. Upon filing of such a statement with the agency, the rules do not apply to that business or that city until the rules are approved by a law enacted after the agency determination or administrative law judge disapproval.
Subd. 4. Exceptions. (a) Subdivision 3 does not apply if the administrative law judge approves an agency's determination that the legislature has appropriated money to sufficiently fund the expected cost of the rule upon the business or city proposed to be regulated by the rule.
(b) Subdivision 3 does not apply if the administrative law judge approves an agency's determination that the rule has been proposed pursuant to a specific federal statutory or regulatory mandate.
(c) This section does not apply if the rule is adopted under section 14.388 or under another law specifying that the rulemaking procedures of this chapter do not apply.
(d) This section does not apply to a rule adopted by the Public Utilities Commission.
(e) Subdivision 3 does not apply if the governor waives application of subdivision 3. The governor may issue a waiver at any time, either before or after the rule would take effect, but for the requirement of legislative approval. As soon as possible after issuing a waiver under this paragraph, the governor must send notice of the waiver to the speaker of the house and the president of the senate and must publish notice of this determination in the State Register."^[38]

Mississippi

: See also: Mississippi Constitution and Mississippi Administrative Procedure Act

The state APA requires an economic impact statement as part of rulemaking, as well as a small business impact statement for relevant rules.

MS Code § 25-43-3.105 (2024):

"MS Code § 25-43-3.105 (1) Prior to giving the notice required in Section 25-43-3.103, each agency proposing the adoption of a rule or significant amendment of an existing rule imposing a duty, responsibility or requirement on any person shall consider the economic impact the rule will have on the citizens of our state and the benefits the rule will cause to accrue to those citizens. For purposes of this section, a "significant amendment" means any amendment to a rule for which the total aggregate cost to all persons required to comply with that rule exceeds One Hundred Thousand Dollars ($100,000.00).
(2) Each agency shall prepare a written report providing an economic impact statement for the adoption of a rule or significant amendment to an existing rule imposing a duty, responsibility or requirement on any person, except as provided in subsection (7) of this section. The economic impact statement shall include the following:
(a) A description of the need for and the benefits which will likely accrue as the result of the proposed action;
(b) An estimate of the cost to the agency, and to any other state or local government entities, of implementing and enforcing the proposed action, including the estimated amount of paperwork, and any anticipated effect on state or local revenues;
(c) An estimate of the cost or economic benefit to all persons directly affected by the proposed action;
(d) An analysis of the impact of the proposed rule on small business;
(e) A comparison of the costs and benefits of the proposed rule to the probable costs and benefits of not adopting the proposed rule or significantly amending an existing rule;
(f) A determination of whether less costly methods or less intrusive methods exist for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule where reasonable alternative methods exist which are not precluded by law;
(g) A description of reasonable alternative methods, where applicable, for achieving the purpose of the proposed action which were considered by the agency and a statement of reasons for rejecting those alternatives in favor of the proposed rule; and
(h) A detailed statement of the data and methodology used in making estimates required by this subsection.
...
(7) This section does not apply to the adoption of:
(a) Any rule which is required by the federal government pursuant to a state/federal program delegation agreement or contract;
(b) Any rule which is expressly required by state law; and
(c) A temporary rule adopted pursuant to Section 25-43-3.108."^[39]

MS Code § 25-43-4.104 (2024):

"MS Code § 25-43-4.104 (1) Prior to submitting proposed permanent rules for adoption, amendment, revision or revocation pursuant to the Mississippi Administrative Procedures Law, the agency shall comply with Section 25-43-3.105(2)(d) in order to determine whether the proposed rules affect small business by preparing an economic impact statement that includes the following:
(a) An identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the proposed regulation;
(b) The projected reporting, recordkeeping and other administrative costs required for compliance with the proposed regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
(c) A statement of the probable effect on impacted small businesses;
(d) A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed regulation, including the following regulatory flexibility analysis:
(i) The establishment of less stringent compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(ii) The establishment of less stringent schedules or deadlines for compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(iii) The consolidation or simplification of compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(iv) The establishment of performance standards for small businesses to replace design or operational standards required in the proposed regulation; and
(v) The exemption of some or all small businesses from all or any part of the requirements contained in the proposed regulations.
(2) If the economic impact statement reflects that a proposed rule may have an economic effect upon small business, the agency shall submit a copy of the proposed rules and the economic impact statement to the committee for its review and comment pursuant to the review and comment provisions of the Mississippi Administrative Procedures Law. During the committee review process, the director or the director's designee of the promulgating agency shall be available at the request of the committee for comment on the proposed regulation.
(3) Within the review and comment period, if the committee determines that the proposed rules may have an economic effect upon small business, the committee may submit to the agency its comments concerning the proposed regulation including its specific recommendations.
(4) A small business that is affected or aggrieved by final agency action to enforce a rule or regulation is entitled to review of agency compliance with the requirements of this act.
(5) To ensure that any final rule continues to minimize economic impact on small businesses in a manner consistent with the stated objectives of applicable statutes, each agency shall, during any periodic review required by this chapter, consider the following factors:
(a) The continued need for the rule;
(b) The nature of complaints or comments received concerning the rule from the public;
(c) The complexity of the rule;
(d) The extent to which the rule overlaps, duplicates, or conflicts with other federal, state and local governmental law or rules; and
(e) The length of time since the rule has been evaluated or the degree to which technology, economic conditions, or other factors have changed in the area affected by the rule.
(6) If an agency's economic impact statement reflects that a proposed rule will have no economic impact upon a small business, or if an agency fails to file an economic impact statement and the committee otherwise determines that the agency's proposed rule will have an economic impact, then the committee may file its own economic impact statement for the agency's proposed rule with the Secretary of State and notify the appropriate agency that the economic impact statement was filed. When the committee files its economic impact statement, if an agency has not completed the regulatory process that is required for the applicable proposed rule to become final, the committee shall have an additional sixty (60) days from the date of filing its economic impact statement with the Secretary of State to submit its comments concerning the proposed regulation and any specific recommendations to the agency, for its consideration. During the additional sixty (60) days' committee review process, the director of the promulgating agency, or his or her designee, shall be available at the request of the committee to comment on the proposed regulation."^[40]

Missouri

: See also: Missouri Constitution and Missouri Administrative Procedure Act

The state APA requires a fiscal note estimating costs to state/local government entities for rules costing a total of more than $500 annually.

MO Rev Stat § 536.016 (2024):

"2. Each state agency shall adopt procedures by which it will determine whether a rule is necessary to carry out the purposes of the statute authorizing the rule. Such criteria and rulemaking shall be based upon reasonably available empirical data and shall include an assessment of the effectiveness and the cost of rules both to the state and to any private or public person or entity affected by such rules."^[41]

MO Rev Stat § 536.200 (2024):

"Any state agency filing a notice of proposed rulemaking, as required by section 536.021, or an emergency rule, as required by section 536.025, wherein the adoption, amendment, or rescission of the rule would require or result in an expenditure of public funds by or a reduction of public revenues for that agency or any other state agency of the state government or any political subdivision thereof including counties, cities, towns, and villages, and school, road, drainage, sewer, water, levee, or any other special purpose district which is estimated to cost more than five hundred dollars in the aggregate to any such agency or political subdivision, shall at the time of filing the notice with the secretary of state file a fiscal note estimating the cost to each affected agency or to each class of the various political subdivisions to be affected. The fiscal note shall contain a detailed estimated cost of compliance and shall be supported with a declaration subject to the requirements of section 575.060 by the director of the department to which the agency belongs that in the director's opinion the estimate is reasonably accurate. If no fiscal note is filed, the director of the department to which the agency belongs shall file a declaration subject to the requirements of section 575.060 which states that the proposed change will cost less than five hundred dollars in the aggregate to all such agencies and political subdivisions."^[42]

MO Rev Stat § 536.205 (2024):

"1. Any state agency filing a notice of proposed rulemaking, as required by section 536.021, or an emergency rule, as required by section 536.025, whereby the adoption, amendment, or rescission of the rule would require an expenditure of money by or a reduction in income for any person, firm, corporation, association, partnership, proprietorship or business entity of any kind or character which is estimated to cost more than five hundred dollars in the aggregate, shall at the time of filing the notice with the secretary of state file a fiscal note containing the following information and estimates of cost:
(1) An estimate of the number of persons, firms, corporations, associations, partnerships, proprietorships or business entities of any kind or character by class which would likely be affected by the adoption of the proposed rule, amendment or rescission of a rule;
(2) A classification by types of the business entities in such manner as to give reasonable notice of the number and kind of businesses which would likely be affected;
(3) An estimate in the aggregate as to the cost of compliance with the rule, amendment or rescission of a rule by the affected persons, firms, corporations, associations, partnerships, proprietorships or business entities of any kind or character."^[43]

MO Rev Stat § 536.215 (2024):

MO Rev Stat § 536.300 (2024):

"2. If the proposed rules affect small businesses, the state agency shall consider creative, innovative, or flexible methods of compliance for small business and prepare a small business impact statement to be submitted to the secretary of state and the joint committee on administrative rules with the proposed rules. Such business impact statement and proposed rules shall be submitted to the board prior to providing notice for a public hearing. The statement shall provide a reasonable determination of the following:
(1) The methods the agency considered or used to reduce the impact on small businesses such as consolidation, simplification, differing compliance, or reporting requirements, less stringent deadlines, performance rather than design standards, exemption, or any other mitigating techniques;
(2) How the agency involved small businesses in the development of the proposed rules;
(3) The probable monetary costs and benefits to the implementing agency and other agencies directly affected, including the estimated total amount the agency expects to collect from any additionally imposed fees and the manner in which the moneys will be used, if such costs are capable of determination;
(4) A description of the small businesses that will be required to comply with the proposed rules and how they may be adversely affected, except in cases where the state agency has filed a fiscal note that complies with all of the provisions of section 536.205;
(5) In dollar amounts, the increase in the level of direct costs, such as fees or administrative penalties, and indirect costs, such as reporting, record keeping, equipment, construction, labor, professional services, revenue loss, or other costs associated with compliance if such costs are capable of determination, except in cases where the state agency has filed a fiscal note that complies with all of the provisions of section 536.205;
(6) The business that will be directly affected by, bear the cost of, or directly benefit from the proposed rules;
(7) Whether the proposed rules include provisions that are more stringent than those mandated by any comparable or related federal, state, or county standards, with an explanation of the reason for imposing the more-stringent standard."^[45]

Montana

: See also: Montana Constitution and Montana Administrative Procedure Act

Agencies are required to provide an economic impact statement at legislative request.

MT Code § 2-4-405 (2024):

"Economic impact statement. (1) Subject to 2-4-112, on written request of the appropriate administrative rule review committee based upon the affirmative request of a majority of the members of the committee at an open meeting, an agency shall prepare a statement of the economic impact of the adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule as proposed. The agency shall also prepare a statement upon receipt by the agency or the committee of a written request for a statement made by at least 15 legislators. If the request is received by the committee, the committee shall give the agency a copy of the request, and if the request is received by the agency, the agency shall give the committee a copy of the request. As an alternative, the committee may, by contract, prepare the estimate.
(2) Except to the extent that the request expressly waives any one or more of the following, the requested statement must include and the statement prepared by the committee may include:
(a) a description of the classes of persons who will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will benefit from the proposed rule;
(b) a description of the probable economic impact of the proposed rule upon affected classes of persons, including but not limited to providers of services under contracts with the state and affected small businesses, and quantifying, to the extent practicable, that impact;
(c) the probable costs to the agency and to any other agency of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule and any anticipated effect on state revenue;
(d) an analysis comparing the costs and benefits of the proposed rule to the costs and benefits of inaction;
(e) an analysis that determines whether there are less costly or less intrusive methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule;
(f) an analysis of any alternative methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule that were seriously considered by the agency and the reasons why they were rejected in favor of the proposed rule;
(g) a determination as to whether the proposed rule represents an efficient allocation of public and private resources; and
(h) a quantification or description of the data upon which subsections (2)(a) through (2)(g) are based and an explanation of how the data was gathered.
(3) A request to an agency for a statement or a decision to contract for the preparation of a statement must be made prior to the final agency action on the rule. The statement must be filed with the appropriate administrative rule review committee within 3 months of the request or decision. A request or decision for an economic impact statement may be withdrawn at any time.
(4) Subject to 2-4-112, on receipt of an impact statement, the committee shall determine the sufficiency of the statement. If the committee determines that the statement is insufficient, the committee may return it to the agency or other person who prepared the statement and request that corrections or amendments be made. If the committee determines that the statement is sufficient, a notice, including a summary of the statement and indicating where a copy of the statement may be obtained, must be filed with the secretary of state for publication in the register by the agency preparing the statement or by the committee, if the statement is prepared under contract by the committee, and must be mailed to persons who have registered advance notice of the agency's rulemaking proceedings.
(5) This section does not apply to rulemaking pursuant to 2-4-303.
(6) The final adoption, amendment, or repeal of a rule is not subject to challenge in any court as a result of the inaccuracy or inadequacy of a statement required under this section.
(7) An environmental impact statement prepared pursuant to 75-1-201 that includes an analysis of the factors listed in this section satisfies the provisions of this section."^[46]

Nebraska

: See also: Nebraska Constitution and Nebraska Administrative Procedure Act

Nebraska statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

NE Code § 84-906.01 (2024):

"(1) An agency shall maintain an official rulemaking or regulationmaking record for each rule or regulation it adopts or proposes by publication of a notice. The record and materials incorporated by reference shall be available for public inspection and shall be maintained for at least four years after the effective date of the rule or regulation.
(2) The record shall contain:
...(h) A description, including an estimated quantification, of the fiscal impact on state agencies, political subdivisions, and regulated persons."^[47]

Nevada

: See also: Nevada Constitution and Nevada Administrative Procedure Act

Nevada statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

NV Rev Stat § 233B.0603 (2024):

"1. The notice of intent to act upon a regulation required pursuant to NRS 233B.060 must:
(a) Include:
...(4) A statement of the estimated economic effect of the regulation on the business which it is to regulate and on the public. These must be stated separately and in each case must include:
(I) Both adverse and beneficial effects; and
(II) Both immediate and long-term effects.
(5) A statement identifying the methods used by the agency in determining the impact on a small business prepared pursuant to subsection 3 of NRS 233B.0608.
(6) The estimated cost to the agency for enforcement of the proposed regulation."^[48]

New Hampshire

: See also: New Hampshire Constitution and New Hampshire Administrative Procedure Act

New Hampshire statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

NH Rev Stat § 541-A:5 (2024):

"541-A:5 Fiscal Impact Statements. –
I. The agency shall provide the legislative budget assistant with adequate details of the intended action and supporting data to enable the legislative budget assistant to prepare a fiscal impact statement.
II. The legislative budget assistant shall develop a form which shall specify the details and supporting data necessary to assess the fiscal impact of the intended action. The fiscal impact of a proposed rule which was previously effective but has expired, or of a proposed rule which adopts a current agency policy, procedure, or practice as a rule for the first time, shall not be assessed as an existing rule but as a proposed rule which is not yet effective.
III. The legislative budget assistant shall establish a schedule of deadlines for submission of the fiscal impact form, and the agency shall file the completed form with the legislative budget assistant in accordance with such deadlines.
IV. The fiscal impact statement issued by the legislative budget assistant shall not be limited to dollar amounts, but shall include a discussion of the methodology used to reach any stated amounts. In addition, the fiscal impact statement shall consist of:
(a) A narrative stating the costs and benefits to the citizens of the state and to the political subdivisions of the intended action.
(b) A conclusion as to the cost or benefit to the state general fund or any state special fund of taking the intended action.
(c) An explanation of, and citation to, the federal mandate for the intended action, if there is such a mandate, and how that mandate affects state funds.
(d) A comparison of the cost of the intended action with the cost of the existing rule, if there is an existing rule, and, to the extent that the proposed rule had expired, indicating the cost of the expired rule and, if applicable, the difference in cost of any proposed change from the expired rule.
(e) An analysis of the general impact of the intended action upon any independently owned businesses, including a description of the specific reporting and recordkeeping requirements upon small businesses which employ fewer than 10 employees."^[49]

New Jersey

: See also: New Jersey Constitution and New Jersey Administrative Procedure Act

New Jersey statute requires a cost analysis as part of rulemaking.

NJ Rev Stat § 52:14B-4 (2024):

"4. (a) Prior to the adoption, amendment, or repeal of any rule, except as may be otherwise provided, the agency shall:
...(2) Prepare for public distribution at the time the notice appears in the Register, and make available for public viewing through publication on the agency's Internet website, a statement setting forth a summary of the proposed rule, as well as a clear and concise explanation of the purpose and effect of the rule, the specific legal authority under which its adoption is authorized, a description of the expected socio-economic impact of the rule, a regulatory flexibility analysis, or the statement of finding that a regulatory flexibility analysis is not required, as provided in section 4 of P.L.1986, c.169 (C.52:14B-19), a jobs impact statement which shall include an assessment of the number of jobs to be generated or lost if the proposed rule takes effect, an agriculture industry impact statement as provided in section 7 of P.L.1998, c.48 (C.4:1C-10.3), a housing affordability impact statement, a smart growth development impact statement, as provided in section 31 of P.L.2008, c.46 (C.52:14B-4.1b), and a racial and ethnic community criminal justice and public safety impact statement as required in section 3 of P.L.2017, c.286 (C.2C:48B-2)"^[50]

New Mexico

New York

: See also: New York Constitution and New York Administrative Procedure Act

A regulatory impact statement is required for all rules; a regulatory flexibility analysis is required for rules affecting small businesses.

NY State Admin Pro Act § 202 (2024):

"Sec. 5 (b) If any comments included estimates of projected costs of the proposed rule to the state, local governments or regulated persons, which differed significantly from those presented by the agency in its regulatory impact statement, regulatory flexibility analysis, or rural area flexibility analysis, the assessment shall also summarize the agency's assessment of such estimates. If no comments have been received, the notice of adoption shall state that no comments were received by the agency. Comments submitted or presented to the agency by a legislative committee or commission or by a member or members of the senate or assembly shall be considered public comment and shall be summarized and analyzed in the assessment."^[51]

NY State Admin Pro Act § 202-A (2024):

"Sec. 2. Each agency shall, except as provided in subdivision five of this section, issue a regulatory impact statement for a rule proposed for adoption or a rule adopted on an emergency basis.
3. Each regulatory impact statement shall contain:
(a) Statutory authority. A statement analyzing the statutory authority for the rule, including but not limited to the agency's interpretation of the legislative objectives of such authority;
(b) Needs and benefits. A statement setting forth the purpose of, necessity for, and benefits derived from the rule, a citation for and summary, not to exceed five hundred words, of each scientific or statistical study, report or analysis that served as the basis for the rule, an explanation of how it was used to determine the necessity for and benefits derived from the rule, and the name of the person that produced each study, report or analysis;
(c) Costs. A statement detailing the projected costs of the rule, which shall indicate:
(i) the costs for the implementation of, and continuing compliance with, the rule to regulated persons;
(ii) the costs for the implementation of, and continued administration of, the rule to the agency and to the state and its local governments; and
(iii) the information, including the source or sources of such information, and methodology upon which the cost analysis is based; or
(iv) where an agency finds that it cannot fully provide a statement of such costs, a statement setting forth its best estimate, which shall indicate the information and methodology upon which such best estimate is based and the reason or reasons why a complete cost statement cannot be provided;"^[52]

NY State Admin Pro Act § 202-B (2024):

"NY State Admin Pro Act § 202-B Sec. 1. In developing a rule, the agency shall consider utilizing approaches that will accomplish the objectives of applicable statutes while minimizing any adverse economic impact of the rule on small businesses and local governments. Consistent with the objectives of applicable statutes, the agency shall consider such approaches as:
(a) the establishment of differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables that take into account the resources available to small businesses and local governments or the time needed by small businesses or local governments to come into compliance with the rule;
(b) the use of performance rather than design standards; and
(c) an exemption from coverage by the rule, or by any part thereof, for small businesses and local governments so long as the public health, safety or general welfare is not endangered.
1-a. In developing a rule for which a regulatory flexibility analysis is required and which involves the establishment or modification of a violation or of penalties associated with a violation, the agency shall: (a) include a cure period or other opportunity for ameliorative action, the successful completion of which will prevent the imposition of penalties on the party or parties subject to enforcement; or (b) include in the regulatory flexibility analysis an explanation of why no such cure period was included in the rule.
2. In proposing a rule for adoption or in adopting a rule on an emergency basis, the agency shall issue a regulatory flexibility analysis regarding the rule being proposed for adoption or the emergency rule being adopted. A copy of such analysis and any finding, and reasons for such finding, pursuant to subdivision three of this section, shall be submitted to the governor, the temporary president of the senate, the speaker of the assembly, the office of business permits and regulatory assistance and the administrative regulations review commission at the time such analysis is submitted to the secretary of state for publication and, upon written request, a copy shall be sent to any other person. Each regulatory flexibility analysis shall contain:
(a) a description of the types and an estimate of the number of small businesses and local governments to which the rule will apply;
(b) a description of (i) the reporting, recordkeeping and other compliance requirements of the rule, and (ii) the kinds of professional services that a small business or local government is likely to need in order to comply with such requirements;
(c) an estimate of the initial capital costs and an estimate of the annual cost of complying with the rule, with an indication of any likely variation in such costs for small businesses or local governments of different types and of differing sizes;
(d) an assessment of the economic and technological feasibility of compliance with such rule by small businesses and local governments;
(e) an indication of how the rule is designed to minimize any adverse economic impact of such rule on small businesses and local governments, including information regarding whether the approaches suggested in subdivision one of this section or other similar approaches were considered; and
(f) a statement indicating how the agency complied with subdivision six of this section."^[53]

North Carolina

: See also: North Carolina Constitution, North Carolina Administrative Procedure Act, and North Carolina REINS-style state law

Note: North Carolina passed a state-level REINS law in 2025, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's North Carolina REINS-style state law page.

The state APA directs a cost-benefit analysis for a prospective rule's impact on "all parties." It also requires a 'rule coordinator' to be appointed to serve as a liaison with other government entities.

NC Gen Stat § 150B-19.1 (2024):

NC Gen Stat § 150B-21 (2024):

"(a) Each agency must designate one or more rule‑making coordinators to oversee the agency's rule‑making functions. The coordinator shall serve as the liaison between the agency, other agencies, units of local government, and the public in the rule‑making process. The coordinator shall report directly to the agency head.

...(c) At the earliest point in the rule‑making process and in consultation with the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, the North Carolina League of Municipalities, and with samples of county managers or city managers, as appropriate, the rule‑making coordinator shall lead the agency's efforts in the development and drafting of any rules or rule changes that could: (1) Require any unit of local government, including a county, city, school administrative unit, or other local entity funded by or through a unit of local government to carry out additional or modified responsibilities; (2) Increase the cost of providing or delivering a public service funded in whole or in part by any unit of local government; or

(3) Otherwise affect the expenditures or revenues of a unit of local government."^[55]

NC Gen Stat § 150B-21.4 (2024):

"(a) State Funds. – Before an agency publishes in the North Carolina Register the proposed text of a permanent rule change that would require the expenditure or distribution of funds subject to the State Budget Act, Chapter 143C of the General Statutes, it must submit the text of the proposed rule change, an analysis of the proposed rule change, and a fiscal note on the proposed rule change to the Office of State Budget and Management and obtain certification from the Office of State Budget and Management that the funds that would be required by the proposed rule change are available. The fiscal note must state the amount of funds that would be expended or distributed as a result of the proposed rule change and explain how the amount was computed. The Office of State Budget and Management must certify a proposed rule change if funds are available to cover the expenditure or distribution required by the proposed rule change.
(a1) DOT Analyses. – In addition to the requirements of subsection (a) of this section, any agency that adopts a rule affecting environmental permitting of Department of Transportation projects shall conduct an analysis to determine if the rule will result in an increased cost to the Department of Transportation. The analysis shall be conducted and submitted to the Board of Transportation when the agency submits the notice of text for publication. The agency shall consider any recommendations offered by the Board of Transportation prior to adopting the rule. Once a rule subject to this subsection is adopted, the Board of Transportation may submit any objection to the rule it may have to the Rules Review Commission. If the Rules Review Commission receives an objection to a rule from the Board of Transportation no later than 5:00 P.M. of the day following the day the Commission approves the rule, then the rule shall only become effective as provided in G.S. 150B‑21.3(b1).
(b) Local Funds. – Before an agency publishes in the North Carolina Register the proposed text of a permanent rule change that would affect a unit of local government, it must submit the text of the proposed rule change and a fiscal note on the proposed rule change to the Office of State Budget and Management as provided by G.S. 150B‑21.26, the Fiscal Research Division of the General Assembly, the North Carolina Association of County Commissioners, and the North Carolina League of Municipalities. The fiscal note must state the amount by which the proposed rule change would increase or decrease the direct or indirect expenditures or revenues of a unit of local government and must explain how the amount was computed.
(b1) Substantial Economic Impact. – Before an agency publishes in the North Carolina Register the proposed text of a permanent rule change that would have a substantial economic impact and that is not identical to a federal regulation that the agency is required to adopt, the agency shall prepare a fiscal note for the proposed rule change and have the note approved by the Office of State Budget and Management. The agency must also obtain from the Office a certification that the agency adhered to the regulatory principles set forth in G.S. 150B‑19.1(a)(2), (5), and (6). The agency may request the Office of State Budget and Management to prepare the fiscal note only after, working with the Office, it has exhausted all resources, internal and external, to otherwise prepare the required fiscal note. If an agency requests the Office of State Budget and Management to prepare a fiscal note for a proposed rule change, that Office must prepare the note within 90 days after receiving a written request for the note. If the Office of State Budget and Management fails to prepare a fiscal note within this time period, the agency proposing the rule change shall prepare a fiscal note. A fiscal note prepared in this circumstance does not require approval of the Office of State Budget and Management. If an agency prepares the required fiscal note, the agency must submit the note to the Office of State Budget and Management for review. The Office of State Budget and Management shall review the fiscal note within 14 days after it is submitted and either approve the note or inform the agency in writing of the reasons why it does not approve the fiscal note. After addressing these reasons, the agency may submit the revised fiscal note to that Office for its review. If an agency is not sure whether a proposed rule change would have a substantial economic impact, the agency shall ask the Office of State Budget and Management to determine whether the proposed rule change has a substantial economic impact. Failure to prepare or obtain approval of the fiscal note as required by this subsection shall be a basis for objection to the rule under G.S. 150B‑21.9(a)(4).
As used in this subsection, the term "substantial economic impact" means an aggregate financial impact on all persons affected of at least one million dollars ($1,000,000) in a 12‑month period. In analyzing substantial economic impact, an agency shall do the following:
(1) Determine and identify the appropriate time frame of the analysis.
(2) Assess the baseline conditions against which the proposed rule is to be measured.
(3) Describe the persons who would be subject to the proposed rule and the type of expenditures these persons would be required to make.
(4) Estimate any additional costs that would be created by implementation of the proposed rule by measuring the incremental difference between the baseline and the future condition expected after implementation of the rule. The analysis should include direct costs as well as opportunity costs. Cost estimates must be monetized to the greatest extent possible. Where costs are not monetized, they must be listed and described.
(5) For costs that occur in the future, the agency shall determine the net present value of the costs by using a discount factor of seven percent (7%).
(b2) Content. – A fiscal note required by subsection (b1) of this section must contain the following:
(1) A description of the persons who would be affected by the proposed rule change.
(2) A description of the types of expenditures that persons affected by the proposed rule change would have to make to comply with the rule and an estimate of these expenditures.
(3) A description of the purpose and benefits of the proposed rule change. (4) An explanation of how the estimate of expenditures was computed.
(5) A description of at least two alternatives to the proposed rule that were considered by the agency and the reason the alternatives were rejected. The alternatives may have been identified by the agency or by members of the public."^[56]

NC Gen Stat § 150B-21.26 (2024):

"(b) Scope. – The preliminary review of a proposed permanent rule change that would affect the expenditures or revenues of a unit of local government shall include consideration of the following:
(1) The agency's explanation of the reason for the proposed change.
(2) Any unanticipated effects of the proposed change on local government budgets.
(3) The potential costs of the proposed change weighed against the potential risks to the public of not taking the proposed change."^[57]

North Dakota

: See also: North Dakota Constitution and North Dakota Administrative Procedure Act

North Dakota statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of some rulemaking.

North Dakota Code § 28-32-08.1:

"28-32-08. Regulatory analysis.
1. An agency or the commission shall issue a regulatory analysis of a proposed rule if:
a. Within twenty days after the last published notice date of a proposed rule hearing, a written request for the analysis is filed by the governor or a member of the legislative assembly; or
b. The proposed rule is expected to have an impact on the regulated community in excess of fifty thousand dollars. The analysis under this subdivision must be available on or before the first date of public notice as provided for in section

28-32-10.
2. The regulatory analysis must contain:
a. A description of the classes of persons who probably will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule and classes that will benefit from the proposed rule;
b. A description of the probable impact, including economic impact, of the proposed rule;
c. The probable costs to the agency or commission of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule and any anticipated effect on state revenues;

and
d. A description of any alternative methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule that were seriously considered by the agency or commission and the reasons why the methods were rejected in favor of the proposed rule.
3. Each regulatory analysis must include quantification of the data to the extent practicable."^[58]

North Dakota Code § 28-32-08:

"...3. Before adoption of any proposed rule that may have an adverse impact on small entities, the adopting agency shall prepare an economic impact statement that includes consideration of:
a. The small entities subject to the proposed rule;
b. The administrative and other costs required for compliance with the proposed rule;
c. The probable cost and benefit to private persons and consumers who are affected by the proposed rule;
d. The probable effect of the proposed rule on state revenues; and
e. Any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed rule."^[59]

Ohio

: See also: Ohio Constitution and Ohio Administrative Procedure Act

A business impact analysis is required for rules affecting businesses, but doesn't entail analysis of specific monetary costs or benefits.

OH Rev Code § 106.024 (2024):

"...(4) An estimate, in dollars, of the amount by which the proposed rule would increase or decrease revenues or expenditures during the current biennium;
(5) A citation identifying the appropriation that authorizes each expenditure that would be necessitated by the proposed rule;
(6) A summary of the estimated cost of compliance with the rule to all directly affected persons;
(7) The reasons why the rule is being proposed;
(8) If the rule has a fiscal effect on school districts, counties, townships, or municipal corporations, an estimate in dollars of the cost of compliance with the rule, or, if dollar amounts cannot be determined, a written explanation of why it was not possible to ascertain dollar amounts;"^[60]

Oklahoma

: See also: Oklahoma Constitution, Oklahoma Administrative Procedure Act, and Oklahoma REINS-style state law

Note: Oklahoma passed a state-level REINS law in 2025, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Oklahoma REINS-style state law page.

Oklahoma statute requires a cost-benefit analysis as part of rulemaking.

75 OK Stat § 303 (2024):

"75 OK Stat § 303
...D. 1. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, an agency shall issue a rule impact statement of a proposed rule prior to or within fifteen (15) days after the date of publication of the notice of proposed rule adoption. The rule impact statement may be modified after any hearing or comment period afforded pursuant to the provisions of this section.
2. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, the rule impact statement shall include, but not be limited to:
a. a brief description of the purpose of the proposed rule,
b. a description of the classes of persons who most likely will be affected by the proposed rule, including classes that will bear the costs of the proposed rule, and any information on cost impacts received by the agency from any private or public entities,
c. a description of the classes of persons who will benefit from the proposed rule,
d. a description of the probable economic impact of the proposed rule upon affected classes of persons or political subdivisions, including a listing of all fee changes and, whenever possible, a separate justification for each fee change,
e. the probable costs and benefits to the agency and to any other agency of the implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule, the source of revenue to be used for implementation and enforcement of the proposed rule, and any anticipated effect on state revenues, including a projected net loss or gain in such revenues if it can be projected by the agency,
f. a determination of whether implementation of the proposed rule will have an economic impact on any political subdivisions or require their cooperation in implementing or enforcing the rule,
g. a determination of whether implementation of the proposed rule may have an adverse economic effect on small business as provided by the Oklahoma Small Business Regulatory Flexibility Act,
h. an explanation of the measures the agency has taken to minimize compliance costs and a determination of whether there are less costly or nonregulatory methods or less intrusive methods for achieving the purpose of the proposed rule,
i. a determination of the effect of the proposed rule on the public health, safety and environment and, if the proposed rule is designed to reduce significant risks to the public health, safety and environment, an explanation of the nature of the risk and to what extent the proposed rule will reduce the risk,
j. a determination of any detrimental effect on the public health, safety and environment if the proposed rule is not implemented, and
k. the date the rule impact statement was prepared and if modified, the date modified."^[61]

Oregon

: See also: Oregon Constitution and Oregon Administrative Procedure Act

Oregon's state APA requires agencies to file a fiscal impact statement along with a notice of intended action for a proposed rule. This impact statement must include the projected effects of the rule on state agencies, local governments, members of the public, business, small businesses, and, for certain rules, the impact on the cost of housing. State agencies are required to hold public hearings upon request and fully consider statements made by the public.

OR Rev Stat § 183.335 (2023):

"(b) The agency shall include with the notice of intended action given under subsection (1) of this section:
...
(E) A statement of fiscal impact identifying state agencies, units of local government and the public that may be economically affected by the adoption, amendment or repeal of the rule and an estimate of that economic impact on state agencies, units of local government and the public. In considering the economic effect of the proposed action on the public, the agency shall utilize available information to project any significant economic effect of that action on businesses which shall include a cost of compliance effect on small businesses affected. For an agency specified in ORS 183.530, the statement of fiscal impact shall also include a housing cost impact statement as described in ORS 183.534;
...
(3)(a) When an agency proposes to adopt, amend or repeal a rule, it shall give interested persons reasonable opportunity to submit data or views. Opportunity for oral hearing shall be granted upon request received from 10 persons or from an association having not less than 10 members before the earliest date that the rule could become effective after the giving of notice pursuant to subsection (1) of this section. An agency holding a hearing upon a request made under this subsection shall give notice of the hearing at least 21 days before the hearing to the person who has requested the hearing, to persons who have requested notice pursuant to subsection (8) of this section and to the persons specified in subsection (15) of this section. The agency shall publish notice of the hearing in the bulletin referred to in ORS 183.360 at least 14 days before the hearing. The agency shall consider fully any written or oral submission."^[62]

Pennsylvania

: See also: Pennsylvania Constitution and Pennsylvania Administrative Procedure Act

4 Pa. Code § 1.374 requires agencies to submit a written regulatory analysis for any proposed regulation to the General Counsel, the Secretary of the Budget and the Governor’s Policy Director. This regulatory analysis is required to contain a cost-benefit analysis of the regulation among several other documents. The Budget Office is required to review the agency's prepared cost-benefit analysis and provide a fiscal note for the proposed regulation. Agencies are prohibited from proceeding with regulations until, "the General Counsel, the Secretary of the Budget and the Policy Director have informed the agency that the regulation is consistent with the regulatory principles and overall policies of the Administration."

4 Pa. Code § 1.374:

"(a) Prior to submitting a proposed rulemaking, the agency head shall evaluate each regulation and attest to the fact that the regulation addresses a compelling public need that can be best remedied by the promulgation of the regulation.
(b) The agency head shall submit to the General Counsel, the Secretary of the Budget and the Governor’s Policy Director a written regulatory analysis. The analysis shall state:
(1) The name of the agency.
(2) The name of a contact person at that agency.
(3) A short title for the regulation and a citation from the Pennsylvania Code.
(4) Whether the regulation is a proposed, final-form or final-omitted rulemaking.
(5) A brief, clear and, if possible, nontechnical explanation of the regulation.
(6) The statutory authority or mandate for the regulation.
(7) The compelling public need that justifies the regulation.
(8) The public health, safety or environmental risks associated with nonregulation.
(9) Individuals or groups that are likely to benefit from the regulation.
(10) Individuals, groups or entities that will be required to comply with the regulation.
(11) The outreach conducted by the agency with the regulated community prior to submission of the regulation.
(12) An estimate of the costs or savings, or both, associated with compliance and implementation.
(13) A cost/benefit analysis of the regulation.
(14) Nonregulatory alternatives considered and the reasons for their dismissal.
(15) Alternative regulatory schemes considered and the reasons for their dismissal.
(16) A statement of the compelling Pennsylvania interest if the regulation exceeds Federal standards.
(17) Any requirements that would place the Commonwealth at a competitive disadvantage compared to other states.
(18) An intra-agency review schedule for the regulation.
(c) Each regulation submitted for review shall contain a brief preamble, written in clear and concise language, which describes in nontechnical terms the compelling public need the regulation is designed to address, what the regulation requires in legal and practical terms and who the regulation is likely to affect.
(d) The regulatory analysis, along with the preamble and draft regulation, will be reviewed by the Office of General Counsel for form, language and legal authority. The Governor’s Policy Office will review the request to determine that public interest is compelling, that no viable alternative to the regulation exists and that the costs of the regulation reasonably relate to the benefits. The Office of General Counsel will also consider whether the proposed regulation exceeds Federal standards. If the regulation does exceed Federal standards, the Policy Office will then evaluate whether the regulation is justified by a compelling and unique Pennsylvania interest. The Budget Office will evaluate the cost analysis prepared by the agency and prepare a fiscal note for the regulation.
(e) An agency may not proceed with a proposed, final-form or final-omitted regulation until the General Counsel, the Secretary of the Budget and the Policy Director have informed the agency that the regulation is consistent with the regulatory principles and overall policies of the Administration. Review by these three offices will be conducted in a fair and timely manner."^[63]

Rhode Island

: See also: Rhode Island Constitution and Rhode Island Administrative Procedure Act

Rhode Island's state APA requires agencies to prepare a regulatory analysis for any proposed rule. The analysis must weigh the costs and benefits of the proposed rule and provide reasoning as to why it is the most cost-effective alternative. Agencies are required to provide the public with information as to how to obtain the full text of any regulatory analysis, to hold public comment periods for proposed rules, and to consider any information or feedback provided by the public.

RI Gen L § 42-35-2.7. (2024):

RI Gen L § 42-35-2.8. (2024):

"§ 42-35-2.8. Public participation.
(a) An agency proposing a rule shall specify a public-comment period of at least thirty (30) days after publication of notice of the proposed rulemaking, during which a person may submit information and comment on the proposed rule. The information or comment may be submitted in an electronic or written format. The agency shall consider all information and comments on a proposed rule which is submitted pursuant to this subsection within the comment period."^[65]

RI Gen L § 42-35-2.9. (2024):

"§ 42-35-2.9. Regulatory analysis.
(a) An agency shall prepare a regulatory analysis for a proposed rule. The analysis must be completed before notice of the proposed rulemaking is published. The summary of the analysis prepared under subsection (c) must be published with the notice of proposed rulemaking.
(b) A regulatory analysis must contain:
(1) An analysis of the benefits and costs of a reasonable range of regulatory alternatives reflecting the scope of discretion provided by the statute authorizing the proposed rule;
(2) Demonstration that there is no alternative approach among the alternatives considered during the rulemaking proceeding which would be as effective and less burdensome to affected private persons as another regulation. This standard requires that an agency proposing to write any new regulation must identify any other state regulation which is overlapped or duplicated by the proposed regulation and justify any overlap or duplication; and
(3) A determination whether:
(i) The benefits of the proposed rule justify the costs of the proposed rule; and
(ii) The proposed rule will achieve the objectives of the authorizing statute in a more cost-effective manner, or with greater net benefits, than other regulatory alternatives.
(iii) An agency preparing a regulatory analysis under this section shall prepare a concise summary of the analysis.
(iv) If an agency has made a good-faith effort to comply with this section, a rule is not invalid solely if there are errors or paucity of data in the regulatory analysis for the proposed rule."^[66]

South Carolina

: See also: South Carolina Constitution and South Carolina Administrative Procedure Act

South Carolina's state APA requires agencies to prepare preliminary assessment reports on proposed rules that have substantial economic impact. This report is sent to the Office of Research and Statistics of Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office, and is also included in the notice of public hearing if requested by 25 persons or a governmental subdivision or agency. Two members of the legislature can request a final assessment report, which is completed by the Office. Statute requires the preliminary report from the agency and the final report from the Office to, "disclose the effects of the proposed regulation on the public health and environmental welfare of the community and State and the effects of the economic activities arising out of the proposed regulation." Statute also lists several things that these reports may include.

SC Code § 1-23-110 (2024):

"(A) Before the promulgation, amendment, or repeal of a regulation, an agency shall:
(1) give notice of a drafting period by publication of a notice in the State Register. The notice must include:
...
(2) submit to the office, no later than the date the notice required in item (3) is published in the State Register, a preliminary assessment report prepared in accordance with Section 1-23-115 on regulations having a substantial economic impact;
(3) give notice of a public hearing at which the agency will receive data, views, or arguments, orally and in writing, from interested persons on proposed regulations by publication of a notice in the State Register if requested by twenty-five persons, by a governmental subdivision or agency, or by an association having not less than twenty-five members. The notice must include:
...
(f) a summary of the preliminary assessment report submitted by the agency to the office and notice that copies of the preliminary report are available from the agency. The agency may charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs associated with this distribution requirement. A regulation that does not require an assessment report because it does not have a substantial economic impact, must include a statement to that effect. A regulation exempt from filing an assessment report pursuant to Section 1-23-115(E) must include an explanation of the exemption;
...
(C)(1) The agency shall consider fully all written and oral submissions respecting the proposed regulation."^[67]

SC Code § 1-23-115 (2024):

"(A) Upon written request by two members of the General Assembly, made before submission of a promulgated regulation to the General Assembly for legislative review, a regulation that has a substantial economic impact must have an assessment report prepared pursuant to this section and in accordance with the procedures contained in this article. In addition to any other method as may be provided by the General Assembly, the legislative committee to which the promulgated regulation has been referred, by majority vote, may send a written notification to the promulgating agency informing the agency that the committee cannot approve the promulgated regulation unless an assessment report is prepared and provided to the committee. The written notification tolls the running of the one hundred-twenty-day legislative review period, and the period does not begin to run again until an assessment report prepared in accordance with this article is submitted to the committee. Upon receipt of the assessment report, additional days must be added to the days remaining in the one hundred-twenty-day review period, if less than twenty days, to equal twenty days. A copy of the assessment report must be provided to each member of the committee.
(B) A state agency must submit to the Office of Research and Statistics of Revenue and Fiscal Affairs Office, a preliminary assessment report on regulations which have a substantial economic impact. Upon receiving this report the office may require additional information from the promulgating agency, other state agencies, or other sources. A state agency shall cooperate and provide information to the office on requests made pursuant to this section. The office shall prepare and publish a final assessment report within sixty days after the public hearing held pursuant to Section 1-23-110. The office shall forward the final assessment report and a summary of the final report to the promulgating agency.
(C) The preliminary and final assessment reports required by this section must disclose the effects of the proposed regulation on the public health and environmental welfare of the community and State and the effects of the economic activities arising out of the proposed regulation. Both the preliminary and final reports required by this section may include:
...
(D) If information required to be included in the assessment report materially changes at any time before the regulation is approved or disapproved by the General Assembly, the agency must submit the corrected information to the office which must forward a revised assessment report to the Legislative Council for submission to the committees to which the regulation was referred during General Assembly review.
(E) An assessment report is not required on:
(1) regulations specifically exempt from General Assembly review by Section 1-23-120; however, if any portion of a regulation promulgated to maintain compliance with federal law is more stringent than federal law, then that portion is not exempt from this section;
(2) emergency regulations filed in accordance with Section 1-23-130; however, before an emergency regulation may be refiled pursuant to Section 1-23-130, an assessment report must be prepared in accordance with this section;
(3) regulations which control the hunting or taking of wildlife including fish or setting times, methods, or conditions under which wildlife may be taken, hunted, or caught by the public, or opening public lands for hunting and fishing."^[68]

South Dakota

: See also: South Dakota Constitution and South Dakota Administrative Procedure Act

The South Dakota APA requires a fiscal note to be submitted along with any proposed agency rule detailing the effect, if any, that the rule will have on the revenues, expenditures, and fiscal liability of the state and its subdivisions. For rules that affect housing or small businesses, additional impact statements are required. There is an exception for emergency rulemaking.

SD Codified L § 1-26-2.1 (2024):

"1-26-2.1. Small business impact statements--Content. An agency shall, when submitting any proposed rule that will have a direct impact on small business, prepare an impact statement that includes the following:
(1) A narrative explanation in plain, easy-to-read language of the effect of the rule on small business, the basis for its enactments, and why the rule is needed;
(2) An identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the proposed rule;
(3) The projected reporting and recordkeeping required for compliance with the proposed rule, including the types of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
(4) A statement of the probable effect on impacted small business; and
(5) A description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the proposed rule.
An agency is only required to use readily available information and existing resources to prepare the impact statement."^[69]

SD Codified L § 1-26-2.3 (2024):

"1-26-2.3. Housing cost impact statement--Content.
Before an agency may promulgate any rule prescribing new standards or requirements for building or remodeling a residential structure that is based on a model code developed by a national or international organization of trade professionals, including standards for electrical, plumbing or mechanical systems, energy conservation, or fire prevention, the agency shall prepare a housing cost impact statement setting forth the need for each new standard or requirement and the estimated cost, per dwelling unit, of compliance. To determine the estimated cost of compliance, the agency shall obtain from three licensed contractors, or other applicable building trades professionals operating in this state an estimate of the total cost to consumer of all materials, labor and taxes necessary to comply with the proposed new standard or requirement. The agency shall use the average of these estimates in preparing the impact statement. For purposes of this section, residential structure, means any one-family dwelling, two-family dwelling, or townhouse not more than three stories above grade."^[70]

SD Codified L § 1-26-4.2 (2024):

"1-26-4.2. Fiscal note submitted with proposed rule--Fiscal note of bureau--Transmitting copies.
An agency shall, when submitting any proposed rule except an emergency rule, include a fiscal note. The fiscal note shall state what effect, if any, the proposed rule will have on the revenues, expenditures, or fiscal liability of the state or its agencies and subdivisions. The fiscal note shall include an explanation of how such effect, if any, was computed.
The Bureau of Finance and Management shall prepare its own fiscal note and serve it on the agency, the director and the cochairmen of the Joint Appropriations Committee prior to hearing. If a proposed rule has a negative fiscal impact on a political subdivision, the agency shall direct the bureau to transmit a copy of the bureau's fiscal note to the South Dakota Municipal League, the Associated School Boards of South Dakota, and the South Dakota County Commissioners Association, prior to the hearing."^[71]

Tennessee

: See also: Tennessee Constitution and Tennessee Administrative Procedure Act

The Tennessee APA requires agencies to prepare a statement detailing the projected financial impact of any proposed rule on local governments. If the agency determines that a proposed rule would have an impact on small businesses, an additional small business economic impact statement is required. Additionally, other Tennessee statutes provide that the commissioner or head of any agency or any member of the general assembly can request an economic impact statement from any agency to justify any proposed agency action, including the promulgation of a rule.

TN Code § 4-33-104 (2024):

"(a) Upon written request by the commissioner or head of any agency, or by any member of the general assembly, each agency shall within a reasonable time justify a proposed action by preparing an economic impact statement using professionally accepted methodology, with quantification of data to the extent practicable, giving effect to both short-term and long-term consequences; provided, that this section shall not apply to any action of the department of transportation in which federal-aid matching funds are used.
(b) The economic impact statement shall include the following information:
(1) A description of the action proposed, the purpose of the action, the legal authority for the action and the plan for implementing the action;
(2) A determination that the action is the least-cost method for achieving the stated purpose;
(3) A comparison of the cost-benefit relation of the action to nonaction;
(4) A determination that the action represents the most efficient allocation of public and private resources;
(5) A determination of the effect of the action on competition;
(6) A determination of the effect of the action on the cost of living in the geographical area in which the action would occur;
(7) A determination of the effect of the action on employment in the geographical area in which the action would occur;
(8) The source of revenue to be used for the action; and
(9) A conclusion as to the economic impact upon all persons substantially affected by the action, including an analysis containing a description as to which persons will bear the costs of the action and which persons will benefit directly and indirectly from the action.
(c) If, during the course of an agency action, information required by the economic impact statement materially changes, the agency shall amend the statement with the correct information."^[72]

TN Code § 4-5-403 (2024):

"As part of the rulemaking process for any rule being proposed that may have an impact on small businesses, each agency shall prepare an economic impact statement as an addendum for each rule that is deemed to affect small businesses, which shall be published in the Tennessee administrative register, filed with the secretary of state and made available to all interested parties, including the secretary of state, attorney general and reporter and the government operations committees of the senate and the house of representatives, and as described for rules in part 2 of this chapter. The secretary of state may require the online submission of economic impact statements filed pursuant to this part. The statement shall include the following:
(1) The type or types of small business and an identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the rule being proposed that would bear the cost of, or directly benefit from the rule being proposed;
(2) The projected reporting, recordkeeping and other administrative costs required for compliance with the rule being proposed, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparation of the report or record;
(3) A statement of the probable effect on impacted small businesses and consumers;
(4) A description of any less burdensome, less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose and objectives of the rule being proposed that may exist, and to what extent the alternative means might be less burdensome to small business;
(5) A comparison of the rule being proposed with any federal or state counterparts; and
(6) Analysis of the effect of the possible exemption of small businesses from all or any part of the requirements contained in the rule being proposed."^[73]

TN Code § 4-5-402 (2024):

TN Code § 4-5-228 (2024):

"(a) On any rule and regulation proposed to be promulgated, the proposing agency shall state in a simple declarative sentence, without additional comments on the merits or the policy of the rule or regulation, whether the rule or regulation may have a projected financial impact on local governments. The statement shall describe the financial impact in terms of increase in expenditures or decrease in revenues. If the statement says that the rule or regulation has a financial impact on local governments, the general assembly may request representatives of any affected local government to testify concerning its impact. (b) The proposing agency shall submit a copy of the statement provided in subsection (a) to the secretary of state."^[75]

TN Code § 4-5-220 (2024):

"(a) After a rule is filed, the secretary of state shall, within seven (7) days of its acceptance, add the filed rule to the appropriate location within the portion of the secretary of state's website devoted to this chapter. The secretary of state's website shall contain the following:
...
(4) A table of all pending rules and regulations with projected financial impact upon local governments as provided to the secretary of state pursuant to § 4-5-228; and..."^[76]

Texas

: See also: Texas Constitution and Texas Administrative Procedure Act

The state APA requires costs and benefits to public and costs to regulated entities as part of a fiscal note for public reporting requirements. A cost-benefit analysis is required for "major environmental rules," assessing costs to "agencies, local governments, the public, and the regulated community."

TX Govt Code § 2001.024 (2024):

"Sec. 2001.024. CONTENT OF NOTICE. (a) The notice of a proposed rule must include:
(1) a brief explanation of the proposed rule;
(2) the text of the proposed rule, except any portion omitted under Section 2002.014, prepared in a manner to indicate any words to be added or deleted from the current text;
(3) a statement of the statutory or other authority under which the rule is proposed to be adopted, including:
(A) a concise explanation of the particular statutory or other provisions under which the rule is proposed;
(B) the section or article of the code affected;
(C) if applicable, the bill number for the legislation that enacted the statutory authority under which the rule is proposed to be adopted if the legislation was enacted during the four-year period preceding the date notice of the proposed rule is given; and
(D) a certification that the proposed rule has been reviewed by legal counsel and found to be within the state agency's authority to adopt;
(4) a fiscal note showing the name and title of the officer or employee responsible for preparing or approving the note and stating for each year of the first five years that the rule will be in effect:
(A) the additional estimated cost to the state and to local governments expected as a result of enforcing or administering the rule;
(B) the estimated reductions in costs to the state and to local governments as a result of enforcing or administering the rule;
(C) the estimated loss or increase in revenue to the state or to local governments as a result of enforcing or administering the rule; and
(D) if applicable, that enforcing or administering the rule does not have foreseeable implications relating to cost or revenues of the state or local governments;
(5) a note about public benefits and costs showing the name and title of the officer or employee responsible for preparing or approving the note and stating for each year of the first five years that the rule will be in effect:
(A) the public benefits expected as a result of adoption of the proposed rule; and
(B) the probable economic cost to persons required to comply with the rule;
(6) the local employment impact statement prepared under Section 2001.022, if required;
(7) a request for comments on the proposed rule from any interested person; and
(8) any other statement required by law.
(b) In the notice of a proposed rule that amends any part of an existing rule:
(1) the text of the entire part of the rule being amended must be set out;
(2) the language to be deleted must be bracketed and stricken through; and
(3) the language to be added must be underlined.
(c) In the notice of a proposed rule that is new or that adds a complete section to an existing rule, the new rule or section must be set out and underlined.
(d) Failure to include in the notice of a proposed rule the bill number for the legislation that enacted the statutory authority under which the rule is proposed to be adopted as required by Subsection (a)(3)(C) does not invalidate a rule adopted by a state agency or an action taken by the agency under that rule."^[77]

TX Govt Code § 2001.0225 (2024):

"Sec. 2001.0225. REGULATORY ANALYSIS OF MAJOR ENVIRONMENTAL RULES. (a) This section applies only to a major environmental rule adopted by a state agency, the result of which is to:
(1) exceed a standard set by federal law, unless the rule is specifically required by state law;
(2) exceed an express requirement of state law, unless the rule is specifically required by federal law;
(3) exceed a requirement of a delegation agreement or contract between the state and an agency or representative of the federal government to implement a state and federal program; or
(4) adopt a rule solely under the general powers of the agency instead of under a specific state law.
(b) Before adopting a major environmental rule subject to this section, a state agency shall conduct a regulatory analysis that:
(1) identifies the problem the rule is intended to address;
(2) determines whether a new rule is necessary to address the problem; and
(3) considers the benefits and costs of the proposed rule in relationship to state agencies, local governments, the public, the regulated community, and the environment.
(c) When giving notice of a major environmental rule subject to this section, a state agency shall incorporate into the fiscal note required by Section 2001.024 a draft impact analysis describing the anticipated effects of the proposed rule. The draft impact analysis, at a minimum, must:
(1) identify the benefits that the agency anticipates from adoption and implementation of the rule, including reduced risks to human health, safety, or the environment;
(2) identify the costs that the agency anticipates state agencies, local governments, the public, and the regulated community will experience after implementation of the rule;
(3) describe the benefits and costs anticipated from implementation of the rule in as quantitative a manner as feasible, but including a qualitative description when a quantitative description is not feasible or adequately descriptive;
(4) describe reasonable alternative methods for achieving the purpose of the rule that were considered by the agency and provide the reasons for rejecting those alternatives in favor of the proposed rule;
(5) identify the data and methodology used in performing the analysis required by this section;
(6) provide an explanation of whether the proposed rule specifies a single method of compliance, and, if so, explain why the agency determines that a specified method of compliance is preferable to adopting a flexible regulatory approach, such as a performance-oriented, voluntary, or market-based approach;
(7) state that there is an opportunity for public comment on the draft impact analysis under Section 2001.029 and that all comments will be addressed in the publication of the final regulatory analysis; and
(8) provide information in such a manner that a reasonable person reading the analysis would be able to identify the impacts of the proposed rule.
(d) After considering public comments submitted under Section 2001.029 and determining that a proposed rule should be adopted, the agency shall prepare a final regulatory analysis that complies with Section 2001.033. Additionally, the agency shall find that, compared to the alternative proposals considered and rejected, the rule will result in the best combination of effectiveness in obtaining the desired results and of economic costs not materially greater than the costs of any alternative regulatory method considered.
(e) In preparing the draft impact analysis before publication for comment and the final regulatory analysis for the agency order adopting the rule, the state agency shall consider that the purpose of this requirement is to identify for the public and the regulated community the information that was considered by the agency, the information that the agency determined to be relevant and reliable, and the assumptions and facts on which the agency made its regulatory decision. In making its final regulatory decision, the agency shall assess:
(1) all information submitted to it, whether quantitative or qualitative, consistent with generally accepted scientific standards;
(2) actual data where possible; and
(3) assumptions that reflect actual impacts that the regulation is likely to impose.
(f) A person who submitted public comment in accordance with Section 2001.029 may challenge the validity of a major environmental rule that is not proposed and adopted in accordance with the procedural requirements of this section by filing an action for declaratory judgment under Section 2001.038 not later than the 30th day after the effective date of the rule. If a court determines that a major environmental rule was not proposed and adopted in accordance with the procedural requirements of this section, the rule is invalid.
(g) In this section:
(1) "Benefit" means a reasonably identifiable, significant, direct or indirect, favorable effect, including a quantifiable or nonquantifiable environmental, health, or economic effect, that is expected to result from implementation of a rule.
(2) "Cost" means a reasonably identifiable, significant, direct or indirect, adverse effect, including a quantifiable or nonquantifiable environmental, health, or economic effect, that is expected to result from implementation of a rule.
(3) "Major environmental rule" means a rule the specific intent of which is to protect the environment or reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure and that may adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, competition, jobs, the environment, or the public health and safety of the state or a sector of the state.
(h) The requirements of this section do not apply to state agency rules that are proposed or adopted on an emergency basis to protect the environment or to reduce risks to human health from environmental exposure."^[78]

Utah

: See also: Utah Constitution, Utah Administrative Procedure Act, and Utah REINS-style state law

Note: Utah passed a state-level REINS law in 2025, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Utah REINS-style state law page.

Utah statute requires state agencies to include an analysis with any proposed rule that details the anticipated costs or savings to the state budget, to local governments, to small businesses, and to other persons as well as the projected compliance costs for affected persons.

Utah Code § 63G-3-301:

"(5) Before filing a rule with the office, the agency shall conduct a thorough analysis, consistent with the criteria established by the Governor's Office of Planning and Budget, of the fiscal impact a rule may have on businesses, which criteria may include:
(a) the type of industries that will be impacted by the rule, and for each identified industry, an estimate of the total number of businesses within the industry, and an estimate of the number of those businesses that are small businesses;
(b) the individual fiscal impact that would incur to a single business for a one-year period;
(c) the aggregated total fiscal impact that would incur to all businesses within the state for a one-year period;
(d) the total cost that would incur to all impacted entities over a five-year period; and
(e) the department head's comments on the analysis.
(6) If the agency reasonably expects that a proposed rule will have a measurable negative fiscal impact on small businesses, the agency shall consider, as allowed by federal law, each of the following methods of reducing the impact of the rule on small businesses:
(a) establishing less stringent compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(b) establishing less stringent schedules or deadlines for compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(c) consolidating or simplifying compliance or reporting requirements for small businesses;
(d) establishing performance standards for small businesses to replace design or operational standards required in the proposed rule; and
(e) exempting small businesses from all or any part of the requirements contained in the proposed rule.
(7) If during the public comment period an agency receives comment that the proposed rule will cost small business more than one day's annual average gross receipts, and the agency had not previously performed the analysis in Subsection (6), the agency shall perform the analysis described in Subsection (6).
(8) The rule analysis shall contain:
(a) a summary of the rule or change;
(b) the purpose of the rule or reason for the change;
(c) the statutory authority or federal requirement for the rule;
(d) the anticipated cost or savings to:
(i) the state budget;
(ii) local governments;
(iii) small businesses; and
(iv) persons other than small businesses, businesses, or local governmental entities;
(e) the compliance cost for affected persons;
(f) how interested persons may review the full text of the rule;
(g) how interested persons may present their views on the rule;
(h) the time and place of any scheduled public hearing;
(i) the name and telephone number of an agency employee who may be contacted about the rule;
(j) the name of the agency head or designee who authorized the rule;
(k) the date on which the rule may become effective following the public comment period;
(l) the agency's analysis on the fiscal impact of the rule as required under Subsection (5);
(m) any additional comments the department head may choose to submit regarding the fiscal impact the rule may have on businesses; and
(n) if applicable, a summary of the agency's efforts to comply with the requirements of Subsection (6).
...
(13)(a)
(i) Before an agency enacts a rule, the agency shall submit to the appropriations subcommittee and interim committee with jurisdiction over the agency the agency's proposed rule for review, if the proposed rule, over a five-year period, has a fiscal impact of more than $1,000,000 statewide.
(ii) A proposed rule that is subject to Subsection (13)(e) is exempt from Subsection (13)(a)(i).
(b) An appropriations subcommittee or interim committee that reviews a rule an agency submits under Subsection (13)(a) shall:
(i) before the review, directly inform the chairs of the Rules Review and General Oversight Committee of the coming review, including the date, time, and place of the review; and
(ii) after the review, directly inform the chairs of the Rules Review and General Oversight Committee of the outcome of the review, including any recommendation.
(c) An appropriations subcommittee or interim committee that reviews a rule an agency submits under Subsection (13)(a) may recommend to the Rules Review and General Oversight Committee that the Rules Review and General Oversight Committee not recommend reauthorization of the rule in the legislation described in Section 63G-3-502.
(d) The agency shall calculate the substantial fiscal impact in accordance with Subsection (5).
(e) Unless an agency cannot implement a statute or execute a federally delegated authority without making a rule that is estimated to have substantial fiscal impact, the agency may not make the rule.
(f) The requirements described in Subsections (13)(a) and (13)(b) do not apply to:
(i) the State Tax Commission; or
(ii) the State Board of Education."^[79]

Utah Code § 63G-3-302:

"(1) An agency may hold a public hearing on a proposed rule, amendment to a rule, or repeal of a rule during the public comment period.
(2) Except as provided in Subsection (4), an agency shall hold a public hearing on a proposed rule, amendment to a rule, or repeal of a rule if:
(a) a public hearing is required by state or federal mandate;
(b)
(i) another state agency, 10 interested persons, or an interested association having not fewer than 10 members request a public hearing; and
(ii) the agency receives the request in writing not more than 15 days after the publication date of the proposed rule.
(3) The agency shall hold the hearing:
(a) before the rule becomes effective; and
(b) no less than seven days nor more than 30 days after receipt of the request for hearing.
(4) The Wildlife Board is not required to hold a public hearing on a proposed rule, amendment to a rule, or repeal of a rule unless required to hold a public hearing under Title 23A, Chapter 2, Part 3, Wildlife Board and Regional Councils."^[80]

Utah Code § 63G-3-304:

"(1) All agencies shall comply with the rulemaking procedures of Section 63G-3-301 unless an agency finds that these procedures would:
(a) cause an imminent peril to the public health, safety, or welfare;
(b) cause an imminent budget reduction because of budget restraints or federal requirements; or
(c) place the agency in violation of federal or state law.
(2)(a) When finding that its rule is excepted from regular rulemaking procedures by this section, the agency shall file with the office and the members of the Rules Review and General Oversight Committee:
(i) the text of the rule; and
(ii) a rule analysis that includes the specific reasons and justifications for its findings.
(b) The office shall publish the rule in the bulletin as provided in Subsection 63G-3-301(4).
(c) The agency shall notify interested persons as provided in Subsection 63G-3-301(10).
(d) Subject to Subsection 63G-3-502(4), the rule becomes effective for a period not exceeding 120 days on the date of filing or any later date designated in the rule.
(3) If the agency intends the rule to be effective beyond 120 days, the agency shall also comply with the procedures of Section 63G-3-301."^[81]

Vermont

: See also: Vermont Constitution and Vermont Administrative Procedure Act

Vermont's state APA requires agencies to submit an economic impact analysis when filing a proposed rule with the Secretary of State. The analysis must include the anticipated costs and benefits for each category of people, businesses, and government entities that will potentially be affected. Additional analysis is required regarding the impact to small businesses and school districts when applicable. Small business cost-benefit analysis is not required for procurement purposes. The analysis must include possible alternatives and reasoning as to why the proposed rule is the best option. These analyses are conducted by the employees of the agency that proposes the rule.

3 V.S.A. § 838 (2024):

"(a) Filing; information. Proposed rules shall be filed with the Secretary of State in a format determined by the Secretary that includes the following information:
...
(2) An analysis of economic impact.
...
(b) Economic impact analysis; rules affecting small businesses and school districts.
(1) General requirements. The economic impact analysis shall analyze the anticipated costs and benefits to be expected from adoption of the rule. Specifically, each economic impact analysis shall, for each requirement in the rule:
(A) list each category of people, enterprises, and government entities potentially affected and estimate for each the costs and benefits anticipated; and
(B) compare the economic impact of the rule with the economic impact of other alternatives to the rule, including having no rule on the subject or a rule having separate requirements for small businesses.
(2) Small businesses. When a rule provides for the regulation of a small business, in the economic impact analysis, the agency shall include, when appropriate, a specific and clearly demarcated evaluation of ways by which a small business can reduce the cost and burden of compliance by specifying less numerous, detailed, or frequent reporting requirements or alternative methods of compliance. When an agency determines that such an evaluation is not appropriate, the economic impact statement shall briefly explain the reasons for this determination.
(A) An agency shall also include in this evaluation its consideration of creative, innovative, or flexible methods of compliance with the rule when the agency finds, in writing, that these methods of compliance would not:
(i) significantly reduce the effectiveness of the rule in achieving the objectives or purposes of the statutes being implemented or interpreted; or
(ii) be inconsistent with the language or purpose of statutes that are implemented or interpreted by the rule; or
(iii) increase the risk to the health, safety, or welfare of the public or to the beneficiaries of the regulation or compromise the environmental standards of the State.
(B) This subdivision (2) shall not apply when the regulation is incidental to:
(i) a purchase of goods or services by the State or an agency thereof; or
(ii) the payment for goods or services by the State or an agency thereof for the benefit of a third party.
(3) School districts. If a rule affects or provides for the regulation of public education and public schools, the economic impact analysis shall include a specific and clearly demarcated evaluation of the cost implications to local school districts and school taxpayers and shall clearly state the associated costs. This evaluation also shall include consideration of alternatives to the rule, including having no rule on the subject, that would reduce or ameliorate costs to local school districts while achieving the objectives or purposes of the proposed rule.
(4) Most appropriate method. In addition, each economic impact analysis shall conclude that the rule is the most appropriate method of achieving the regulatory purpose. Only employees of the agency and information either already available to the agency or available at reasonable cost need be used in preparing economic impact analyses."^[82]

3 V.S.A. § 836 (2024):

3 V.S.A. § 842 (2024):

"§ 842. Review by Legislative Committee
(a) Objection; time frame; process.
(1) Within 45 days after the filing of a final proposal unless the agency consents to an extension of this review period, the Legislative Committee on Administrative Rules, by majority vote of the entire Committee, may object under subsection (b) of this section and recommend that the agency amend or withdraw the proposal. The agency shall be notified promptly of the objections. Failure to give timely notice shall be deemed approval."^[84]

Virginia

: See also: Virginia Constitution and Virginia Administrative Procedure Act

Note: according to a January 15, 2022 executive order, all Virginia regulations must receive a cost-benefit analysis.^[85]

Virginia's state APA requires agencies to include an economic impact statement prepared by the Department of Planning and Budget with the submission of a proposed rule. The impact analysis is required to include the number of businesses, localities, types of businesses and entities, people, and employment positions affected by the rule, the impact on the value and use of private property, the costs to businesses, localities, and entities, and an analysis of the costs to small businesses, if applicable.

VA Code § 2.2-4007.04 (2024):

"A. Before delivering any proposed regulation under consideration to the Registrar as required in § 2.2-4007.05, the agency shall submit on the Virginia Regulatory Town Hall a copy of that regulation to the Department of Planning and Budget. In addition to determining the public benefit, the Department of Planning and Budget in coordination with the agency shall, within 45 days, prepare an economic impact analysis of the proposed regulation, as follows:
1. The economic impact analysis shall include but need not be limited to the projected number of businesses or other entities to which the regulation would apply; the identity of any localities and types of businesses or other entities particularly affected by the regulation; the projected number of persons and employment positions to be affected; the impact of the regulation on the use and value of private property, including additional costs related to the development of real estate for commercial or residential purposes; and the projected costs to affected businesses, localities, or entities of implementing or complying with the regulations, including the estimated fiscal impact on such localities and sources of potential funds to implement and comply with such regulation. A copy of the economic impact analysis shall be provided to the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules; and
2. If the regulation may have an adverse effect on small businesses, the economic impact analysis shall also include (i) an identification and estimate of the number of small businesses subject to the regulation; (ii) the projected reporting, recordkeeping, and other administrative costs required for small businesses to comply with the regulation, including the type of professional skills necessary for preparing required reports and other documents; (iii) a statement of the probable effect of the regulation on affected small businesses; and (iv) a description of any less intrusive or less costly alternative methods of achieving the purpose of the regulation. As used in this subdivision, "small business" has the same meaning as provided in subsection A of § 2.2-4007.1.
...
D. In the event the economic impact analysis completed by the Department reveals that the proposed regulation would have an adverse economic impact on businesses or would impose a significant adverse economic impact on a locality, business, or entity particularly affected, the Department shall advise the Joint Commission on Administrative Rules, the House Committee on Appropriations, and the Senate Committee on Finance and Appropriations within the 45-day period. The Joint Commission on Administrative Rules shall review such rule or regulation and issue a statement containing the Commission's findings in accordance with § 30-73.3."^[86]

VA Code § 2.2-4006:

Washington

: See also: Washington Constitution and Washington Administrative Procedure Act

Washington statute requires a cost-benefit analysis for some rulemaking.

WA Rev Code § 34.05.328 (2024):

"(1) Before adopting a rule described in subsection (5) of this section, an agency must:
(a) Clearly state in detail the general goals and specific objectives of the statute that the rule implements;
(b) Determine that the rule is needed to achieve the general goals and specific objectives stated under (a) of this subsection, and analyze alternatives to rule making and the consequences of not adopting the rule;
(c) Provide notification in the notice of proposed rule making under RCW 34.05.320 that a preliminary cost-benefit analysis is available. The preliminary cost-benefit analysis must fulfill the requirements of the cost-benefit analysis under (d) of this subsection. If the agency files a supplemental notice under RCW 34.05.340, the supplemental notice must include notification that a revised preliminary cost-benefit analysis is available. A final cost-benefit analysis must be available when the rule is adopted under RCW 34.05.360;
(d) Determine that the probable benefits of the rule are greater than its probable costs, taking into account both the qualitative and quantitative benefits and costs and the specific directives of the statute being implemented;
(e) Determine, after considering alternative versions of the rule and the analysis required under (b), (c), and (d) of this subsection, that the rule being adopted is the least burdensome alternative for those required to comply with it that will achieve the general goals and specific objectives stated under (a) of this subsection;
(f) Determine that the rule does not require those to whom it applies to take an action that violates requirements of another federal or state law;
(g) Determine that the rule does not impose more stringent performance requirements on private entities than on public entities unless required to do so by federal or state law;
(h) Determine if the rule differs from any federal regulation or statute applicable to the same activity or subject matter and, if so, determine that the difference is justified by the following:
(i) A state statute that explicitly allows the agency to differ from federal standards; or
(ii) Substantial evidence that the difference is necessary to achieve the general goals and specific objectives stated under (a) of this subsection; and
(i) Coordinate the rule, to the maximum extent practicable, with other federal, state, and local laws applicable to the same activity or subject matter.
(2) In making its determinations pursuant to subsection (1)(b) through (h) of this section, the agency must place in the rule-making file documentation of sufficient quantity and quality so as to persuade a reasonable person that the determinations are justified.
(3) Before adopting rules described in subsection (5) of this section, an agency must place in the rule-making file a rule implementation plan for rules filed under each adopting order. The plan must describe how the agency intends to:
(a) Implement and enforce the rule, including a description of the resources the agency intends to use;
(b) Inform and educate affected persons about the rule;
(c) Promote and assist voluntary compliance; and
(d) Evaluate whether the rule achieves the purpose for which it was adopted, including, to the maximum extent practicable, the use of interim milestones to assess progress and the use of objectively measurable outcomes.
(4) After adopting a rule described in subsection (5) of this section regulating the same activity or subject matter as another provision of federal or state law, an agency must do all of the following:
(a) Coordinate implementation and enforcement of the rule with the other federal and state entities regulating the same activity or subject matter by making every effort to do one or more of the following:
(i) Deferring to the other entity;
(ii) Designating a lead agency; or
(iii) Entering into an agreement with the other entities specifying how the agency and entities will coordinate implementation and enforcement.
If the agency is unable to comply with this subsection (4)(a), the agency must report to the legislature pursuant to (b) of this subsection;
(b) Report to the joint administrative rules review committee:
(i) The existence of any overlap or duplication of other federal or state laws, any differences from federal law, and any known overlap, duplication, or conflict with local laws; and
(ii) Make recommendations for any legislation that may be necessary to eliminate or mitigate any adverse effects of such overlap, duplication, or difference.
(5)(a) Except as provided in (b) of this subsection, this section applies to:
(i) Significant legislative rules of the departments of ecology, labor and industries, health, revenue, social and health services, and natural resources, the employment security department, the forest practices board, the office of the insurance commissioner, the state building code council, and to the legislative rules of the department of fish and wildlife implementing chapter 77.55 RCW; and
(ii) Any rule of any agency, if this section is voluntarily made applicable to the rule by the agency, or is made applicable to the rule by a majority vote of the joint administrative rules review committee within forty-five days of receiving the notice of proposed rule making under RCW 34.05.320.
(b) This section does not apply to:
(i) Emergency rules adopted under RCW 34.05.350;
(ii) Rules relating only to internal governmental operations that are not subject to violation by a nongovernment party;
(iii) Rules adopting or incorporating by reference without material change federal statutes or regulations, Washington state statutes, rules of other Washington state agencies, shoreline master programs other than those programs governing shorelines of statewide significance, or, as referenced by Washington state law, national consensus codes that generally establish industry standards, if the material adopted or incorporated regulates the same subject matter and conduct as the adopting or incorporating rule;
(iv) Rules that only correct typographical errors, make address or name changes, or clarify language of a rule without changing its effect;
(v) Rules the content of which is explicitly and specifically dictated by statute, including any rules of the department of revenue adopted under the authority of RCW 82.32.762(3);
(vi) Rules that set or adjust fees under the authority of RCW 19.02.075 or that set or adjust fees or rates pursuant to legislative standards, including fees set or adjusted under the authority of RCW 19.80.045;
(vii) Rules of the department of social and health services relating only to client medical or financial eligibility and rules concerning liability for care of dependents; or
(viii) Rules of the department of revenue that adopt a uniform expiration date for reseller permits as authorized in RCW 82.32.780 and 82.32.783."^[88]

West Virginia

: See also: West Virginia Constitution and West Virginia Administrative Procedure Act

West Virginia's APA requires agencies to file a fiscal note itemizing the costs a proposed legislative exempt rule, procedural rule, or interpretive rule is expected to have on the state and the persons affected by the rule.

WV Code § 29A-3-4 (2024):

"(a) When an agency proposes a legislative exempt rule, procedural rule or an interpretive rule, the agency shall file in the State Register a notice of its action, including the text of the rule as proposed.
(b) All proposed rules filed under subsection (a) of this section shall have a fiscal note attached itemizing the cost of implementing the rules as they relate to this state and to persons affected by the rules. The fiscal note shall include all information included in a fiscal note for either house of the Legislature and a statement of the economic impact of the rule on the state or its residents. The objectives of the rule shall be clearly and separately stated in the fiscal note by the agency issuing the proposed rules. A legislative exempt, procedural or interpretive rule is not void or voidable by virtue of noncompliance with this subsection."^[89]

Wisconsin

: See also: Wisconsin Constitution, Wisconsin Administrative Procedure Act, and Wisconsin REINS Act

Note: Wisconsin passed a state-level REINS law in 2017, requiring legislative approval of regulatory actions above a cost threshold. For more information on this law, see Ballotpedia's Wisconsin REINS Act page.

Wisconsin's APA requires agencies to submit an economic impact analysis for any proposed rule. The analysis should include feedback from businesses, local governments, and individuals that will be affected, should include the expected economic impact of the rule, should include the expected costs to businesses, local governments, and individuals, and should provide the agency's reasoning as to why this rule it the most beneficial solution to the particular policy issue it seeks to solve, among other requirements. The APA details the specific government entities that are entitled to this report. Legislative approval is required for rules with expected implementation and compliance costs above $10,000,000 over 2 years.

WI Stat § 227.137 (2024):

"227.137 Economic impact analyses of proposed rules.
(2) An agency shall prepare an economic impact analysis for a proposed rule before submitting the proposed rule to the legislative council staff under s. 227.15.
(3) An economic impact analysis of a proposed rule shall contain information on the economic effect of the proposed rule on specific businesses, business sectors, public utility ratepayers, local governmental units, and the state’s economy as a whole. The agency or person preparing the analysis shall solicit information and advice from businesses, associations representing businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule. The agency or person shall prepare the economic impact analysis in coordination with local governmental units that may be affected by the proposed rule. The agency or person may also request information that is reasonably necessary for the preparation of an economic impact analysis from other businesses, associations, local governmental units, and individuals and from other agencies. The economic impact analysis shall include all of the following:
(a) An analysis and quantification of the policy problem that the proposed rule is intending to address, including comparisons with the approaches used by the federal government and by Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota to address that policy problem. If the approach chosen by the agency to address that policy problem is different from those approaches, an economic impact analysis prepared by an agency shall include a statement as to why the agency chose a different approach.
(b) An analysis and detailed quantification of the economic impact of the proposed rule, including the implementation and compliance costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to the businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule, specifically including all of the following:
1. An estimate of the total implementation and compliance costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals as a result of the proposed rule, expressed as a single dollar figure. With respect to an independent economic impact analysis prepared under sub. (4m) or s. 227.19 (5) (b) 3., the person preparing the analysis shall provide a detailed explanation of any variance from the agency’s estimate under this subdivision.
2. A determination, for purposes of the requirement under s. 227.139, as to whether $10,000,000 or more in implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals over any 2-year period as a result of the proposed rule.
(c) An analysis of the actual and quantifiable benefits of the proposed rule, including an assessment of how effective the proposed rule will be in addressing the policy problem that the rule is intended to address.
(d) An analysis of alternatives to the proposed rule, including the alternative of not promulgating the proposed rule.
(e) A determination made in consultation with the businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule as to whether the proposed rule would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, jobs, or the overall economic competitiveness of this state.
(f) Except as provided in this paragraph, if the economic impact analysis relates to a proposed rule of the department of safety and professional services under s. 101.63 (1) establishing standards for the construction of a dwelling, as defined in s. 101.61 (1), an analysis of whether the proposed rule would increase the cost of constructing or remodeling such a dwelling by more than $1,000. This paragraph applies notwithstanding that the purpose of the one- and 2-family dwelling code under s. 101.60 includes promoting interstate uniformity in construction standards. This paragraph does not apply to a proposed rule whose promulgation has been authorized under s. 227.19 (5) (fm).
(g) An analysis of the ways in which and the extent to which the proposed rule would place any limitations on the free use of private property, including a discussion of alternatives to the proposed rule that would minimize any such limitations.
(4) On the same day that the agency submits the economic impact analysis to the legislative council staff under s. 227.15 (1), the agency shall also submit that analysis to the department of administration, to the governor, and to the chief clerks of each house of the legislature, who shall distribute the analysis to the presiding officers of their respective houses, to the chairpersons of the appropriate standing committees of their respective houses, as designated by those presiding officers, and to the cochairpersons of the joint committee for review of administrative rules. If a proposed rule is modified after the economic impact analysis is submitted under this subsection so that the economic impact of the proposed rule is significantly changed, the agency shall prepare a revised economic impact analysis for the proposed rule as modified. A revised economic impact analysis shall be prepared and submitted in the same manner as an original economic impact analysis is prepared and submitted.
(4m) (a) After an agency submits an economic impact analysis for a proposed rule to the legislature under sub. (4), but before the agency submits the proposed rule for approval under s. 227.185, either cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules may request an independent economic impact analysis to be prepared for the proposed rule.
1. A request by the senate cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules for an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a) requires approval by the committee on senate organization.
2. A request by the assembly cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules for an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a) requires approval by the committee on assembly organization.
(b)
1. If a cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules requests an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a), and the request is approved under par. (am), the cochairperson shall notify the agency proposing the proposed rule and shall contract with a person that is not an agency to prepare the independent economic impact analysis.
...(5) This section does not apply to emergency rules promulgated under s. 227.24."^[90]

WI Stat § 227.139 (2024):

"227.139 Passage of bill required for certain rules.
(1) If an economic impact analysis prepared under s. 227.137 (2), a revised economic impact analysis prepared under s. 227.137 (4), or an independent economic impact analysis prepared under s. 227.137 (4m) or 227.19 (5) (b) 3. indicates that $10,000,000 or more in implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals over any 2-year period as a result of the proposed rule, the agency proposing the rule shall stop work on the proposed rule and may not continue promulgating the proposed rule notwithstanding any provision authorizing or requiring the agency to promulgate the proposed rule, except as authorized under sub. (2).
(2)(a) Any member of the legislature may introduce a bill authorizing an agency to promulgate a rule that the agency is prohibited from promulgating under sub. (1). The agency may resume the rule-making process as provided in this subchapter upon enactment of a bill introduced under this paragraph.
(b) If an agency is prohibited from promulgating a rule under sub. (1), the agency may modify the proposed rule, if the modification is germane to the subject matter of the proposed rule, to address the implementation and compliance costs of the proposed rule. If the agency modifies a proposed rule under this paragraph, the agency shall prepare a revised economic impact analysis under s. 227.137 (4). Following the modification, the agency may continue with the rule-making process as provided in this subchapter if the revised economic impact analysis prepared by the agency indicates, and any independent economic impact analysis prepared under s. 227.137 (4m) or 227.19 (5) (b) 3. subsequent to the agency’s modification also indicates, that $10,000,000 or more in implementation and compliance costs are not reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals over any 2-year period as a result of the proposed rule."^[91]

Wyoming

Footnotes

[1] Note: Hawaii statute has a minor analysis requirement in some instances.

[2] Virginia.gov, Va. Exec. Directive No. 1 (2022) "Laying a Strong Foundation for Job Creation and Economic Growth Through Targeted Regulatory Reductions," January 15, 2022

[3] Justia, Alabama Revised Code § 41-22-5.1 (2024)

[4] Justia, Alabama Revised Code § 41-22-5 (2024)

[5] Justia, Alaska Statutes § 44.62.190 (2024)

[6] Justia, AZ Rev Stat § 41-1055 (2024)

[7] Justia, Arizona Revised Statutes § 41-1052 (2024)

[8] Justia, Arizona Revised Statutes § 41-1005 (2024)

[9] Justia, Arkansas Code § 25-15-202 (2024)

[10] Justia, Arkansas Code § 25-15-204 (2024)

[11] Justia, California Government Code § 11346.3 (2024)

[12] Justia, California Government Code § 11346.36 (2024)

[13] Justia, Colorado Revised Statutes § 24-4-103 (2024)

[14] Justia, Connecticut General Statutes § 4-168. (2024)

[15] Justia, 29 DE Code § 10404A (2024)

[16] Justia, Florida Statutes § 120.54 (2024)

[17] Justia, Florida Statutes § 120.541 (2024)

[18] Justia, Georgia Code § 50-13-4 (2024)

[19] Justia, Hawaii Revised Statutes § 91-3 (2024)

[20] [https://law.justia.com/codes/idaho/title-67/chapter-52/section-67-5223/ Justia, Idaho Code § 67-5223 (2024)]

[21] Justia, 5 Illinois Compiled Statutes 100/5-30

[22] Justia, IN Code § 4-3-22-1 (2024)

[23] Justia, IN Code § 4-22-2-19.5 (2024)

[24] Justia, IN Code § 4-22-2-22.7 (2024)

[25] Justia, IN Code § 4-3-22-13 (2024)

[26] Justia, IA Code § 17A.4A (2024)

[27] Justia, IA Code § 17A.4B (2024)

[28] Justia, KS Stat § 77-416 (2024)

[29] Justia, KY Rev Stat § 13A.250 (2024)

[30] Justia, LA Rev Stat § 49:961 (2024)

[31] Justia, 5 ME Rev Stat § 8052 (2024)

[32] Justia, 5 ME Rev Stat § 8063 (2024)

[33] Justia, 5 ME Rev Stat § 8063-A (2024)

[34] Justia, MD State Government Code § 10-124 (2024)

[35] Justia, MA Gen L ch 30a § 2 (2023)

[36] Justia, MI Comp L § 24.245 (2024)

[37] Justia, MN Stat § 14.131 (2024)

[38] Justia, MN Stat § 14.127 (2024)

[39] Justia, MS Code § 25-43-3.105 (2024)

[40] Justia, MS Code § 25-43-4.104 (2024)

[41] Justia, MO Rev Stat § 536.016 (2024)

[42] Justia, MO Rev Stat § 536.200 (2024)

[43] Justia, MO Rev Stat § 536.205 (2024)

[44] [ Justia, MO Rev Stat § 536.215 (2024)]

[45] Justia, MO Rev Stat § 536.300 (2024)

[46] Justia, MT Code § 2-4-405 (2024)

[47] Justia, NE Code § 84-906.01 (2024)

[48] Justia, NV Rev Stat § 233B.0603 (2024)

[49] Justia, NH Rev Stat § 541-A:5 (2024)

[50] Justia, NJ Rev Stat § 52:14B-4 (2024)

[51] Justia, NY State Admin Pro Act § 202 (2024)

[52] Justia, NY State Admin Pro Act § 202-A (2024)

[53] Justia, NY State Admin Pro Act § 202-B (2024)

[54] Justia, NC Gen Stat § 150B-19.1 (2024)

[55] Justia, NC Gen Stat § 150B-21 (2024)

[56] Justia, NC Gen Stat § 150B-21.4 (2024)

[57] Justia, NC Gen Stat § 150B-21.26 (2024)

[58] Findlaw.com, North Dakota Code § 28-32-08.1

[59] Findlaw.com, North Dakota Code § 28-32-08

[60] Justia, Ohio Revised Code § 106.024 (2024)

[61] Justia, 75 Oklahoma Statutes § 303 (2024)

[62] Justia, Oregon Revised Statutes § 183.335 (2023)

[63] PAcodeandbulletin.gov, 4 Pennsylvania Code § 1.374

[64] Justia, Rhode Island General Laws § 42-35-2.7. (2024)

[65] Justia, Rhode Island General Laws § 42-35-2.8. (2024)

[66] Justia, Rhode Island General Laws § 42-35-2.9. (2024)

[67] Justia, South Carolina Code § 1-23-110 (2024)

[68] Justia, South Carolina Code § 1-23-115 (2024)

[69] Justia, South Dakota Codified Laws § 1-26-2.1 (2024)

[70] Justia, South Dakota Codified Laws § 1-26-2.3 (2024)

[71] Justia, South Dakota Codified Laws § 1-26-4.2 (2024)

[72] [ Justia, Tennessee Code § 4-33-104 (2024)]

[73] Justia, Tennessee Code § 4-5-403 (2024)

[74] Justia, Tennessee Code § 4-5-402

[75] Justia, TN Code § 4-5-228 (2024)

[76] Justia, Tennessee Code § 4-5-220 (2024)

[77] Justia, Texas Government Code § 2001.024 (2024)

[78] Justia, Texas Government Code § 2001.0225 (2024)

[79] Utah.gov, Utah Code § 63G-3-301

[80] Utah.gov, Utah Code § 63G-3-302

[81] Utah.gov, Utah Code § 63G-3-304

[82] Vermont.gov, 3 Vermont Statutes Annotated § 838

[83] Vermont.gov, 3 Vermont Statutes Annotated § 836

[84] Vermont.gov, 3 Vermont Statutes Annotated § 842

[85] Virginia.gov, Va. Exec. Directive No. 1 (2022) "Laying a Strong Foundation for Job Creation and Economic Growth Through Targeted Regulatory Reductions," January 15, 2022

[86] Virginia.gov, Virginia Code § 2.2-4007.04

[87] Virginia.gov, Virginia Code § 2.2-4006

[88] Justia, Washington Revised Code § 34.05.328 (2024)

[89] Justia, West Virginia Code § 29A-3-4 (2024)

[90] Justia, Wisconsin Statutes § 227.137 (2024)

[91] Justia, Wisconsin Statutes § 227.139 (2024)

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

[31]

[32]

[33]

[34]

[35]

[36]

[37]

[38]

[39]

[40]

[41]

[42]

[43]

[44]

[45]

[46]

[47]

[48]

[49]

[50]

[51]

[52]

[53]

[54]

[55]

[56]

[57]

[58]

[59]

[60]

[61]

[62]

[63]

[64]

[65]

[66]

[67]

[68]

[69]

[70]

[71]

[72]

[73]

[74]

[75]

[76]

[77]

[78]

[79]

[80]

[81]

[82]

[83]

[84]

[85]

[86]

[87]

[88]

[89]

[90]

[91]

50-State Research: Fiscal Analysis in Rulemaking

Contents

Summary of findings

Most states require a fiscal analysis for rulemaking

Most fiscal analyses are conducted by the rulemaking agency

Fiscal analyses trigger additional requirements in a minority (17) of states

Fiscal analysis tagging system

Rulemaking fiscal analysis in the states

Text of state statutory provisions providing for rulemaking fiscal analysis

See also

Footnotes

Information about voting

2026 Elections

2025 Elections

Election analysis

Trending

Public Policy

Information for candidates

Get Engaged

Services

Additional analysis

SITE NAVIGATION