[Senate Hearing 119-250]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 119-250
TRUMP'S REGULATORY ROLLBACK: SAVING
AMERICANS $907 BILLION AND COUNTING
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS
AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP
OF THE
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
NOVEMBER 19, 2025
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship
[GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov
__________
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-295 WASHINGTON : 2026
=======================================================================
COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
----------
JONI ERNST, Iowa, Chair
EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Ranking Member
JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
RAND PAUL, Kentucky JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire
TIM SCOTT, South Carolina COREY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
TODD YOUNG, Indiana CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
TED BUDD, North Carolina JACKY ROSEN, Nevada
JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado
JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia ADAM B. SCHIFF, California
JON HUSTED, Ohio
Meredith West, Republican Staff Director
Sean Moore, Democratic Staff Director
C O N T E N T S
----------
NOVEMBER 19, 2025
Opening Statements
Page
Joni Ernst, United States Senator from Iowa...................... 1
Witness
The Honorable Casey B. Mulligan, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, U.S.
Small Business Administration, Washington, DC.................. 3
Prepared Statement........................................... 6
Additional Letters/Statements for the Record
Unted States Chamber of Commerce
Letter Dated November 19, 2025............................... 30
Questions for the Record
The Honorable Casey B. Mulligan
Responses to questions submitted by Ranking Member Markey.... 32
TRUMP'S REGULATORY ROLLBACK: SAVING AMERICANS $907 BILLION AND COUNTING
----------
WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2025
United States Senate,
Committee on Small Business
and Entrepreneurship,
Washington, DC.
The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in
Room 428A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Joni Ernst,
chairwoman of the committee, presiding.
Present: Senators Ernst [presiding], Young, Hawley, Booker,
and Hirono.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ERNST
Chair. I call the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship to order. As I travel from river to river
across Iowa, I hear from small businesses about the consistent
thorn in their side, which is overregulation. In fact, when
asked about federal regulations, Iowans consistently tell me to
bring back a simple message to Washington bureaucrats; stay out
of our way.
For a small business, regulatory compliance is more than
just a headache. It's wasted time and money they'd rather put
back into their businesses. It forces folks to jump through
hoops designed by people who have never run a payroll, or had
to scramble to keep their doors open and their lights on.
In Iowa, most entrepreneurs do not have extra folks on hand
dedicated to compliance, or a legal team to comply with
regulations designed for large corporations, not to mention the
endless time and money to fight Uncle Sam if they miss one
small paperwork requirement.
Unfortunately, during the previous administration, federal
bureaucrats ignored the resources and bandwidth of our small
businesses. During the Biden administration, a record
shattering 107,262 pages of rules were added to the Federal
Register, which cost an estimated $1.8 trillion, with a T,
trillion dollars, and added 256 million hours of paperwork onto
the plates of small business owners.
During President Biden's last year in office alone, his
administration issued over 3,000 final rules. The regulatory
costs of the Biden administration's reckless rulemaking were
more than 15 times higher than President Trump's first term,
and over three times higher than of Barack Obama's entire
presidency.
The massive mountain of paperwork hours due to bureaucratic
red tape cuts into small businesses, bottom lines. It slows job
creation and balloons compliance costs. It's simply bad for
business.
Since January, the Trump administration has published $702
billion in total regulatory cost savings, and cut 72.1 million
hours of paperwork, altogether, with additional deregulatory
efforts. These actions so far could save American taxpayers up
to $907 billion. And I know these savings will only grow as
small businesses recover from the previous administration's
regulatory onslaught. The Trump administration is hard at work
making sure agencies delete, revoke, and rescind the harmful
regulations of previous administrations.
I've been pleased to work with Administrator Zeldin to help
bring common sense back to the Environmental Protection Agency,
where the Trump EPA has been especially busy. Just this week,
the EPA proposed an updated Waters of the United States, or
WOTUS Rule, to clarify what is covered by WOTUS. This proposed
rule follows my Clean Waters Act, which would codify that
groundwater and waste treatment systems are not navigable
waters, and end this government overreach for our farmers,
landowners, and small businesses.
I am also glad that the EPA is working to overturn the
agency's harmful Obama-era Endangerment Finding, which allowed
far left administrations to pave the way for EV mandates and
Green New Deal policies. The Trump EPA estimates that the
Endangerment Finding has been used to justify over $1 trillion
in hidden taxes on small businesses and American families.
Revoking that finding would save Americans $54 billion
annually.
Today, our committee will hear from Chief Counsel for
Advocacy, Dr. Casey Mulligan. In any administration, the Office
of Advocacy is a valuable counterweight to the sprawling
bureaucratic mess that regulations create for small businesses.
Dr. Mulligan, thank you so much for your steadfast
commitment to identifying regulatory pain points that make it
difficult for small businesses to grow. It has been a personal
mission of mine to end the red tape nightmare that has
tormented our small business owners.
And earlier this year, I reintroduced the PROVE IT Act. My
bill requires agencies to consider both the direct and indirect
costs for small businesses before finalizing regulations. It
requires Advocacy to formally review federal agency
certification of rules, and prove that the federal government
is fully compliant with existing law, and it gives small
businesses a voice in the rulemaking process to shift the
balance of power away from the administrative state and back
onto the Main Street.
I also introduced the RED TAPE Act, earlier this year, to
expose the true price tag of Washington's red tape and end
Biden shady circular, A-4 scheme used to conceal the cost of
federal regulations. Just a few weeks later, President Trump
issued Executive Order 14192, which mirrored my legislation and
formally rescinded the Biden-era guidance. This sort of common-
sense legislation along with the deregulatory action of this
administration will truly lead to a golden age for America's
small business.
I look forward to hearing from Dr. Mulligan today about
further ways we can work together to reduce regulatory burdens
on small firms. Ranking Member Markey is unable to make it
today, so we will go ahead, and we will start then with your
statement. So, you, Dr. Mulligan, are recognized. I'll give you
an introduction first, but then, you will have five minutes for
your opening statements.
And again, I would like to extend a warm welcome today to
our witness, Dr. Casey Mulligan. I'm thankful that you took the
time out of your busy schedule to be here with us, and I think
it looks like it might be a quick hearing today. We will have
members come and go throughout the day, but the committee is
excited to hear about the work of the Office of Advocacy, and
your work to limit the regulatory burdens on small businesses
since your confirmation.
In August, Dr. Mulligan was confirmed by the Senate, and
currently serves as the SBA's Chief Counsel for Advocacy. Prior
to this, he was a professor at the University of Chicago,
specializing in labor economics, public policy, and the impacts
of regulation on economic behavior.
During the first Trump administration, he served as chief
economist for the White House Council of Economic Advisors. Dr.
Mulligan received his Bachelor of Arts from Harvard University,
and earned his Ph.D. in economics from the University of
Chicago.
I ask unanimous consent that Dr. Mulligan's full statement
be included in the record. And without objection, it is so
ordered. And with that, Dr. Mulligan, you're recognized for
five minutes for your testimony. You may begin.
STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CASEY B. MULLIGAN, CHIEF COUNSEL FOR
ADVOCACY, U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, WASHINGTON, DC
Dr. Mulligan. Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and
members of the committee, I'm honored to discuss with you the
small business effects of President Trump's regulatory agenda.
My testimony does not necessarily reflect the views of the
administration or of the SBA.
Before I begin, I would like to thank the committee for
supporting my nomination to this position of Chief Counsel, and
I look forward to working with you to support America's small
businesses.
The Biden administration finalized 12,000 rules that would
cost almost $6 trillion. Against that backdrop, President Trump
was elected to stop, and I quote him, ``ever expanding morass
of complicated federal regulation.'' He directed agencies to
identify regulations that impose undue burdens on small
businesses.
Advocacy is well positioned to help agencies follow in that
direction. During my nomination hearing, I committed to
prioritizing meeting small businesses where they are, and I
have done so in person, in Iowa even, together with our
regional advocates who every day gather small business
perspectives nationwide and bring them into policy discussions
here in Washington.
For years, small businesses burdened by regulations
remained silent, fearing retaliation. Now, they tell Advocacy
that this administration is the first to listen and to
understand. One even said that Advocacy quite literally saved
Christmas, as agencies have been seeking comment on candidates
for deregulation.
My office has flagged roughly 300 issues, particularly
those giving large organizations an artificial advantage over
small ones. One example is the Outpatient Prospective Payment
System, which pays hospitals more for identical services than
it pays independent physicians.
The Trump administration has already delivered substantial
regulatory relief for small businesses. For example, the One
Big Beautiful Bill zeroed out the penalty on auto manufacturers
that fail to achieve Biden's impossible fuel economy standards.
With approximately 14 million Schedule C businesses owning
vehicles, that change alone positioned small entities to save
tens of billions of dollars.
In addition, President Trump and Congress removed 16
regulations this year by way of the Congressional Review Act.
More rule changes are on the way. Among roughly 60 economically
significant rules so far, the largest savings likely come from
the rule that the chair mentioned, which is to stop greenhouse
gas regulations of vehicles. Without that action, vehicle
quality would've fallen and prices risen, costing small
businesses about half a trillion dollars.
Another rule flagged by small businesses is the proposed
OSHA Heat rule. It would impose sweeping one-size-fits-all, and
often absurd requirements, on workplaces where heat is above
certain temperatures. During a meeting with Advocacy, an
Arizona watermelon farmer explained that the rule would require
shade structures even though harvesting occurs at night when
there's no sun to be shaded.
In contrast, well-designed deregulation increases
competition and productivity. President Trump's first term was
a case in point. Prescription drug prices fell for the first
time in decades. Deregulation sharply reduced internet access
prices. And that's all about the competition channel that we
see in the Regulatory Flexibility Act.
While regulators are quick to sanction businesses when they
violate the requirements, they often fail to follow the rules
Congress set. A particularly frequent practice has been to
unlawfully certify important rules as not having a significant
economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Such
certifications are a pathway to capricious enforcement actions.
In Orwellian fashion, 65 percent of the major rules from
the Biden administration were nonetheless said to lack
significant effects on small businesses or otherwise not
require any consideration of those effects. Small businesses
were saddled with at least a hundred billion in costs without
any acknowledgement that there were costs.
President Trump's Restoring Gold Standard Science Executive
Order initiates additional reforms that small entities have
long sought: decisions that rest on transparent data and
reproducible methods. For example, independent fishermen find
the modeling of fisheries by the Biden administration to be
outdated and contrary to the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Among other
things, they point to Georges Bank where closures aimed at
protecting groundfish also stopped scallop harvest, leaving an
estimated $52 million in annual scallops to die off
unharvested.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. As Chief
Counsel, I will continue to listen and to work toward better
policy for all small businesses. And I would be happy to answer
questions.
[The prepared statement of Dr. Mulligan follows.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Chair. Wonderful. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan. And we'll begin
the questioning round, and I will recognize myself for five
minutes for questions.
So, Dr. Mulligan, the cost of living and affordability for
Americans, including our small businesses, has been top of mind
for President Trump in the first year of his second term.
Overregulation makes it difficult for small firms to stay in
business, and it also hurts every American family struggling
with the cost of childcare, home heating, and electricity, and
housing affordability.
With the holidays around the corner, how has deregulation
made everyday items more affordable for our American families?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. And the answer
is much anticipated in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. It
points to two issues with regulatory overreach. One, is by
discouraging the smaller companies from entering the market.
There's less competition, and those bigger companies who are
still there are free to charge quite a bit.
The other channel is productivity. We ended up using more
resources to do the same amount because of the extra paperwork
and extra compliance. So, electricity, for example, we need
more resources to make the same electricity, which means higher
electricity prices for people. We've seen that throughout the
energy area in the last four years. Delivering energy to our
consumers has been quite difficult.
Chair. Good. And I appreciate that, and the fact that we
are trying to drive those costs down. And it's just common-
sense measures that this administration is taking.
So, Dr. Mulligan, as your testimony had pointed out, small
businesses across Iowa and America are hurting due to the
compliance costs that Washington bureaucrats don't even think
twice about. For our small business owners, extra paperwork
means less time actually working to grow their businesses.
And as you know, as I discussed earlier, I've introduced
the PROVE IT Act to make bureaucrats prove that those proposed
rules do not harm small businesses. And it gives Advocacy
further tools to enforce their mission, and to ensure small
businesses are considered in the rulemaking process.
How would the tools given to your office in the PROVE IT
Act allow you to better interact with your federal partners,
and what legislative authority would you still need?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. My experience so
far in the Trump administration, which has just been a few
months, they're extremely supportive of Advocacy and the small
businesses. They're coming to me quite often asking, ``What can
we do to make the rules better for small businesses?''
But President Trump won't always be our President. And then
what happens after that? And I think legislation would be quite
helpful to stop the practice that we saw so much in the last
four years of saying that a regulation is not meaningful for
the small businesses, when in fact, it's quite meaningful and
can sometimes put them out of business.
Chair. Yes, we've seen that a lot through the years, and
hopefully, we'll be able to get the PROVE IT Act across the
finish line. That is definitely a goal of mine.
Recently, the CFPB released a proposed rule regarding small
business lending. And just this week, the EPA released a new
proposed WOTUS rule. How do these new rules compare to their
predecessors in terms of their impact on small businesses?
Dr. Mulligan. Both of those rules, when they came out
before this administration, they were adding costs, as we heard
in my office about those costs. And the new rules, they're in
the proposed stage. They're largely set to reverse what was
done. And during the process, I've seen in, even in preparing
the proposed rules, there was a lot of listening to small
businesses, and those agencies told us, ``Wow we were glad to
hear from them because we were able to make a better proposed
rule based on the wisdom that they heard from outside the
Beltway.
Chair. That is good. And I'll just share a very abbreviated
story, but also when it came to farmers under the Biden WOTUS
rule, if a farmer who had not tilled his field for a while, if
he decided to farm that land again, there was additional cost
because that farmer was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars
for disturbing the land that he owned and intended to farm.
So, not only is there a cost of regulation and adhering to
that regulation, but then there's the government overreach
where you can also be fined for simply doing your normal day-
to-day activities as a small business owner, which are farmers
or small business owners.
So, my time is expired. We'll come back for additional
questions, but at this point, I will recognize the Senator from
Hawaii, Senator Hirono, for five minutes.
Senator Hirono. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, you are the
advocate, I suppose, for small businesses, right? You the
counsel. So, as I talk with small businesses in my state, the
biggest thing that they are concerned about right now are the
President's tariffs. But you're not talking about the tariffs
as increasing costs for small businesses in your testimony. Why
not?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. I think the
tariffs you're referring to came out around April 1st, and----
Senator Hirono. Well, the President's tariffs, they come
and they go. There's a certain unpredictableness about it, and
that that's another reason that small businesses are concerned,
and that there have already been billions of dollars in
payments that businesses have had to make. And by the way, so
can you answer my question? Why aren't you talking about
tariffs as being a cost driver for small businesses?
Dr. Mulligan. Advocacy doesn't make the rules about tariffs
or anything else. We have two things we do. Number one, we
listen----
Senator Hirono. But excuse me, your job is to, did you just
say, listen to small businesses and address their concerns,
their concern being impact of the tariffs?
Dr. Mulligan. One way. Number two, make sure those people
who do make the policy are aware of those concerns. And my
position is subject to Senate confirmation, even though the
President was incredibly quick to get me nominated, and the
chair of this committee was incredibly quick to get the hearing
going. Somehow, the Senate did not finish the job until well
after the trade policies were initiated. So, the chief counsel
chair at those policy discussions was empty.
Senator Hirono. You are avoiding answering my question, you
know, that President Trump has imposed tariffs in April. And
then, as I said, they come and go. And my question to you is,
knowing that these tariffs are very detrimental in raising
costs for small businesses, why aren't you talking about
tariffs in your testimony?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. My job is to
listen to the small businesses, and to communicate to those who
do make the policies their concerns. Right on the heels of----
Senator Hirono. And so, did you tell the people who are
making these policy decisions that the tariffs are hurting
small businesses?
Dr. Mulligan. Let me explain to you how that worked. On the
heels of my confirmation, the government was shut down. So,
while I was able to listen--thank you, Congress, for the
excellent funding you gave my office so we could stay open. I
was listening like crazy, but it was not until the government
reopened.
And let me tell you, last Wednesday, government was still
closed. The White House called me at 8:00 p.m. and they said,
``Casey, get over here. The government's open tomorrow. The
agencies need to hear what the small businesses are telling
you.''
And I went there, and I sat close to----
Senator Hirono. If I look a little frustrated, that's
because I am. You wrote in your book, ``Tariffs are taxes on
small businesses.'' And wouldn't taxes on small businesses hurt
small businesses? So, you don't need to be confirmed, or talk
to them, or whatever. You've written about it. So, why is it
that we can't hear what you're going to do to help small
businesses deal with this on again, off again, tariff
situation.
By the way, I've talked to small businesses in Hawaii, and
anybody who imports anything, any part of a product that the
Hawaii businesses sell, and that goes for small businesses all
across the country, are having to pay higher costs.
So, there's a chip maker in Hawaii, for example, he gets
some of his packaging from China. He's had to pay more for his
product, which are chips. So, there is no question that these
tariffs that Trump tariffs are hurting small businesses. And
yet, you're not here to tell us about how that is impacting
small businesses. And not to mention, I would like to ask you,
are tariffs taxes? Yes or no?
Dr. Mulligan. I just wasn't able to finish answering your
question, which is what am I telling Trump people about the
tariffs.
Senator Hirono. I'm moving on----
Dr. Mulligan. I'm in the middle of telling that----
Senator Hirono. I'm moving on to ask you; are tariffs
taxes?
Dr. Mulligan. President Trump campaigned on changing the
composition of revenue----
Senator Hirono. Are tariffs taxes?
Dr. Mulligan. They're a source of revenue.
Senator Hirono. Are tariffs taxes? Why aren't you answering
the question? You said so in your book that tariffs are taxes.
Madam Chair, I don't know why our witness, the single
witness we have, who's supposed to be talking about impacts on
small businesses and how we can be of help, and the biggest
impact that they're having to face right now are the tariffs,
and we have a witness who's not responding to my questions. I
thank you very much.
Chair. Thank you, Senator. And I would also respond that.
What the Trump administration is doing by releasing some of the
overreach from the federal government on those small
businesses, it has created some equilibrium to any hurt that
small businesses may be feeling.
So, this is something that we can do for the long run,
though, is undo the pain of the pressure from some of these
regulations that are fine for larger corporations, but
certainly do hurt those smaller businesses. So, I appreciate
that.
And I would also recommend that the members of the
committee, also, should be the ones advocating for their small
businesses and reaching out. If they feel that there is a
concern from small businesses, they should take that to the
administration. So, I know I certainly do. I have those
conversations with the President and the administration.
And, Senator Booker, thank you so much. If you would go
ahead and direct your questions to the witness, you are
recognized for five minutes.
Senator Booker. Chairwoman, I really appreciate you. Thank
you for having this hearing. Gives us an opportunity to have a
conversation.
Mr. Mulligan, I crisscross my state and really am
interested in the success of small businesses. They are the top
job givers in our state and job providers. It's extraordinary
to see these entrepreneurs who risk their capital, and make
serious investments in not just the success of their
businesses, but as you know, small businesses radiate into our
communities or are part of the fabric of our towns, especially
a state like New Jersey, which is runs on our small towns.
One of my biggest concerns I hear from my small businesses
right now is just healthcare. They're getting really stuck
pretty badly with healthcare costs. Congress did sweeping cuts
to the federal healthcare funding programs, and has really
given tax cuts not to some of the small businesses, but seen a
lot of them manure to the benefit of the wealthiest there are.
And so, the CBO, which is the non-partisan Congressional
Budget Office, as you know, estimates the healthcare provisions
in that bill will increase our deficit by $907 billion from
2025 to 2034. And the increases, the number of uninsured
Americans, by 10 million by 2034, and additional 4.2 million
will lose their Marketplace coverage because the law failed to
extend the tax credit enhancements, which lower annual premiums
by more than $700 on average for people who receive them
simultaneously.
The small business businesses with the Affordable Care Act
are facing premium increases of about, on average, 11 percent
for 2026, according to an analysis of premium preliminary rate
filings from 318 insurers across all 50 states.
And so, when I just finished crisscrossing my state, having
town halls, I was stunned. I thought we were going to be
talking about other issues, but small business after small
business talked to me about literally the impossibility of
covering healthcare or even imagining trying to cover it for
people to work for.
I had one woman who has a flower business in my state who
talked about not only will she have to forego health insurance,
her and her husband, in order to keep it for their children,
but having the challenges also of watching their employees who
get it through the Marketplace have to lose their insurance as
well.
So, as the administration finalizes its regulations for the
Trump tax bill, will you advocate for the small business owners
whose prices are going up due to the administration's economic
policies, or who will actually lose valuable employees, as some
of the owners told me that are going to go to places where
they're going to get health coverage because they can no longer
afford it themselves?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. The short answer
is yes. I listen to the small businesses, and then I report
what I hear to those who make the rules, and around healthcare
in this case. And like you, I hear a lot, and my staff hears a
lot about healthcare. We have a letter on our website where
we've gathered together, my count was 97 different healthcare
issues, that we heard about from small businesses. And the cost
of insurance is something that's often cited.
One thing that's often cited is the pandemic emergency. We
hear in so many different ways that rules that were put in
place during the pandemic are still there and the pandemic
emergency doesn't end. And that really undermines a number of
healthcare----
Senator Booker. I'm going to interrupt you because I got 90
seconds. So, I get it. As a former mayor, the bureaucracy, the
rules, all of these things, this is where I find a lot of
agreement with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle.
But the biggest issue, and I'm not overstating this at all, was
the staggering premium cost, the staggering cost of people's
healthcare.
And you said, yes, I'll advocate for that. But I'm
wondering specifically when you're saying on your own website,
I think that you were mentioning you're having people bring
this problem. I'm asking you then, what is the solution? What
will you be specifically advocating for to deal with the number
one issue?
And it's anecdotal, but that I heard in county after county
of New Jersey, meeting with small business people, thinking I
was going to talk about other issues. But every conversation
centered around this staggering cost of healthcare. And I'm
wondering, you as a person that's in a very important position,
what specifically is the solution, as you see it?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. We have 97
specifics in the letter, but if I were to organize them, as we
did in the beginning of that letter, really the Regulatory
Flexibility Act principles apply very well to those 97, which
is there are a lot of regulations that reduce competition in
healthcare.
And I mentioned in my opening statement things that
increase the cost of healthcare by undermining independent
physicians. And the other aspect is wasted resources. To
deliver the same healthcare, we need more resources because of
all the red tape.
Senator Booker. And have you thought about the
consequences? Because the immediacy of this, it starts at the
end of the year, what are the consequences going to be for
small businesses that see their costs going up tens of
thousands of dollars; not being able to cover their families,
or facing employees leaving? Have you thought about--because to
me it seems like quite the tsunami that's about to hit small
businesses with their costs going up 5 percent, 10 percent, 15
percent just for health insurance alone.
Dr. Mulligan. What we have been doing at my office, and
I've been doing myself, is again, listening to what the small
businesses have to say and the problems that they express.
Senator Booker. But there's no--you have no immediate
solution, in your mind, for in January?
Dr. Mulligan. Well, I have 97 solutions that I heard from
the small businesses. They're not from Casey Mulligan, they're
from the small businesses. Some of them are immediate and
others may take more time.
Senator Booker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chair. Yes, thank you, Senator Booker. And I would say, as
you pointed out, there are steep premium increases. So, just
simply allowing subsidies to continue to flow doesn't bring the
cost of healthcare down. So, I think this is something we all
should be able to work on together; is figure out what is going
on in healthcare that's driving those costs up, and how do we
actually lower the cost of the healthcare so that it's just not
significant premiums.
So, I hope that we all can come together and figure that
out because, yes, our small businesses need an option that is
affordable and allows easy access to healthcare. So, thank you,
God bless you. And Senator Hawley, you are recognized for five
minutes.
Senator Hawley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Dr.
Mulligan, thank you for being here. Let me just start, if I
could, by asking a little bit about rural businesses. This is
something that I talked to the administrator about when she was
here for her confirmation hearings.
I was sort of surprised, fairly stunned actually, to see
these numbers. The Biden administration's SBA spent in Fiscal
Year 2024 alone, out of 103,000 loans, only 12,500 of them went
to rural businesses. 12 percent of the $56 billion in capital
last fiscal year, $6 billion went to rural businesses. That's
less than 11 percent.
My state is majority rural. We have many, many small
businesses throughout the state that are located in rural
areas. And, obviously, I think a key function of the small
business administration is to protect and promote rural
businesses. So, let me just ask, what office--what role,
rather, does your office, the Office of Advocacy play in
promoting rural small businesses?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. And we know from
a lot of our analysis and visiting in person, small businesses
are especially prominent in rural areas. And as I committed in
my nomination hearing and I have done in person, is to go out
and visit, go where they are. Don't ask them to come to
Washington, go visit them.
We even had an instance a month or two ago where it was
such a remote area that my regional advocate took a mule for
the last couple of miles. And we're really going to great
lengths to hear from--in that case, it was ranchers. And the
ranchers were thrilled that we were listening, and they were
thrilled with the results that we're getting. And we came back
to President Trump's team to start to improve some of that poor
policy in the rural areas.
Senator Hawley. What steps do you think can Congress take
to ensure SBA prioritizes rural areas and rural businesses? Any
recommendations you might have?
Dr. Mulligan. Maybe I'd like to meet with my staff and get
back to you. That's a serious ask, and I don't want to have a
glib answer to that. Certainly, there is lots of room because a
lot of our policies have not treated the rural areas well.
Senator Hawley. Yeah, understood. And I certainly, agree
with that, and I just want to point out that, you know,
programs like the 7(a) Loans, the 504 Certified Development
Company Loans, Disaster Recovery Assistance, these kinds of
programs are absolutely vital to rural America, in general, and
to rural businesses in particular. And they need support and
advocacy from your office and, and across the agency.
Let me just ask you for a second while I've got you here in
my remaining time. Let's go back to talk a little bit about
SBA's 8(a) Program. You're familiar with the 8(a) Program, Dr.
Mulligan?
Dr. Mulligan. Kelly Loeffler, that's her area. Now, any
regulation that she puts out because she's subject to the
Regulatory Flexibility Act, I would review, and again, hear
from the small businesses and comment on that. So, I'm familiar
with it from that perspective, but I'm not involved in making
the 8(a) rules.
Senator Hawley. Well, I guess my question is this. I mean,
the 8(a) has been back in the news recently for reports of all
kinds of corruption and waste of taxpayer dollars. You've got
the most recent example, ATI Government Solutions, which is a
technology services company, apparently that improperly, maybe
fraudulently, claimed ownership Native American ownership to
get 8(a) status, and has been exposed now for acting as a pass-
through organization to take unfair advantage of this program.
These things are happening. We're seeing these reports
proliferate, and we don't have an Inspector General at SBA. So,
I guess maybe my question should be, given what you just said a
moment ago, I mean, do you think it's time that we get an
Inspector General at SBA so that we're able to address these
allegations or reports of fraud?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. I have been
frustrated in that Senate confirmation process on how long it
took. It shouldn't take that long. And you're right, it's
taking way too long for the SBA Inspector General.
Senator Hawley. Yeah, I think so, too. Thank you, Madam
Chair.
Chair. Thank you so much. And I'll take five minutes
additional for a few more questions. I really appreciate your
time today, Dr. Mulligan.
I do want to turn to the great work that you have been
doing at the Office of Advocacy. You and your team have worked
really hard to shed light on a lot of these hard-to-understand
regulations. There's a lot on the books that are small
businesses. They don't have the time to research. They don't
have the time to understand. They don't have additional
personnel to sort through all of that, and it costs them money.
So, as you've traveled across the country, I know you've
met with a lot of small businesses, you've had discussions with
small firms. What is the top existing regulation that is
currently negatively affecting small businesses that those of
us here in Congress can actually grab a hold of, or even
something that exists that the administration might be able to
grab a hold of, and look at reforming or rolling back?
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. There are
regulations in both categories, and in fact, working together
like Congress did on the Congressional Review Act, that small
businesses are very thankful for that. That gives them more
durability and more certainty going forward.
You know, a top one is a little bit hard. We just put on
our website, advocacy.sba.gov, a most wanted list. And there's
not just one on there, but it's a fairly short list. These are
the ones we heard most from the small businesses. And often, in
a dollar sense, they have costs well into the billions, just
for one of the rules.
The 2024 Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification is one
that we hear a lot from small businesses that are involved or
hope to be involved in contracting, the 2024 Heat rule,
quarterly payroll filings. And believe it or not, 15 years on,
the Obamacares employer mandate.
Chair. I wish we had had that question just a little bit
ago. So, yes, the mandate can be very, very costly, but I do
hope that as a Congress or as an administration, that we can
all work together to find some reasonable solutions to help our
small businesses in all of those areas.
So, following the bureaucratic nightmare created by the
former administration, the Trump administration has been really
working very hard to slash a lot of the regulations and red
tape that are out there that affect small businesses, and make
it cheaper and simpler for these small business owners to
comply with federal regulations.
And your office has been playing a key role in that fight.
So, Dr. Mulligan, I intend to follow-up with, of course,
perhaps a question for the record. But as the first confirmed
Chief Counsel for Advocacy in a decade, and you noted that the
seat had been vacant, but you are the first one in a decade,
I'm confident that you have many well-informed ideas about how
to strengthen and better that role for the benefit of all of
our small businesses.
So, if you would, briefly, because I only have a minute and
a half left, just briefly describe what you've thought about
any legislative changes that you would recommend that could be
helpful to us, and in addition to the PROVE IT Act, of course,
because I would like to see that over the finish line. But
things that would allow us to be good champions for our small
businesses.
Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. One idea in the
spirit of the PROVE IT Act would maybe to require that any
major rule can't be certified without the Chief Counsel's
approval. Let's stop the double-talk, the Orwellian
doublespeak. That would be an idea.
If you can, take a look at President Trump's budget, it's
an excellent budget. But one of the things that it does is
really support the Office of Advocacy to a much greater degree
than the draft budget that came out of the House. So, if the
Senate could look at that, that would also, I think, be
helpful.
Chair. Wonderful.
Dr. Mulligan. And I know the small businesses are very
appreciative of what Advocacy is able to do now that it has a
Senate-confirmed leadership.
Chair. I think that's great. And again, I'll reform this
question. I'll submit it for a question for the record. And
then, as you're hearing from some of those small businesses,
you said you had 97 different ideas or suggestions that are out
there or topics. Perhaps some of those might make its way here
to the halls of Congress, and we could actually work on some
solutions for those small businesses.
So, I will stop the questions here, and do appreciate your
time today. I thank you. I know it is a busy day on the Hill,
but thank you for being here. I see that there are no further
questions. So, again, thank you for joining us.
I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing
remain open for two weeks for members to submit questions,
revise, and extend their remarks, and submit additional
information into the record.
And without objection, it is so ordered.
And with that, the Committee on Small Business and
Entrepreneurship stands adjourned. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan.
[Whereupon, at 3:14 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
[all]