Tennessee House Bill HB1913

Tennessee 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/26
• Refer: 2/4/26
• Refer: 4/6/26
• Engrossed: 4/13/26
• Enrolled: 4/23/26
• Passed: 5/19/26

Caption

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 4, Chapter 5, relative to administrative rules.

Summary

HB1913, titled the "Regulatory Freedom Act of 2026," revises Tennessee’s administrative rulemaking process for rules that affect the regulated community. The bill requires agencies to prominently post proposed rules on their websites, notify known trade associations and organizations at least 45 days before the public hearing, and invite input on the rule’s fiscal effects. It also defines a new "fiscal impact statement" standard focused on the actual cost of compliance to affected industries, businesses, trades, and licensed individuals, and requires agencies to prepare such statements for rules expected to have a negative fiscal impact. The bill further requires agencies to include evidence that they sought feedback from affected stakeholders, to incorporate public-comment information into fiscal impact statements, and to produce annual reports summarizing the cumulative fiscal impact of rules adopted in the prior year. For emergency rules, it imposes filing deadlines and shortens the effective life of high-cost emergency rules unless the General Assembly approves them. It also creates a legislative override mechanism for rules with estimated negative fiscal impacts exceeding $1 million over five years, or over one year for emergency rules, making such rules effective only after a majority vote in both chambers if the Joint Government Operations Committee approves them.

Impact

HB1913 amends Tennessee Code Annotated Title 4, Chapter 5, by adding new notice, reporting, and approval requirements for agency rulemaking. It affects agencies whose rules must be approved by the General Assembly, while exempting rules required by federal law or regulation and certain licensure-fee rules. The bill expands the role of the legislature in reviewing high-cost rules, requires agencies to track and publish fiscal impact statements and annual cumulative impact reports, and can delay or prevent the effectiveness of certain rules unless additional legislative approval is obtained.

Sentiment

The bill appears to have broad support among lawmakers, as reflected by strong committee and floor votes in both chambers. The title and structure of the act suggest a policy goal of limiting regulatory burdens and increasing transparency for businesses and other regulated parties. The vote margins indicate that, despite some opposition, the measure was generally viewed favorably and advanced successfully through the legislative process.

Contention

The main point of contention is the bill’s increased legislative control over agency rulemaking, especially the requirement that rules with more than $1 million in estimated negative fiscal impact receive separate approval by both chambers. Critics may view this as a constraint on agency flexibility and a potential delay in implementing regulations, while supporters likely see it as a check on costly regulation and a way to ensure affected industries have meaningful input. The emergency-rule provisions and the scope of the "regulated community" definition are also likely to be debated because they determine which rules are covered and how quickly agencies must act.