Browse regulations

This regulation implements 'Never Contract with the Enemy' requirements for federal grants and cooperative agreements over $50,000 performed outside the US in support of military contingency operations. It requires agencies to check prohibited persons lists, restrict/terminate/void awards if funds go to entities opposing US forces, mandate due diligence by recipients, and authorize record examinations to ensure compliance.

Americans would be worse off if deleted because this prevents US taxpayer funds from being used to support adversaries actively opposing our military forces during contingency operations. The national security justification is compelling and difficult to achieve through alternative means. While it adds administrative burden, the risk of inadvertently funding enemy combatants during active military hostilities outweighs these costs, especially given the limited scope to specific contingency operations outside the US.

This regulation implements the Drug-Free Workplace Act for federal grant recipients, requiring them to establish drug-free workplace policies, publish statements, create awareness programs, report employee drug convictions within 10 days, identify workplaces, and face penalties including suspension or debarment for violations. It applies to grants, cooperative agreements, and other financial assistance awards but not procurement contracts.

The compliance burden disproportionately harms small businesses and nonprofits, diverting scarce resources from their core missions. It federalizes workplace policy decisions that rightfully belong to employers and states, violating Tenth Amendment federalism principles. The threat of multi-year debarment creates barriers to entry and perverse incentives that actually reduce workplace safety. The knowledge problem ensures these one-size-fits-all rules will be mismatched to diverse organizational contexts, while the unseen costs—administrative overhead, reduced participation in federal programs, and chilling effects on hiring rehabilitated individuals—far outweigh any marginal benefits that could be achieved through less restrictive means like standard contract clauses or state-level regulation.

This regulation provides government-wide guidance for federal agencies to implement debarment and suspension systems across all nonprocurement programs (grants, cooperative agreements, etc.). It establishes uniform standards for excluding 'unresponsible' persons from federal transactions, creates reciprocal effects with procurement debarments, mandates use of the SAM.gov exclusions database, and imposes compliance burdens on participants to check for exclusions and disclose certain information. The system allows exclusion for various causes including convictions, civil judgments, indictments, or terminations for cause, with limited due process protections.

This debarment system creates a $2 trillion+ hidden tax through compliance costs while violating rule of law principles. The vague 'public interest' standard and broad exclusion criteria enable arbitrary punishment, functioning as a political blacklist that destroys livelihoods without adequate due process. It weaponizes federal power to exclude dissidents, competitors, and the politically inconvenient from all programs simultaneously through automatic reciprocity—a classic regulatory capture mechanism that protects incumbents. The mandatory SAM.gov surveillance database and tiered liability turn every contractor and grantee into an enforcement arm of the state, distorting incentives and creating a chilling effect on association and speech. Small organizations face 30% higher per-employee compliance costs, effectively raising barriers to entry. The entire apparatus represents administrative overreach that assumes perfect bureaucratic knowledge—the very fallacy Hayek identified—while imposing catastrophic unseen costs on civil society and market competition. Federal programs should compete on merit, not maintain extra-constitutional blacklists.

Requires federal grant recipients to certify and enforce anti‑trafficking compliance plans, report violations, and face termination for engaging in severe trafficking, forced labor, or related abuses.

Removing these safeguards would expose federally funded projects to increased trafficking and exploitation, harming vulnerable workers and undermining the moral objective of protecting liberty and preventing abuse.

This regulation establishes reporting requirements for federal financial assistance recipients, mandating disclosure of subawards over $30,000 and executive compensation for large entities (those receiving 80%+ revenue from federal sources and over $25M annually) unless already publicly disclosed through SEC filings. It creates reporting systems like FSRS and integrates with SAM.gov registration.

This regulation imposes significant compliance costs on businesses and nonprofits without demonstrable benefits. The reporting requirements create a surveillance state apparatus that chills free association and enterprise, while the executive compensation disclosure serves no legitimate purpose beyond political grandstanding. Small entities face disproportionate burden, and the information collected is rarely used for any meaningful oversight, representing pure regulatory waste.

Mandates that applicants and recipients of federal financial assistance obtain a UEI and maintain active SAM.gov registration, with narrow exemptions, to track and enforce award compliance.

Imposes heavy compliance costs and administrative burdens, especially on small entities, creates barriers to entry, and centralizes data with limited transparency benefit relative to its expense.

OMB guidance and agency regulations for federal financial assistance management, ensuring consistent policies and procedures across agencies

Contributes to $2 trillion annual compliance costs, creates bureaucratic labyrinth, and enables regulatory capture despite being guidance rather than regulation. Repeal would reduce hidden tax and align with limited government principles.

This regulation outlines procedures for seizure, administrative forfeiture, and disposal of wildlife, plants, and related property under various conservation laws enforced by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. It covers notice requirements, claims, petitions for remission, and forfeiture declarations.

Administrative forfeiture circumvents judicial due process, imposes hidden costs on taxpayers and innocent owners, and creates perverse incentives for agencies to profit from seizures. The complex procedures expand bureaucratic power at the expense of property rights and liberty, violating the principles of limited government.

This regulation prescribes the design, specifications, and use restrictions for the National Transportation Safety Board's official seal. It details the seal's appearance (colors, elements, monochrome versions), custody (Chief Human Capital Officer), permitted uses by the Board and external parties, prohibited uses (commercial items, souvenirs, clothing, etc.), and criminal penalties for falsification under 18 U.S.C. § 506.

This is ceremonial bureaucracy at its worst—regulating the use of a government logo. The costs include administrative overhead, chilling effects on free expression, and criminal penalties for symbolic acts causing no harm. No compelling government interest justifies controlling how citizens display a government emblem. The NTSB's mission is transportation safety investigation, not branding enforcement. This regulation epitomizes mission creep and should be repealed to reduce meaningless regulatory burden.

Compilation of standard Education Department Acquisition Regulations (EDAR) boilerplate clauses for federal procurement contracts, covering: Contracting Officer's Representative (COR) duties; contractor records management for federal records; personnel security vetting; Paperwork Reduction Act compliance; conflict of interest certifications; FOIA disclosure provisions; bid/proposal cost accounting rules; and award-term performance mechanisms.

Americans would be worse off without these provisions: government contracts would lack technical oversight (COR), federal records could be mismanaged, security risks would increase, corruption through conflicts of interest would go undetected, contractors could impose unchecked paperwork burdens on the public, and performance incentives would be weakened. These standardized clauses are the minimal, proven mechanisms to protect taxpayer interests, ensure legal compliance, and maintain procurement integrity—outcomes that would be extremely difficult to achieve through ad hoc, agency-by-agency approaches.

Requires contracting officers to include clause 3452.247-70 (Foreign travel) in all cost-reimbursement contracts where foreign travel is contemplated, ensuring standardized contract terms for international travel expenses and relatedrequirements.

Deletion risks inconsistent inclusion of foreign travel provisions, potentially leading to unallowable costs, inadequate oversight, and misuse of taxpayer funds; the mandatory clause ensures reliable accountability that ad hoc discretion cannot provide.

Requires HCA approval for any use of ED production and research property by foreign governments or international organizations, with cost recovery or rental determined on a case-by-case basis.

Creates unnecessary bureaucratic approval and arbitrary pricing, stifling beneficial international collaboration and adding compliance costs; existing contract and security regulations already protect federal assets without this deadweight burden.

Federal procurement regulation requiring contracting officers to include a key personnel change notification clause in applicable contracts.

Mandates a burdensome administrative step that adds to regulatory accumulation; the market would naturally include such clauses where needed, and the rule's coercive nature increases costs for contractors, particularly small businesses, without demonstrable benefits over flexible contracting.

Regulation mandates federal contracting officers to insert specific clauses (3452.242-70 on litigation/claims, 3452.242-71 on delay notices, 3452.242-73 on meeting accessibility) into cost-reimbursement contracts and solicitations where conferences are contemplated, imposing standardized requirements on government contractors.

These clauses impose significant compliance costs on contractors, particularly small businesses with fewer resources, creating barriers to entry in federal procurement. The standardization reduces contracting flexibility, forces contractors to government-mandated terms rather than negotiated ones, and expands federal regulatory overreach into private business operations. The benefits of consistent litigation handling, delay notifications, and accessibility could be achieved more efficiently through tailored contracts or voluntary standards, while avoiding the hidden tax of regulatory compliance.

Requires contracting officers to include an IPv6 compliance clause in all solicitations and contracts for hardware and software.

Mandates a specific technology, increasing compliance costs and distorting market choices. IPv6 adoption is already occurring organically; the government should specify technical needs in RFPs rather than impose blanket mandates that raise barriers for small firms and reduce innovation.