Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB993

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/30/26
• Refer: 1/30/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to renumber and amend 227.139 (1) and 227.139 (3); to amend 227.114 (2) (intro.), 227.137 (3) (intro.), 227.14 (6) (c) 1. (intro.), 227.15 (7) and 990.01 (30m); to create 35.93 (2) (c) 2m., 35.93 (3) (g), 227.135 (1) (g), 227.137 (3c), 227.139 (1) (b), 227.139 (3) (b), 227.14 (6) (c) 1m. and 227.225 of the statutes; Relating to: the expiration of administrative rules. (FE)

Impact

The bill mandates that prior to renewing administrative rules, agencies must conduct a thorough analysis of the economic impact associated with the rule they are attempting to readopt. This includes evaluating compliance costs and the economic effects on businesses and local governments. By instituting this review process, the bill encourages agencies to consider the ongoing economic implications of regulations and to make necessary adjustments to ensure they remain justifiable and effective.

Summary

Assembly Bill 993 seeks to address the administrative rule-making process within the state by establishing a systematic expiration mechanism for chapters of the Wisconsin Administrative Code. Under the proposed legislation, each chapter would automatically expire eight years after its enactment or readoption unless the relevant agency takes steps to renew it through the established rule-making process. This initiative aims to improve regulatory efficiency and accountability by requiring agencies to periodically assess the relevance and effectiveness of their rules.

Contention

While proponents of AB993 argue that it will foster a more responsible regulatory environment by preventing outdated rules from lingering indefinitely, critics express concerns regarding the potential administrative burden this could impose on agencies. The requirement for detailed economic analyses may slow down the renewal process and lead to uncertainties for entities that depend on established rules for operational stability. Some stakeholders fear that this measure could introduce inefficiencies in rule-making, counter to the intended simplification.

Additional_notes

The bill requires that if a proposed rule is expected to incur significant costs—over $10 million in compliance costs within two years—agencies must halt work on those rules unless modified or legislatively approved. This stipulation highlights the bill's focus on fiscal responsibility and the economic burdens placed on businesses and local governments through regulatory compliance.