Federal Red Tape Plunges Under Trump
The president is making real progress on deregulation, but he needs to get Congress involved.
Among the high points of President Donald Trump's first administration was his push to rein in the administrative state and reduce the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals. The president seems to have carried his deregulatory instincts over to his second term, which is an encouraging sign. Unfortunately, he's also continued his taste for unilateral action, often carried out through executive orders. If that continues, it will be all too easy for future administrations to undo any gains.
You are reading The Rattler from J.D. Tuccille and Reason. Get more of J.D.'s commentary on government overreach and threats to everyday liberty.
The High Cost of Red Tape
Regulation isn't just an annoyance—it's a prosperity killer. At the end of 2024, the MetLife & U.S. Chamber of Commerce Small Business Index found that "51% of small businesses say navigating regulatory compliance requirements is negatively impacting their growth" and that "almost as many (47%) say their business spends too much time fulfilling regulatory compliance requirements."
With the affordability of housing a major concern, the National Association of Home Builders warns that "regulations account for nearly 25% of the cost of a single-family home."
It's encouraging to see a president attempt to reduce red tape.
Recovering From a Period of Record Rulemaking
"While Biden's 2024 Federal Register totaled 106,109 pages—the highest in history—the 2025 volume closed the year with 'only' 61,461 pages (adjusted for blanks and skips), the lowest seen since Trump's first-term tally of 61,067," reports the Competitive Enterprise Institute's Clyde Wayne Crews in an end-of-year analysis of the Trump administration's regulatory policies. "Both are levels otherwise not seen since 1993. Notably, 7,648 of those pages are attributable to Biden-era activity before Trump's inauguration."
True, the Federal Register is only a rough count of regulatory activity; there are other ways the government imposes red tape on the population. Also, the Administrative Procedure Act requires that a rule be issued to repeal a preexisting rule. Theoretically, you could fatten up the Federal Register with nothing but rule rescissions. But the page count is a good starting point for judging the general direction of regulatory activity.
On that point, Trump offers a real contrast to both his predecessor and his successor in the White House. Prior to the Biden administration, BallotPedia reports, "the Federal Register hit an all-time high of 95,894 pages in 2016" under the presidency of Barack Obama (the Law Librarians Society of Washington D.C. puts it at 97,110 pages). That was the first time it exceeded 90,000 pages. The Biden administration broke a new barrier when it exceeded 100,000 pages in 2024. Of course, the rules those pages represent, offset by whatever "unrules" (delays and rescission) are mixed in, accumulate year after year.
Crews comments that not only is the Federal Register page count down, but "final rule counts cratered to 2,441 in 2025. That is not only substantially down from Biden's 3,248 in 2024, it is the lowest total since recordkeeping began in the mid-1970s." Of the rules issued under Trump, 243 actually began life under Biden and many of the rules issued were unrules delaying or rescinding existing red tape.
Crews doesn't address the details of rules and rule rescissions issued during Trump's first year back in office. To wade further into the weeds, see the Brookings Institution, which notes: "As the Trump administration returns to office for a second term with renewed deregulatory ambitions, the executive branch and its agencies are implementing significant policy changes." Brookings maintains a regulatory tracker which "provides background information and status updates on a curated selection of significant regulatory and deregulatory changes made by the Trump administration."
So, it looks like the second Trump administration is off to a decent start in keeping its January 2025 promise "to promote prudent financial management and alleviate unnecessary regulatory burdens" by ensuring that "for each new regulation issued, at least 10 prior regulations be identified for elimination."
Missed Opportunities During Trump's First Term
Trump's first term made similar commitments as reviewed in 2020 for the Cato Institute by Keith B. Belton and John D. Graham. They concluded the flow of new regulations was much smaller compared to previous administrations and that the administration was somewhat effective in working with Congress to enact deregulation through legislation. But "Trump's effectiveness as a deregulator has been hampered by a lack of political appointees in key regulatory agencies and a skeptical judicial branch dominated by judges appointed under Democratic administrations."
Among the challenges the first Trump administration faced, Belton and Graham noted, was that by leaving many executive branch offices unfilled, the management of agencies and the enactment of the administration's policies was left in the hands of career staff who didn't necessarily agree with the deregulatory program: "Without the assistance of agency career staff, it is unlikely that deregulatory rulemakings will be completed in a judicially defensible manner."
The second Trump administration has made better progress filling key offices. That should help with implementing a deregulatory agenda. But if it remains a matter of enacting memos from the boss, that leaves regulatory reform to be undone by a future president.
Congress Needs To Get Involved in Reducing Red Tape
CEI's Crews warns that Trump's deregulatory achievements remain vulnerable in the current term: "Trump 2.0 has leaned heavily on executive orders (225 in all) to reverse Biden's politicized mandates on climate, DEI, financial disclosure, labor, energy, and more. But regulatory restraint that relies on presidential discretion is fragile, since executive orders can usually (though not always) be rescinded as easily as they are issued."
"The real test ahead is whether deregulation will be made durable by Congress or be left to the whims of the executive officeholder," Crews emphasizes. "Unfortunately for the Trump project, meaningful reform requires more than freezes and ratios. Congress needs to make the 'Unrules project' permanent, and to end the laundering of regulation by means other than the conventional rules featured in this roundup."
At a time when the regulatory burden in the United States is hampering businesses and raising costs for Americans, Trump and his team have emphasized cutting red tape and setting the economy free. They've made a good start in that direction with a greatly reduced volume of regulations. But a lasting deregulatory legacy requires getting Congress on board so that reform can be enacted into law and put beyond the whims of presidents to come.
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
Now would Trump PLEASE STOP trying to regulate foreign "leaders" (dicktators) and whether or snot they may own machine guns? Gun cuntrol at the point of guns in foreign lands is rather absurd!
(Gun cuntrol in the case of Venezuela is just the pretense; OIL cuntrol is where shit's REALLY at!)
Suddenly, borders are a thing.
Mad Mud-uro the Mad-Man was staying on HIS side of the border, with his machine guns! Shit is the would-be World Cunt-querers who are disrespecting the borders in cases like this! Greenland and Denmark (Canada and Panama too?) had better be beefing up their border defenses! Hello, World War III, and THANK YOU, Cunt-quering Orange Shitler-Caligula!
Plain and simple, to World-Cunt-quering Orange Shitler-Caligula and shit's brainless-wonder-children drooling morons, MEEEE and MY Borders are SACRED; borders of other people can and should be ignored at swill!!!
"Treat others as you'd like to be treated" udderly escapes the evil, greedy, selfish, and malignant peoples of this world!
Humorously it was the Bill Clinton Administration that did the Oil-For-Food Program after invading Iraq.
Leftard Self-Projection. It's all the leftarded does day-in and day-out.
[WE] do it. But it's all those 'icky' peoples fault [WE] did it. /s
"The real test ahead is whether deregulation will be made durable by Congress or be left to the whims of the executive officeholder," Crews emphasizes.
This sentiment won't be welcomed by Obama and Trump cultists who love Rule by Pen and Phone, but Congressional action is needed for lasting structural change. On that front, the SPEED Act is a good sign that there's useful life amongst the Congresscritters. If it passes, it represents much-needed deregulation for the Energy sector.
This standard complaint by cosplay libertarians is jist retarded. Congress doesn't make anything permanent. Congress can always undo what a prior Congress has done.
So the complaint is meaningless and just used to ignore or criticize actions actually taken.
Not surprised you agree with it. Even here you use it to criticize Trump for using congressionally passed prior laws.
Your complaints are meaningless and a standard leftist tactic to dismiss positive acts. Youre a useful idiot.
This standard complaint by cosplay libertarians is jist retarded. Congress doesn't make anything permanent. Congress can always undo what a prior Congress has done.
Agreed. At this point in the well-established decline of a Republic, congress is basically irrelevant. The best we can hope for at this point is benevolent action, which reducing regulations for businesses certainly is.
"This sentiment won't be welcomed by Obama and Trump cultists..."
But more than welcomed by TDS-addled steaming piles of shit cultists like this asswipe.
Trump would have to bribe Congress with something like giving them their USAID money pipeline back.
One of the best thing Trump does. He needs to be attacking the true Rinos in Congress that love the regulatory state and get some legislation passed that cripples the bureaucracts ability to make rules (eg. no rule can be law if Congress doesn't explicitly votes for it). Barring that, we'll see if Congress at least gets rid of the Dept of Education - and not just a reshuffle/renaming - , which should be easy.
More of this. Instead of complaining about everything note and encourage the positive.
The regulatory state is far more costly than even the worst and most ridiculous tariff cost speculation. It controls far more of the economy.
Good to see a rare note on this.
Do not resist. Just comply.
Soon , you will love the taste of boot.
Just because you did doesn't mean the rest of us should or will.
And the boot in your mouth is yours based on your posts here.
Deregulation = more boot to retards i guess.
You ought to see the cost of welfare fraud...
The president is making real progress on deregulation, but he needs to get Congress involved.
The police have made real progress in reducing the body count from serial killers... but they need to get the serial killers involved.
One wonders how much he's involved with what and how to deregulate. A deregulator at heart would not have created the complicated tariff mess that he has. What a politician doesn't care about, he leaves alone.
You've never read actual trade agreements have you? All those free trade agreements were complicated horse trading.
Domestic Tax-Cuts =/= A de-regulator at heart?
For WHO? China?
And that's why people who like the USA and Freedom elected Trump.
The USA and Freedom was more important than how many ponies they could STEAL from their neighbors.
I never got my stimulus pony. I was looking forward to some pony sashimi and making jerky out of the rest.
Which one?
Cares Act by [D] Courtney with a [D] House speaker void-vote objected by [R] Massie?
Or the ARPA Double-Dip by [D] Yarmuth, [D] Congress & [D] Biden?
Trump deserves shame on the first at about 15% of it.
Still making him 85% better than the other side of the isle.
Trump wouldn't be so good if the other side of the coin wasn't so bad.
If the majority of the congress wasn't filled with corrupt people then they would get involved. Instead the majority of congress is bought and payed for.
Congress doesn't want deregulation - they want a cha-ching machine.