Regulations' Enormous Costs Give DOGE an Enormous Opportunity
By one account, regulations cost American households over $15,000 per year. Here's hoping DOGE can help.

The Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has made a promise: It will go after regulations that slow growth, obstruct innovators and cost American households thousands of dollars each year. Here's hoping for success.
The burden of excessive regulation is hard to measure. We know, for instance, that the Code of Federal Regulations is over 188,000 pages long, guaranteeing that citizens can never really be sure they comply with every regulation.
While the stated intent of many rules is to protect the public interest—be it the environment, safety, or market fairness—the unintended consequences are often staggering. Regulations frequently impose costs far beyond their benefits, stifling entrepreneurship and innovation while hampering businesses' ability to produce at full potential, hire workers, or provide consumers with what we need.
Wayne Crews, author of the Competitive Enterprise Institute's "Ten Thousand Commandments" study, produced a price tag that he says is very conservative: $2.1 trillion per year. That's equivalent to Canada's entire economy and a hidden regulatory tax of $15,788 annually on each American household.
These eye-popping figures tell only part of the story.
The costs disproportionately impact new, small- and medium-sized enterprises, which lack the resources to hire compliance officers or navigate complex regulations. The Dodd-Frank financial legislation, enacted in response to the 2008 financial crisis, was over 2,300 pages long and added more than 400 new rules and mandates. While it aimed at reducing systemic financial risks, it's much harder for smaller banks and credit unions to navigate, leading to financial sector consolidation and reduced competition.
Environmental regulations are renowned for going too far and imposing costs that outweigh any benefits. Ignoring that the Clean Air Act's approach could be better handled through property rights and tort law, this act—which the Cato Institute's Peter Van Doren calls "utopian 'costs-don't-matter' air quality standards"—imposes massive compliance costs on businesses with diminishing returns. Each new amendment tackles increasingly smaller amounts of pollution at exponentially higher prices that are passed on to consumers.
Stringent Environmental Protection Agency emissions standards have made it prohibitively expensive to construct new manufacturing plants, effectively halting innovation in certain industries. The auto industry, too, faces onerous fuel-efficiency standards that raise the cost of vehicles—even green ones—and reduce consumer choice, all while delivering marginal environmental benefits.
And don't get me started on the National Environmental Protection Act of 1970 (NEPA). Its requirement for exhaustive environmental reviews has evolved into an endless process whereby even simple projects can be delayed for years through nonstop studies, public comments, and litigation. A single environmental impact statement can cost millions of dollars; on average, each takes four and a half years to complete. This regulatory maze makes it far more difficult to build critical infrastructure like highways, bridges, and energy projects promptly.
NEPA essentially gives federal bureaucrats and activists veto power over private development, even on state and private lands. Rather than protecting the environment, it's become a weapon for blocking development through death by delay, driving up costs for everything from housing to energy while providing minimal environmental benefit.
A prime example is the Keystone XL pipeline saga. The pipeline, which would have transported Canadian crude oil to U.S. refineries, was ultimately canceled after political and regulatory pushback. But NEPA is even more punishing to green projects.
The coming reforms should prioritize inserting sunset clauses on rules as they become outdated, streamlining compliance processes, and focusing on outcomes rather than prescriptive, rigid mandates that rule out more innovative approaches. Reducing regulatory burdens with these simple methods can unleash the creative potential of entrepreneurs and businesses.
Indeed, Van Doren reminds us that we are still benefiting from 1970s deregulation. Airline deregulation, while worth it on its own, opened the door to competition and innovation, including the emergence of low-cost airlines and other mass travel that no one could imagine at the time.
A freer economy is not just more productive or better equipped to meet the challenges of the future. It also means lower prices. Writing about Argentina's large, ongoing deregulation under President Javier Milei, Wall Street Journal columnist Mary O'Grady writes that the country's deregulation czar has "discovered a rough rule of thumb: Where deregulation happens, prices decline in the range of 30%. He has seen it in textiles, logistics and some agricultural products." Thirty percent!
That leads to a lot of extra economic growth. Potentially 3 percent more, argues economist John Cochrane. And since economic growth is everything—making nations richer, safer, healthier, cleaner and even more peaceful and tolerant—we should all cheer for DOGE to succeed.
COPYRIGHT 2024 CREATORS.COM
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
… regulations cost American households over $15,000 per year
Only tariffs have that power!
I'd love to believe that 30% figure. Unfortunately, it comes from a politician, strike 1; and a politician whose future votes depend on voters believing him, strike 2.
And my gut instinct says 30% is low, that if we were to dump all regulations, this economy would take off like a rocket.
But inequality!
A large positive effect on growth would come from zoning reform. Beyond reducing spatial misallocation of labor, it would create more blue collar jobs that could be filled by underemployed young men if they go into the trades.
"By one account, regulations cost American households over $15,000 per year. Here's hoping DOGE can help."
Oh, here's an idea: Deregulate businesses as much as possible.
It works.
For example, Jimmy Carter, of all people, deregulated the airline industry, and it took off (forgive the pun).
Deregulation of other businesses in the US will take off too with cutting red tape and eliminating needless and onerous regulations.
Oh, wait.
That makes sense.
What was I thinking?
My bad.
Also, remember that for most Democrats the most fundamental goal of life is regulating society.
Only because you won't listen to us!!! If you'd only do as we say, we'd have no need to regulate you!!! What about that, do you people not understand!!!
-The Democrats
Dude, it’s against the rules to give credit to a Democrat for anything. You’re supposed to say that Republicans deregulated airlines while Carter was president. You NEVER give credit to a Democrat. That’s outing yourself as a leftist.
Binary thinking.
LOL
It's against the rules to educate yourself even when given direct citations apparently.
Airline deregulation was formulated and initiated under Ford. You've been given the links multiple times.
But you have this weird addiction to defending any democrat or narrative positive of them.
Why do you hang on so desperately to media narratives when given actual truth?
Thanks for proving my point.
Airline deregulation was formulated and initiated under Ford.
So is it true or false?
"Airline deregulation was formulated and initiated under Ford."
By Ted Kennedy.
Republicans voted for deregulation, as did Democrats, but Republicans dld not play a major role in the process.
Lol.
I cant tell who is dumber, you or sarc.
Or a (shudder) libertarian.
Most businessmen like to be regulated because it protects them from competition.
Reason only complains about tariffs and ignores regulations because they hate Trump. Therefore this article doesn’t exist.
Poor sarc.
Fuck sarc with a barb-wire-wrapped broomstick. Why folks continue to engage with that slimy pile of TDS-addled lefty shit is a mystery to me.
Still a strawman.
>>we should all cheer for DOGE to succeed.
nice of you to finally come around.
Run the Code of Federal Regulations past an AI and task it to mark all duplications, illogic, conflicts, etc.
Bet the page count would go down.
I bet the computer would explode half way through the run - - - - - - - -
Reason writers start hallucinating thinking outside our own borders or just one imaginary construct. I'd give AI about a dozen layers deep before it starts hallucinating about on which side of which border cabotage or immigration is relatively unregulated by the US or Government and which side it tightly controlled by the EU or Canadian government, or whichever side of whatever border it's OK for Kyle Rittenhouse to defend himself while literally putting out dumpster fires and which side it's not.
That’s a feature, not a bug. Making regulations impossible to follow allows the government to anyone.
to *go after* anyone
Why isn’t there an edit button?
“…to [blank] anyone”?
Fill in the blank.
"property rights and tort law"
As in, you have no right to have even one molecule of your industrial boiler's exhaust appear over my property? Great! I can shut down every factory within 20 miles. The only career worth pursuing anymore would be trial lawyer.
Libertarians theory just doesn't work in practice.
Not with looters outnumbering us 49 to 1. But once the Jesus Caucus is gone, LP spoiler votes will manipulate the looters into repealing some of their own laws and taxes.
Congress de-regulated Savings and Loans at the start of the Reagan Administration, and guess what happened, financial disaster which Congress ended up bailing out at considerable taxpayer expense.
The Trumpists want to eliminate FDIC. I will remove my money from banks and so will most Americans. It will be 1933 all over again and we will get another Depression.
Republican prohibition confiscations and tax weaponization weakened US banks. But Hoover and Anslinger pushing the League of Nations into forcing Germany to ban/curtail all kinds of pharma exports triggered a MAJOR banking panic June 6, 1931, as Europeans jerked assets out of American banks. The Capone show trial didn't help matters.
The Left.
Economic growth that people need will KILL us all.
...because what plants need (CO2) will KILL them all.
Or just to summarize their absolute stupidity.
What you NEED to survive will KILL you!
...Only [OUR] 'Guns' (Gov-Guns) will SAVE you!
from what you NEED to survive because that'll KILL you!
Remember Italy: first the DOGE, then IL DUCE.