Executive Order 13771

From Infogalactic: the planetary knowledge core
Jump to: navigation, search
Executive Order 13771
Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
Seal of the President of the United States
File:Executive Order 13771.pdf
Executive Order 13371 in the Federal Registar
Type Executive order
Executive Order number {{#property:P1555}}
Signed by Donald Trump on January 30, 2017 (2017-01-30)
Federal Register details
Federal Register document number {{#property:P1544}}
Publication date February 3, 2017 (2017-02-03)
Document citation {{#property:P1031}}
Directs agencies to:
  • identify at least two existing regulations for repeal in place of every new regulation;
  • manage expenditure so that the total cost of new regulations does not increase.

Executive Order 13771 —entitled "Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs"— is an executive order signed by U.S. President Donald Trump on January 30, 2017.[1] It directs agencies to repeal two existing regulations for every new regulation, and to do so in such a way that the total cost of regulations does not increase. It is an example of a PAYGO (Pay As You GO) policy for regulations, comparable to regulatory PAYGO policies in Canada, the United Kingdom and Australia.[2]


Executive Order 13771 requires any executive department or agency who plans to publicly announce a new regulation to propose two regulations which will in turn be repealed. The cost of the implementation of these new regulations must be less than or equal to 0 dollars. If costs above 0 dollars are accrued, the payment of these costs shall be funded through the elimination of more regulations. Advice on the financial aspect of these matters is provided by the Director of the Office of Management and Budget.[3]

Director of the Office of Management and Budget

It is up to The Director to notify agencies of their total incremental costs for a given year. The Director is allowed to issue both increases or decreases in said costs. The Director also has the authority to exemplify regulations/agencies from compliance with the Executive Order.[3]


Executive Order 13771 will shrink the existing Code of Federal Regulations. By utilizing Pay As You Go policy, Executive Order 13771 will halt economic growth within governmental agencies affected by this Executive Order.[4] President Trump believes this Executive Order will encourage the Executive Branch to be financially responsible and prudent.[3] Groups such as Public Citizen, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Communications Workers of America have looked beyond the realm of economic feasibility, and have expressed concern about the Executive Order's impact on various public domains (see Lawsuit section).[5]


On February 8, 2017, Public Citizen, Natural Resources Defense Council, and Communications Workers of America filed a lawsuit against the implementation of the Executive Order 13771. The lawsuit states that the passing of the Executive Order by the Trump Administration is unconstitutional by violating separation of powers and overstepping the authority allowed under the Take Care Clause. This would make federal agencies violate governing statutes, like the Administrative Procedure Act which establishes the way agencies pass regulations.[5] By forcing federal agencies to focus on costs rather than benefits, these groups argue that the Executive Order harms the public by forcing agencies to repeal beneficial regulations and arbitrarily preventing new regulations to be passed.[6]

Affected regulations

The plaintiff's claim that the Executive Order 13771 will endanger public health, safety, and the environment and will force federal agencies to violate current governing statutes by ignoring the non-financial benefits current and potential regulations bring to the public.[5] In particular, the lawsuit cites several regulations that will be adversely affected, including:

White House Response

On April 10, 2017, the White House responded with a court filing, asking to dismiss the lawsuit due to its speculative nature. Because no regulations have yet been directly affected, the administration claims the lawsuit is too premature. In addition, the administration claims that the Executive Order does not exceed the president's scope of power.[7]


Former Federal Trade Commission official David Vladeck called the executive order "unconstitutional, illegal and stupid," saying "if you really want to reduce the regulatory load, you can't use a shotgun, you have to use a scalpel."[8]

On April 17, 2017, fourteen states (West Virginia, Wisconsin, Alabama, Arizona, Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Nevada, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Texas, and Wyoming) filed an amici curiae in support of the Executive Order.[9] The Republican states argue that the Executive Order falls within allowed presidential authority and will benefit state governments.[10]


In March 2017, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) formed a "Working Group On Regulatory Reform" to implement Executive Order 13771 to review and improve USPTO regulations.[11]

See also


  1. The White House, Office of the Press Secretary (January 30, 2017), Presidential Executive Order on Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  2. Peacock, Marcus (December 7, 2016), "Implementing a Two-for-One Regulatory Requirement in the U.S." (PDF), The George Washington University Regulatory Studies Center<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  3. 3.0 3.1 3.2 "Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs". Federal Register. February 3, 2017. Retrieved March 10, 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  4. "President Trump Issues Executive Order Aimed at Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs". The National Law Review. Retrieved March 15, 2017.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  5. 5.0 5.1 5.2 "PC, NRDC, CWA v. Donald J. Trump" (PDF).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  6. "Background on 2 for 1 Lawsuit" (PDF). NRDC.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  7. Henry, Devin (April 11, 2017). "White House asks court to dismiss suit over regulation repeals". The Hill.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  8. Gerstein, Josh (April 10, 2017). "How Merrick Garland could torment Trump". Politico.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  9. Devaney, Tim (April 18, 2017). "Trump's 'One In, Two Out' Regulatory Policy Backed by 14 States". The Hill.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  10. "Brief of Amici Curiae the States of West Virginia, Wisconsin, and 12 Other States" (PDF).<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>
  11. "USPTO Working Group on Regulatory Reform". www.uspto.gov. Office of the Chief Communications.<templatestyles src="Module:Citation/CS1/styles.css"></templatestyles>

External links