Regulatory Cost

Under President Trump’s executive order, the benefits of new regulations will play no role in regulatory decision-making.

As Trump takes aim at regulation, Canada’s experience with regulatory budgeting offers a possible template.

Scholar considers how costs and benefits might be calculated under a regulatory offsets system.

After a long battle, the Cross-State Air Pollution Rule receives an update.

Experts argue that the number and cost of regulations sharply rose in 2015—at a rate that has held steady in 2016.

A recent study shows a correlation between regulation and consumer prices.

Recent Court decisions have not created a presumption in favor of formal cost-benefit analysis.

Cost-benefit analysis has become a routinized part of policymaking. Probing what justifies this methodology helps us to see how it might be improved.

Earlier and less burdensome regulatory impact analyses would lead to more transparent, better regulatory decisions.

These two forms of regulatory capture require different solutions.

When a regulation’s benefits exceed its costs, simplicity and interdisciplinary processes are essential to reducing capture.

A 2009 court decision could spur more cost-benefit analysis in the regulatory process.