Help us improve in just 2 minutes—share your thoughts in our reader survey.

North Carolina REINS-style state law

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a REINS-style state law?

REINS-style state laws refer to state laws in the spirit of the federal Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act that require legislative approval of proposed state agency rules with associated costs in excess of a certain monetary threshold. REINS-style state laws aim to give state legislators the preemptive authority to halt the initial enactment of certain administrative regulations.

Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
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.


The North Carolina REINS-style state law (House Bill 402) is a REINS-style state law passed by legislative override of the veto of Governor Josh Stein (D) on July 29, 2025, that requires legislative approval for regulations that cost $20 million or more over a five-year period. The bill also introduces additional requirements for rules proposed by multi-member boards and commissions.[1]

REINS-style state laws refer to state laws in the spirit of the federal Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) Act. These laws require legislative approval of proposed state agency rules that carry associated costs in excess of a certain monetary threshold.

The North Carolina REINS Act includes the following provision:[2]

“

A permanent rule that would have an aggregate financial cost... on all persons affected of at least twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in a five-year period shall become effective only if the General Assembly ratifies a bill to approve the rule[3]

”

Background

See also: Rulemaking, REINS Act

The federal REINS Act, which the North Carolina state version was modeled on, was initially designed by Tea Party activist Lloyd Rogers in 2009. Rogers contacted former U.S. Representative Geoff Davis (R-Ky.) to propose legislation requiring that "all rules, regulations, or mandates that require citizens, state or local government financial expenditures must first be approved by the U.S. Congress before they can become effective." The proposal was incorporated into the Republican Party's Pledge to America legislative agenda leading up to the 2010 election cycle and was later introduced as legislation. It has since been introduced in the 112th Congress (2011-2013) through the 118th Congress (2023-2025).[4][5]

REINS-style state laws are modeled on the proposed federal-level REINS Act, and contain the following two reform proposals: requiring a cost-benefit analysis of a rule expected to exceed certain financial or economic thresholds, and preemptive legislative action on that agency rule.

Cost-based analyses of agency rules require an entity to review and evaluate the impact of agency rules and determine if they are expected to exceed a certain cost threshold over a certain time. REINS-style state laws differ on the cost threshold and across how much time, whether non-quantifiable or social costs are included, and who completes the evaluation. The evaluator can be a legislative committee, a legislative office, an independent reviewer, or an agency entity.

REINS-style state laws require legislative action before an agency rule identified as having an estimated cost above the specified threshold can go into effect. The degree of legislative action varies; it can be legislative review by a legislatively controlled body, approval through a joint or concurrent resolution, or enactment of a statute that approves a rule.

Legislative history

The North Carolina REINS Act was introduced into the North Carolina House of Representatives on March 13, 2025 as House Bill (HB) 402. The bill passed the House on April 16, 2025, and advanced through the North Carolina State Senate with amendments on June 10, 2025. The final version of the bill, after reconciliation, was approved by the House on June 17, 2025. It was sent to Gov. Josh Stein (D) on June 19, 2025, and vetoed on June 27, 2025. On July 29, 2025, the House and Senate both voted to override Gov. Stein's veto, passing the bill into law.[1]

Below is an abbreviated timeline of the legislative history of the North Carolina REINS Act:[1]

Provisions

The sections below contain a series of quotes explaining the major provisions of the law, according to the text of the law. The quotes outline the requirement that rules exceeding a cost threshold receive legislative approval, an exception to this requirement, and additional requirements for rules proposed by multi-member commissions.[2]

Legislative approval for rules exceeding cost threshold

The following section outlines the law's requirement that rules exceeding the cost threshold must receive legislative approval to enter into force:

“

A permanent rule that would have an aggregate financial cost, as defined in G.S. 150B-19.4(d), on all persons affected of at least twenty million dollars ($20,000,000) in a five-year period shall become effective only if the General Assembly ratifies a bill to approve the rule. If a bill that specifically approves the rule is ratified by the General Assembly, the rule shall become effective on the later of (i) the first day of the month following the month that the bill ratifying the rule becomes effective or (ii) the date specified by the agency adopting the rule.[3]

”

Federal compliance exception

The following section outlines an exception to the legislative approval requirement:

“

This subsection shall not apply to a rule or set of rules that is required by federal law, including a rule or set of rules necessary to maintain compliance with a program delegated to the State from a federal agency.[3]

”

Additional requirements for commissions

The following section outlines requirements for rules proposed by multi-member boards or commissions:

“

(a) If an agency determines that a proposed permanent rule or set of rules will have a projected aggregate financial cost to all persons affected equal to or greater than one million dollars ($1,000,000) during any five-year period and the agency is a board, a commission, a council, or other similar unit of government, the permanent rule or set of rules must be adopted by a vote of at least two-thirds of the board or commission members present and voting on the rule or set of rules.

(b) If an agency determines that a proposed permanent rule or set of rules will have a projected aggregate financial cost to all persons affected equal to or greater than ten million dollars ($10,000,000) during any five-year period and the agency is a board, a commission, a council, or other similar unit of government, the permanent rule or set of rules must be adopted by a unanimous vote of the board or commission members present and voting on the rule or set of rules.[3]

”

This section also specifies an exception for rules required by federal law:

“

(c) This section shall apply to all rules adopted pursuant to Article 2A of Chapter 150B of the General Statutes, including rules undergoing periodic review and readoption under G.S. 150B-21.3A; provided, however, this section shall not apply to rules required by federal law, including a rule or set of rules necessary to maintain compliance with a program delegated to the State from a federal agency.[3]

”

See also

External links

Footnotes

  1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 North Carolina State Legislature, "HB402," accessed July 29, 2025
  2. ↑ 2.0 2.1 North Carolina State Legislature, "House Bill 402," accessed July 29, 2025
  3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
  4. ↑ The Jackson Sun, "We were never closer to seeing REINS Act become law," January 4, 2017
  5. ↑ Boston Herald, "Smith: Congress can regain power with REINS," January 6, 2017
v • e
The Administrative State
MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
Pillars
Reporting
Laws
Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Cases
Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
Terms
Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
Bibliography
Agencies
Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=North_Carolina_REINS-style_state_law&oldid=10470169"