SB14

What SB14 does

The Regulatory Reform and Efficiency Act creates a regulatory-efficiency office within the governor’s office, strengthens information required when state agencies propose rules, and directs courts to decide covered legal questions independently rather than defer to agencies’ legal interpretations. It does not itself repeal a list of regulations or give businesses a blanket exemption from them. Signed April 23, 2025, it took effect September 1, 2025. official history; final law.

A new office, guidance and a searchable rules website

The Texas Regulatory Efficiency Office is to help agencies identify unnecessary or ineffective rules, evaluate costs and find ways to protect the public with less cost and inconvenience. Options include fewer forms, less requested information, lower fees, narrower regulated activities, waivers and reduced training hours while protecting health and safety. The office must publish plain-language economic-analysis and regulatory-reduction guides. It may establish an advisory panel and a public-participation forum as needed. These are coordination and assistance duties, not an unrestricted power to override statutes. final law, Chapter 465.

The governor may prioritize regulatory expertise when selecting panel members and may name a chair. Members receive no compensation, though necessary expenses may be reimbursed at the office’s discretion. The final act does not prescribe a seven-member allocation among the governor and legislative leaders or fixed two-year terms. It exempts the panel from the usual Chapter 2110 advisory-committee law. final law, Sections 465.0101–.0108.

The office may not recommend repealing rules whose purpose is to inform people about rulemaking or facilitate public participation. Its biennial report, due December 1 of each even-numbered year, must describe activities and legislative recommendations, go to state leaders and the Legislative Budget Board, and be posted publicly online. The secretary of state, Department of Information Resources and new office must coordinate a searchable rules website organized by topic, regulated activity/business and, where applicable, industry classification code. final law, Sections 465.0052(c), 465.0151 and 2001.007(e).

Important funding limit: implementation of Chapter 465 and the new website requirement is mandatory for the named agencies only if the legislature specifically appropriates money for it. Without that appropriation, they may use other available appropriations but are not required to implement those provisions. SB14 itself makes no appropriation. This condition does not suspend all of the act’s rule-notice and judicial-review changes. final law, Section 12.

Rule notices and challenges

Proposed-rule text must be in plain language to the extent practicable. The definition emphasizes concise, organized language understandable to the public, including people with limited English proficiency. A notice must identify the authorizing bill when the relevant legislation was enacted within the preceding four years, include legal counsel’s certification that the rule falls within the agency’s authority, and solicit information about costs, benefits and effects from regulated people and other interested parties. These supplement existing notice, fiscal and public-benefit requirements; they do not replace public comments. final law, Section 4.

The act removes protections that previously said failure to prepare required local-employment or government-growth impact statements did not impair a rule’s legal effect. It brings those requirements within the substantial-compliance framework for procedural challenges, with the existing two-year deadline measured from the rule’s effective date. A rule is voidable, not automatically void for every omission. Courts may return a rule for correction; it remains effective during that period unless the court finds good cause to invalidate it. final law, Sections 5–6 and 9.

Courts decide legal questions independently

For covered judicial reviews, courts must review questions of law “de novo”—decide the legal question afresh—without deferring to the agency’s legal determination. A broader companion provision says courts are not required to defer in state judicial proceedings. Both provisions still allow consideration of an agency interpretation that is reasonable and consistent with the statute’s plain language. This is not a ban on listening to agency expertise, and it does not direct courts to retry all factual questions. The mandatory-review section extends to authorized contested-case reviews and other authorized court actions involving agency legal determinations; exemptions must specifically reference that section. final law, Sections 7–8.

The revised rule-notice/procedural provisions apply to rules proposed on or after September 1, 2025. The judicial-review changes apply to proceedings initiated on or after that date. Earlier proposals and proceedings remain governed by the former law for these purposes. The act uses the Administrative Procedure Act’s defined terms; it should not be described as governing every local ordinance or every governmental body without exception. final law, Sections 10–11 and 465.0001.