[Senate Hearing 119-250] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] S. Hrg. 119-250 TRUMP'S REGULATORY ROLLBACK: SAVING AMERICANS $907 BILLION AND COUNTING ======================================================================= HEARING BEFORE THE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION __________ NOVEMBER 19, 2025 __________ Printed for the use of the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.govinfo.gov __________ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 62-295 WASHINGTON : 2026 ======================================================================= COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS ---------- JONI ERNST, Iowa, Chair EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Ranking Member JAMES E. RISCH, Idaho MARIA CANTWELL, Washington RAND PAUL, Kentucky JEANNE SHAHEEN, New Hampshire TIM SCOTT, South Carolina COREY A. BOOKER, New Jersey TODD YOUNG, Indiana CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii TED BUDD, North Carolina JACKY ROSEN, Nevada JOHN R. CURTIS, Utah JOHN W. HICKENLOOPER, Colorado JAMES C. JUSTICE, West Virginia ADAM B. SCHIFF, California JON HUSTED, Ohio Meredith West, Republican Staff Director Sean Moore, Democratic Staff Director C O N T E N T S ---------- NOVEMBER 19, 2025 Opening Statements Page Joni Ernst, United States Senator from Iowa...................... 1 Witness The Honorable Casey B. Mulligan, Chief Counsel for Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, DC.................. 3 Prepared Statement........................................... 6 Additional Letters/Statements for the Record Unted States Chamber of Commerce Letter Dated November 19, 2025............................... 30 Questions for the Record The Honorable Casey B. Mulligan Responses to questions submitted by Ranking Member Markey.... 32 TRUMP'S REGULATORY ROLLBACK: SAVING AMERICANS $907 BILLION AND COUNTING ---------- WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 19, 2025 United States Senate, Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship, Washington, DC. The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:33 p.m., in Room 428A, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. Joni Ernst, chairwoman of the committee, presiding. Present: Senators Ernst [presiding], Young, Hawley, Booker, and Hirono. OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR ERNST Chair. I call the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship to order. As I travel from river to river across Iowa, I hear from small businesses about the consistent thorn in their side, which is overregulation. In fact, when asked about federal regulations, Iowans consistently tell me to bring back a simple message to Washington bureaucrats; stay out of our way. For a small business, regulatory compliance is more than just a headache. It's wasted time and money they'd rather put back into their businesses. It forces folks to jump through hoops designed by people who have never run a payroll, or had to scramble to keep their doors open and their lights on. In Iowa, most entrepreneurs do not have extra folks on hand dedicated to compliance, or a legal team to comply with regulations designed for large corporations, not to mention the endless time and money to fight Uncle Sam if they miss one small paperwork requirement. Unfortunately, during the previous administration, federal bureaucrats ignored the resources and bandwidth of our small businesses. During the Biden administration, a record shattering 107,262 pages of rules were added to the Federal Register, which cost an estimated $1.8 trillion, with a T, trillion dollars, and added 256 million hours of paperwork onto the plates of small business owners. During President Biden's last year in office alone, his administration issued over 3,000 final rules. The regulatory costs of the Biden administration's reckless rulemaking were more than 15 times higher than President Trump's first term, and over three times higher than of Barack Obama's entire presidency. The massive mountain of paperwork hours due to bureaucratic red tape cuts into small businesses, bottom lines. It slows job creation and balloons compliance costs. It's simply bad for business. Since January, the Trump administration has published $702 billion in total regulatory cost savings, and cut 72.1 million hours of paperwork, altogether, with additional deregulatory efforts. These actions so far could save American taxpayers up to $907 billion. And I know these savings will only grow as small businesses recover from the previous administration's regulatory onslaught. The Trump administration is hard at work making sure agencies delete, revoke, and rescind the harmful regulations of previous administrations. I've been pleased to work with Administrator Zeldin to help bring common sense back to the Environmental Protection Agency, where the Trump EPA has been especially busy. Just this week, the EPA proposed an updated Waters of the United States, or WOTUS Rule, to clarify what is covered by WOTUS. This proposed rule follows my Clean Waters Act, which would codify that groundwater and waste treatment systems are not navigable waters, and end this government overreach for our farmers, landowners, and small businesses. I am also glad that the EPA is working to overturn the agency's harmful Obama-era Endangerment Finding, which allowed far left administrations to pave the way for EV mandates and Green New Deal policies. The Trump EPA estimates that the Endangerment Finding has been used to justify over $1 trillion in hidden taxes on small businesses and American families. Revoking that finding would save Americans $54 billion annually. Today, our committee will hear from Chief Counsel for Advocacy, Dr. Casey Mulligan. In any administration, the Office of Advocacy is a valuable counterweight to the sprawling bureaucratic mess that regulations create for small businesses. Dr. Mulligan, thank you so much for your steadfast commitment to identifying regulatory pain points that make it difficult for small businesses to grow. It has been a personal mission of mine to end the red tape nightmare that has tormented our small business owners. And earlier this year, I reintroduced the PROVE IT Act. My bill requires agencies to consider both the direct and indirect costs for small businesses before finalizing regulations. It requires Advocacy to formally review federal agency certification of rules, and prove that the federal government is fully compliant with existing law, and it gives small businesses a voice in the rulemaking process to shift the balance of power away from the administrative state and back onto the Main Street. I also introduced the RED TAPE Act, earlier this year, to expose the true price tag of Washington's red tape and end Biden shady circular, A-4 scheme used to conceal the cost of federal regulations. Just a few weeks later, President Trump issued Executive Order 14192, which mirrored my legislation and formally rescinded the Biden-era guidance. This sort of common- sense legislation along with the deregulatory action of this administration will truly lead to a golden age for America's small business. I look forward to hearing from Dr. Mulligan today about further ways we can work together to reduce regulatory burdens on small firms. Ranking Member Markey is unable to make it today, so we will go ahead, and we will start then with your statement. So, you, Dr. Mulligan, are recognized. I'll give you an introduction first, but then, you will have five minutes for your opening statements. And again, I would like to extend a warm welcome today to our witness, Dr. Casey Mulligan. I'm thankful that you took the time out of your busy schedule to be here with us, and I think it looks like it might be a quick hearing today. We will have members come and go throughout the day, but the committee is excited to hear about the work of the Office of Advocacy, and your work to limit the regulatory burdens on small businesses since your confirmation. In August, Dr. Mulligan was confirmed by the Senate, and currently serves as the SBA's Chief Counsel for Advocacy. Prior to this, he was a professor at the University of Chicago, specializing in labor economics, public policy, and the impacts of regulation on economic behavior. During the first Trump administration, he served as chief economist for the White House Council of Economic Advisors. Dr. Mulligan received his Bachelor of Arts from Harvard University, and earned his Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago. I ask unanimous consent that Dr. Mulligan's full statement be included in the record. And without objection, it is so ordered. And with that, Dr. Mulligan, you're recognized for five minutes for your testimony. You may begin. STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CASEY B. MULLIGAN, CHIEF COUNSEL FOR ADVOCACY, U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION, WASHINGTON, DC Dr. Mulligan. Chair Ernst, Ranking Member Markey, and members of the committee, I'm honored to discuss with you the small business effects of President Trump's regulatory agenda. My testimony does not necessarily reflect the views of the administration or of the SBA. Before I begin, I would like to thank the committee for supporting my nomination to this position of Chief Counsel, and I look forward to working with you to support America's small businesses. The Biden administration finalized 12,000 rules that would cost almost $6 trillion. Against that backdrop, President Trump was elected to stop, and I quote him, ``ever expanding morass of complicated federal regulation.'' He directed agencies to identify regulations that impose undue burdens on small businesses. Advocacy is well positioned to help agencies follow in that direction. During my nomination hearing, I committed to prioritizing meeting small businesses where they are, and I have done so in person, in Iowa even, together with our regional advocates who every day gather small business perspectives nationwide and bring them into policy discussions here in Washington. For years, small businesses burdened by regulations remained silent, fearing retaliation. Now, they tell Advocacy that this administration is the first to listen and to understand. One even said that Advocacy quite literally saved Christmas, as agencies have been seeking comment on candidates for deregulation. My office has flagged roughly 300 issues, particularly those giving large organizations an artificial advantage over small ones. One example is the Outpatient Prospective Payment System, which pays hospitals more for identical services than it pays independent physicians. The Trump administration has already delivered substantial regulatory relief for small businesses. For example, the One Big Beautiful Bill zeroed out the penalty on auto manufacturers that fail to achieve Biden's impossible fuel economy standards. With approximately 14 million Schedule C businesses owning vehicles, that change alone positioned small entities to save tens of billions of dollars. In addition, President Trump and Congress removed 16 regulations this year by way of the Congressional Review Act. More rule changes are on the way. Among roughly 60 economically significant rules so far, the largest savings likely come from the rule that the chair mentioned, which is to stop greenhouse gas regulations of vehicles. Without that action, vehicle quality would've fallen and prices risen, costing small businesses about half a trillion dollars. Another rule flagged by small businesses is the proposed OSHA Heat rule. It would impose sweeping one-size-fits-all, and often absurd requirements, on workplaces where heat is above certain temperatures. During a meeting with Advocacy, an Arizona watermelon farmer explained that the rule would require shade structures even though harvesting occurs at night when there's no sun to be shaded. In contrast, well-designed deregulation increases competition and productivity. President Trump's first term was a case in point. Prescription drug prices fell for the first time in decades. Deregulation sharply reduced internet access prices. And that's all about the competition channel that we see in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. While regulators are quick to sanction businesses when they violate the requirements, they often fail to follow the rules Congress set. A particularly frequent practice has been to unlawfully certify important rules as not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Such certifications are a pathway to capricious enforcement actions. In Orwellian fashion, 65 percent of the major rules from the Biden administration were nonetheless said to lack significant effects on small businesses or otherwise not require any consideration of those effects. Small businesses were saddled with at least a hundred billion in costs without any acknowledgement that there were costs. President Trump's Restoring Gold Standard Science Executive Order initiates additional reforms that small entities have long sought: decisions that rest on transparent data and reproducible methods. For example, independent fishermen find the modeling of fisheries by the Biden administration to be outdated and contrary to the Magnuson-Stevens Act. Among other things, they point to Georges Bank where closures aimed at protecting groundfish also stopped scallop harvest, leaving an estimated $52 million in annual scallops to die off unharvested. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. As Chief Counsel, I will continue to listen and to work toward better policy for all small businesses. And I would be happy to answer questions. [The prepared statement of Dr. Mulligan follows.] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Chair. Wonderful. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan. And we'll begin the questioning round, and I will recognize myself for five minutes for questions. So, Dr. Mulligan, the cost of living and affordability for Americans, including our small businesses, has been top of mind for President Trump in the first year of his second term. Overregulation makes it difficult for small firms to stay in business, and it also hurts every American family struggling with the cost of childcare, home heating, and electricity, and housing affordability. With the holidays around the corner, how has deregulation made everyday items more affordable for our American families? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. And the answer is much anticipated in the Regulatory Flexibility Act. It points to two issues with regulatory overreach. One, is by discouraging the smaller companies from entering the market. There's less competition, and those bigger companies who are still there are free to charge quite a bit. The other channel is productivity. We ended up using more resources to do the same amount because of the extra paperwork and extra compliance. So, electricity, for example, we need more resources to make the same electricity, which means higher electricity prices for people. We've seen that throughout the energy area in the last four years. Delivering energy to our consumers has been quite difficult. Chair. Good. And I appreciate that, and the fact that we are trying to drive those costs down. And it's just common- sense measures that this administration is taking. So, Dr. Mulligan, as your testimony had pointed out, small businesses across Iowa and America are hurting due to the compliance costs that Washington bureaucrats don't even think twice about. For our small business owners, extra paperwork means less time actually working to grow their businesses. And as you know, as I discussed earlier, I've introduced the PROVE IT Act to make bureaucrats prove that those proposed rules do not harm small businesses. And it gives Advocacy further tools to enforce their mission, and to ensure small businesses are considered in the rulemaking process. How would the tools given to your office in the PROVE IT Act allow you to better interact with your federal partners, and what legislative authority would you still need? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. My experience so far in the Trump administration, which has just been a few months, they're extremely supportive of Advocacy and the small businesses. They're coming to me quite often asking, ``What can we do to make the rules better for small businesses?'' But President Trump won't always be our President. And then what happens after that? And I think legislation would be quite helpful to stop the practice that we saw so much in the last four years of saying that a regulation is not meaningful for the small businesses, when in fact, it's quite meaningful and can sometimes put them out of business. Chair. Yes, we've seen that a lot through the years, and hopefully, we'll be able to get the PROVE IT Act across the finish line. That is definitely a goal of mine. Recently, the CFPB released a proposed rule regarding small business lending. And just this week, the EPA released a new proposed WOTUS rule. How do these new rules compare to their predecessors in terms of their impact on small businesses? Dr. Mulligan. Both of those rules, when they came out before this administration, they were adding costs, as we heard in my office about those costs. And the new rules, they're in the proposed stage. They're largely set to reverse what was done. And during the process, I've seen in, even in preparing the proposed rules, there was a lot of listening to small businesses, and those agencies told us, ``Wow we were glad to hear from them because we were able to make a better proposed rule based on the wisdom that they heard from outside the Beltway. Chair. That is good. And I'll just share a very abbreviated story, but also when it came to farmers under the Biden WOTUS rule, if a farmer who had not tilled his field for a while, if he decided to farm that land again, there was additional cost because that farmer was fined hundreds of thousands of dollars for disturbing the land that he owned and intended to farm. So, not only is there a cost of regulation and adhering to that regulation, but then there's the government overreach where you can also be fined for simply doing your normal day- to-day activities as a small business owner, which are farmers or small business owners. So, my time is expired. We'll come back for additional questions, but at this point, I will recognize the Senator from Hawaii, Senator Hirono, for five minutes. Senator Hirono. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, you are the advocate, I suppose, for small businesses, right? You the counsel. So, as I talk with small businesses in my state, the biggest thing that they are concerned about right now are the President's tariffs. But you're not talking about the tariffs as increasing costs for small businesses in your testimony. Why not? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. I think the tariffs you're referring to came out around April 1st, and---- Senator Hirono. Well, the President's tariffs, they come and they go. There's a certain unpredictableness about it, and that that's another reason that small businesses are concerned, and that there have already been billions of dollars in payments that businesses have had to make. And by the way, so can you answer my question? Why aren't you talking about tariffs as being a cost driver for small businesses? Dr. Mulligan. Advocacy doesn't make the rules about tariffs or anything else. We have two things we do. Number one, we listen---- Senator Hirono. But excuse me, your job is to, did you just say, listen to small businesses and address their concerns, their concern being impact of the tariffs? Dr. Mulligan. One way. Number two, make sure those people who do make the policy are aware of those concerns. And my position is subject to Senate confirmation, even though the President was incredibly quick to get me nominated, and the chair of this committee was incredibly quick to get the hearing going. Somehow, the Senate did not finish the job until well after the trade policies were initiated. So, the chief counsel chair at those policy discussions was empty. Senator Hirono. You are avoiding answering my question, you know, that President Trump has imposed tariffs in April. And then, as I said, they come and go. And my question to you is, knowing that these tariffs are very detrimental in raising costs for small businesses, why aren't you talking about tariffs in your testimony? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. My job is to listen to the small businesses, and to communicate to those who do make the policies their concerns. Right on the heels of---- Senator Hirono. And so, did you tell the people who are making these policy decisions that the tariffs are hurting small businesses? Dr. Mulligan. Let me explain to you how that worked. On the heels of my confirmation, the government was shut down. So, while I was able to listen--thank you, Congress, for the excellent funding you gave my office so we could stay open. I was listening like crazy, but it was not until the government reopened. And let me tell you, last Wednesday, government was still closed. The White House called me at 8:00 p.m. and they said, ``Casey, get over here. The government's open tomorrow. The agencies need to hear what the small businesses are telling you.'' And I went there, and I sat close to---- Senator Hirono. If I look a little frustrated, that's because I am. You wrote in your book, ``Tariffs are taxes on small businesses.'' And wouldn't taxes on small businesses hurt small businesses? So, you don't need to be confirmed, or talk to them, or whatever. You've written about it. So, why is it that we can't hear what you're going to do to help small businesses deal with this on again, off again, tariff situation. By the way, I've talked to small businesses in Hawaii, and anybody who imports anything, any part of a product that the Hawaii businesses sell, and that goes for small businesses all across the country, are having to pay higher costs. So, there's a chip maker in Hawaii, for example, he gets some of his packaging from China. He's had to pay more for his product, which are chips. So, there is no question that these tariffs that Trump tariffs are hurting small businesses. And yet, you're not here to tell us about how that is impacting small businesses. And not to mention, I would like to ask you, are tariffs taxes? Yes or no? Dr. Mulligan. I just wasn't able to finish answering your question, which is what am I telling Trump people about the tariffs. Senator Hirono. I'm moving on---- Dr. Mulligan. I'm in the middle of telling that---- Senator Hirono. I'm moving on to ask you; are tariffs taxes? Dr. Mulligan. President Trump campaigned on changing the composition of revenue---- Senator Hirono. Are tariffs taxes? Dr. Mulligan. They're a source of revenue. Senator Hirono. Are tariffs taxes? Why aren't you answering the question? You said so in your book that tariffs are taxes. Madam Chair, I don't know why our witness, the single witness we have, who's supposed to be talking about impacts on small businesses and how we can be of help, and the biggest impact that they're having to face right now are the tariffs, and we have a witness who's not responding to my questions. I thank you very much. Chair. Thank you, Senator. And I would also respond that. What the Trump administration is doing by releasing some of the overreach from the federal government on those small businesses, it has created some equilibrium to any hurt that small businesses may be feeling. So, this is something that we can do for the long run, though, is undo the pain of the pressure from some of these regulations that are fine for larger corporations, but certainly do hurt those smaller businesses. So, I appreciate that. And I would also recommend that the members of the committee, also, should be the ones advocating for their small businesses and reaching out. If they feel that there is a concern from small businesses, they should take that to the administration. So, I know I certainly do. I have those conversations with the President and the administration. And, Senator Booker, thank you so much. If you would go ahead and direct your questions to the witness, you are recognized for five minutes. Senator Booker. Chairwoman, I really appreciate you. Thank you for having this hearing. Gives us an opportunity to have a conversation. Mr. Mulligan, I crisscross my state and really am interested in the success of small businesses. They are the top job givers in our state and job providers. It's extraordinary to see these entrepreneurs who risk their capital, and make serious investments in not just the success of their businesses, but as you know, small businesses radiate into our communities or are part of the fabric of our towns, especially a state like New Jersey, which is runs on our small towns. One of my biggest concerns I hear from my small businesses right now is just healthcare. They're getting really stuck pretty badly with healthcare costs. Congress did sweeping cuts to the federal healthcare funding programs, and has really given tax cuts not to some of the small businesses, but seen a lot of them manure to the benefit of the wealthiest there are. And so, the CBO, which is the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, as you know, estimates the healthcare provisions in that bill will increase our deficit by $907 billion from 2025 to 2034. And the increases, the number of uninsured Americans, by 10 million by 2034, and additional 4.2 million will lose their Marketplace coverage because the law failed to extend the tax credit enhancements, which lower annual premiums by more than $700 on average for people who receive them simultaneously. The small business businesses with the Affordable Care Act are facing premium increases of about, on average, 11 percent for 2026, according to an analysis of premium preliminary rate filings from 318 insurers across all 50 states. And so, when I just finished crisscrossing my state, having town halls, I was stunned. I thought we were going to be talking about other issues, but small business after small business talked to me about literally the impossibility of covering healthcare or even imagining trying to cover it for people to work for. I had one woman who has a flower business in my state who talked about not only will she have to forego health insurance, her and her husband, in order to keep it for their children, but having the challenges also of watching their employees who get it through the Marketplace have to lose their insurance as well. So, as the administration finalizes its regulations for the Trump tax bill, will you advocate for the small business owners whose prices are going up due to the administration's economic policies, or who will actually lose valuable employees, as some of the owners told me that are going to go to places where they're going to get health coverage because they can no longer afford it themselves? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. The short answer is yes. I listen to the small businesses, and then I report what I hear to those who make the rules, and around healthcare in this case. And like you, I hear a lot, and my staff hears a lot about healthcare. We have a letter on our website where we've gathered together, my count was 97 different healthcare issues, that we heard about from small businesses. And the cost of insurance is something that's often cited. One thing that's often cited is the pandemic emergency. We hear in so many different ways that rules that were put in place during the pandemic are still there and the pandemic emergency doesn't end. And that really undermines a number of healthcare---- Senator Booker. I'm going to interrupt you because I got 90 seconds. So, I get it. As a former mayor, the bureaucracy, the rules, all of these things, this is where I find a lot of agreement with my colleagues on the other side of the aisle. But the biggest issue, and I'm not overstating this at all, was the staggering premium cost, the staggering cost of people's healthcare. And you said, yes, I'll advocate for that. But I'm wondering specifically when you're saying on your own website, I think that you were mentioning you're having people bring this problem. I'm asking you then, what is the solution? What will you be specifically advocating for to deal with the number one issue? And it's anecdotal, but that I heard in county after county of New Jersey, meeting with small business people, thinking I was going to talk about other issues. But every conversation centered around this staggering cost of healthcare. And I'm wondering, you as a person that's in a very important position, what specifically is the solution, as you see it? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. We have 97 specifics in the letter, but if I were to organize them, as we did in the beginning of that letter, really the Regulatory Flexibility Act principles apply very well to those 97, which is there are a lot of regulations that reduce competition in healthcare. And I mentioned in my opening statement things that increase the cost of healthcare by undermining independent physicians. And the other aspect is wasted resources. To deliver the same healthcare, we need more resources because of all the red tape. Senator Booker. And have you thought about the consequences? Because the immediacy of this, it starts at the end of the year, what are the consequences going to be for small businesses that see their costs going up tens of thousands of dollars; not being able to cover their families, or facing employees leaving? Have you thought about--because to me it seems like quite the tsunami that's about to hit small businesses with their costs going up 5 percent, 10 percent, 15 percent just for health insurance alone. Dr. Mulligan. What we have been doing at my office, and I've been doing myself, is again, listening to what the small businesses have to say and the problems that they express. Senator Booker. But there's no--you have no immediate solution, in your mind, for in January? Dr. Mulligan. Well, I have 97 solutions that I heard from the small businesses. They're not from Casey Mulligan, they're from the small businesses. Some of them are immediate and others may take more time. Senator Booker. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Chair. Yes, thank you, Senator Booker. And I would say, as you pointed out, there are steep premium increases. So, just simply allowing subsidies to continue to flow doesn't bring the cost of healthcare down. So, I think this is something we all should be able to work on together; is figure out what is going on in healthcare that's driving those costs up, and how do we actually lower the cost of the healthcare so that it's just not significant premiums. So, I hope that we all can come together and figure that out because, yes, our small businesses need an option that is affordable and allows easy access to healthcare. So, thank you, God bless you. And Senator Hawley, you are recognized for five minutes. Senator Hawley. Thank you very much, Madam Chair. Dr. Mulligan, thank you for being here. Let me just start, if I could, by asking a little bit about rural businesses. This is something that I talked to the administrator about when she was here for her confirmation hearings. I was sort of surprised, fairly stunned actually, to see these numbers. The Biden administration's SBA spent in Fiscal Year 2024 alone, out of 103,000 loans, only 12,500 of them went to rural businesses. 12 percent of the $56 billion in capital last fiscal year, $6 billion went to rural businesses. That's less than 11 percent. My state is majority rural. We have many, many small businesses throughout the state that are located in rural areas. And, obviously, I think a key function of the small business administration is to protect and promote rural businesses. So, let me just ask, what office--what role, rather, does your office, the Office of Advocacy play in promoting rural small businesses? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. And we know from a lot of our analysis and visiting in person, small businesses are especially prominent in rural areas. And as I committed in my nomination hearing and I have done in person, is to go out and visit, go where they are. Don't ask them to come to Washington, go visit them. We even had an instance a month or two ago where it was such a remote area that my regional advocate took a mule for the last couple of miles. And we're really going to great lengths to hear from--in that case, it was ranchers. And the ranchers were thrilled that we were listening, and they were thrilled with the results that we're getting. And we came back to President Trump's team to start to improve some of that poor policy in the rural areas. Senator Hawley. What steps do you think can Congress take to ensure SBA prioritizes rural areas and rural businesses? Any recommendations you might have? Dr. Mulligan. Maybe I'd like to meet with my staff and get back to you. That's a serious ask, and I don't want to have a glib answer to that. Certainly, there is lots of room because a lot of our policies have not treated the rural areas well. Senator Hawley. Yeah, understood. And I certainly, agree with that, and I just want to point out that, you know, programs like the 7(a) Loans, the 504 Certified Development Company Loans, Disaster Recovery Assistance, these kinds of programs are absolutely vital to rural America, in general, and to rural businesses in particular. And they need support and advocacy from your office and, and across the agency. Let me just ask you for a second while I've got you here in my remaining time. Let's go back to talk a little bit about SBA's 8(a) Program. You're familiar with the 8(a) Program, Dr. Mulligan? Dr. Mulligan. Kelly Loeffler, that's her area. Now, any regulation that she puts out because she's subject to the Regulatory Flexibility Act, I would review, and again, hear from the small businesses and comment on that. So, I'm familiar with it from that perspective, but I'm not involved in making the 8(a) rules. Senator Hawley. Well, I guess my question is this. I mean, the 8(a) has been back in the news recently for reports of all kinds of corruption and waste of taxpayer dollars. You've got the most recent example, ATI Government Solutions, which is a technology services company, apparently that improperly, maybe fraudulently, claimed ownership Native American ownership to get 8(a) status, and has been exposed now for acting as a pass- through organization to take unfair advantage of this program. These things are happening. We're seeing these reports proliferate, and we don't have an Inspector General at SBA. So, I guess maybe my question should be, given what you just said a moment ago, I mean, do you think it's time that we get an Inspector General at SBA so that we're able to address these allegations or reports of fraud? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. I have been frustrated in that Senate confirmation process on how long it took. It shouldn't take that long. And you're right, it's taking way too long for the SBA Inspector General. Senator Hawley. Yeah, I think so, too. Thank you, Madam Chair. Chair. Thank you so much. And I'll take five minutes additional for a few more questions. I really appreciate your time today, Dr. Mulligan. I do want to turn to the great work that you have been doing at the Office of Advocacy. You and your team have worked really hard to shed light on a lot of these hard-to-understand regulations. There's a lot on the books that are small businesses. They don't have the time to research. They don't have the time to understand. They don't have additional personnel to sort through all of that, and it costs them money. So, as you've traveled across the country, I know you've met with a lot of small businesses, you've had discussions with small firms. What is the top existing regulation that is currently negatively affecting small businesses that those of us here in Congress can actually grab a hold of, or even something that exists that the administration might be able to grab a hold of, and look at reforming or rolling back? Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. There are regulations in both categories, and in fact, working together like Congress did on the Congressional Review Act, that small businesses are very thankful for that. That gives them more durability and more certainty going forward. You know, a top one is a little bit hard. We just put on our website, advocacy.sba.gov, a most wanted list. And there's not just one on there, but it's a fairly short list. These are the ones we heard most from the small businesses. And often, in a dollar sense, they have costs well into the billions, just for one of the rules. The 2024 Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification is one that we hear a lot from small businesses that are involved or hope to be involved in contracting, the 2024 Heat rule, quarterly payroll filings. And believe it or not, 15 years on, the Obamacares employer mandate. Chair. I wish we had had that question just a little bit ago. So, yes, the mandate can be very, very costly, but I do hope that as a Congress or as an administration, that we can all work together to find some reasonable solutions to help our small businesses in all of those areas. So, following the bureaucratic nightmare created by the former administration, the Trump administration has been really working very hard to slash a lot of the regulations and red tape that are out there that affect small businesses, and make it cheaper and simpler for these small business owners to comply with federal regulations. And your office has been playing a key role in that fight. So, Dr. Mulligan, I intend to follow-up with, of course, perhaps a question for the record. But as the first confirmed Chief Counsel for Advocacy in a decade, and you noted that the seat had been vacant, but you are the first one in a decade, I'm confident that you have many well-informed ideas about how to strengthen and better that role for the benefit of all of our small businesses. So, if you would, briefly, because I only have a minute and a half left, just briefly describe what you've thought about any legislative changes that you would recommend that could be helpful to us, and in addition to the PROVE IT Act, of course, because I would like to see that over the finish line. But things that would allow us to be good champions for our small businesses. Dr. Mulligan. Thank you for your question. One idea in the spirit of the PROVE IT Act would maybe to require that any major rule can't be certified without the Chief Counsel's approval. Let's stop the double-talk, the Orwellian doublespeak. That would be an idea. If you can, take a look at President Trump's budget, it's an excellent budget. But one of the things that it does is really support the Office of Advocacy to a much greater degree than the draft budget that came out of the House. So, if the Senate could look at that, that would also, I think, be helpful. Chair. Wonderful. Dr. Mulligan. And I know the small businesses are very appreciative of what Advocacy is able to do now that it has a Senate-confirmed leadership. Chair. I think that's great. And again, I'll reform this question. I'll submit it for a question for the record. And then, as you're hearing from some of those small businesses, you said you had 97 different ideas or suggestions that are out there or topics. Perhaps some of those might make its way here to the halls of Congress, and we could actually work on some solutions for those small businesses. So, I will stop the questions here, and do appreciate your time today. I thank you. I know it is a busy day on the Hill, but thank you for being here. I see that there are no further questions. So, again, thank you for joining us. I ask unanimous consent that the record of today's hearing remain open for two weeks for members to submit questions, revise, and extend their remarks, and submit additional information into the record. And without objection, it is so ordered. And with that, the Committee on Small Business and Entrepreneurship stands adjourned. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan. [Whereupon, at 3:14 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.] [GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] [all]