The SCRUB Act of 2025 would overhaul how federal rules are created and reviewed by adopting a aggressive “regulatory cut-go” approach. When an agency writes a new rule, it must offset the rule’s anticipated annual costs by repealing existing rules or sets of rules that implement the same statutory authority, with the offset having a value equal to or greater than the new rule’s costs. This offset is determined by cost calculations done by the proposed DOGE (the United States DOGE Service) under the Office of Management and Budget. Agencies can instead choose to repeal eligible preexisting rules before issuing the new rule, and they may apply the cost savings to meet part of the offset within two years of that repeal if the new rule is finalized within that window. The bill also mandates a comprehensive retrospective review of existing and new rules aimed at cutting regulatory costs, with a target of at least a 33% reduction by July 4, 2026, while preserving regulatory effectiveness as much as possible. The act would require OIRA-related certification of cost calculations and would subject agency noncompliance to judicial review, taking effect immediately upon enactment. In short, SCRUB seeks to systematically reduce the overall regulatory burden by tying new rulemaking to the repeal of existing rules, and by conducting a broad, government-wide review to identify and repeal outdated or unnecessarily costly regulations.
Key Points
- 1Regulatory Cut-Go requirement (Sec. 101): For any new federal rule, an agency must repeal existing rules or sets of rules that implement the same statutory authority so that the new rule’s annual cost is offset by the cost reductions from repeal, with the offset equal to or greater than the new rule’s cost. The calculation is based on DOGE’s cost analyses and must exclude non-monetized (intangible) factors.
- 2Alternative repeal pathway (Sec. 101): Agencies may repeal eligible rules before the new rule is issued and later apply those cost savings toward meeting the offset for the new rule within 2 years of the new rule’s finalization, if the new rule is completed within that window.
- 3Net cost reduction requirement (Sec. 101): When using repeal to offset a new rule, the agency must achieve a net reduction in the overall costs of its rulemaking (including the new rule) that is at least equal to the new rule’s cost, potentially requiring additional repeals.
- 4OIRA cost Certification (Sec. 103): The Administrator must review and certify the accuracy of agency cost calculations for new rules, with the certification placed in the rule’s administrative record and transmitted to Congress.
- 5Definition of major rules and scope (Definitions section): A major rule is a rule likely to impose $100 million or more in annual costs (inflation-adjusted), or cause significant adverse effects on competition, employment, investment, productivity, or U.S. competitiveness, or have widespread economic impacts.
- 6Title II retrospective review plan (Sec. 201-202): The DOGE must identify and repeal rules to lower regulatory costs, prioritizing major rules, long-standing rules (over 15 years), burdensome paperwork, small-entity impacts, and those whose benefits do not justify costs. The goal is a 33% reduction in cumulative regulatory costs by July 4, 2026. Agencies must include future-review plans with their final rules and allow public comment; rules failing to meet criteria may be repealed.
- 7No reissuing substantially similar rules (Sec. 201): Repealed rules may not be reissued in substantially the same form absent a new law enacted after repeal.
- 8Judicial review (Sec. 301): Noncompliance with Title I (cut-go) and Title II (future review plans) is subject to judicial review under existing procedures.
- 9Effective date (Sec. 302): The Act takes effect on the date of enactment.