[House Hearing, 119 Congress] [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office] A VOICE FOR SMALL BUSINESS: HOW THE SBA OFFICE OF ADVOCACY IS CUTTING RED TAPE ======================================================================= HEARING before the COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION __________ HEARING HELD JANUARY 7, 2026 __________ [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] Small Business Committee Document Number 119-027 Available via the GPO Website: www.govinfo.gov ______ U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE 62-510 WASHINGTON : 2026 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON SMALL BUSINESS ROGER WILLIAMS, Texas, Chairman PETE STAUBER, Minnesota DAN MEUSER, Pennsylvania BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas JAKE ELLZEY, Texas MARK ALFORD, Missouri NICK LALOTA, New York BRAD FINSTAD, Minnesota TONY WIED, Wisconsin ROB BRESNAHAN, Pennsylvania BRIAN JACK, Georgia TROY DOWNING, Montana KIMBERLYN KING-HINDS, Northern Marina Islands DEREK SCHMIDT, Kansas JIMMY PATRONIS, Florida NYDIA VELAZQUEZ, New York, Ranking Member MORGAN MCGARVEY, Kentucky HILLARY SCHOLTEN, Michigan LAMONICA MCIVER, New Jersey GIL CISNEROS, California KELLY MORRISON, Minnesota GEORGE LATIMER, New York DEREK TRAN, California LATEEFAH SIMON, California JOHNNY OLSZEWSKI, Maryland HERB CONAWAY, New Jersey MAGGIE GOODLANDER, New Hampshire Lauren Holmes, Majority Staff Director Melissa Jung, Minority Staff Director C O N T E N T S OPENING STATEMENTS Page Hon. Roger Williams.............................................. 1 Hon. Nydia Velazquez............................................. 2 WITNESS Hon. Casey B. Mulligan, Chief Counsel, Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, DC.................. 4 APPENDIX Prepared Statement: Hon. Casey B. Mulligan, Chief Counsel, Office of Advocacy, U.S. Small Business Administration, Washington, DC......... 34 Questions and Answers for the Record: Questions from Hon. Velazquez to Hon. Mulligan and Answers from Hon. Mulligan......................................... 179 Questions from Hon. Goodlander to Hon. Mulligan and Answers from Hon. Mulligan......................................... 208 Question from Hon. Schmidt to Hon. Mulligan and Answer from Hon. Mulligan.............................................. 210 Additional Material for the Record: U.S. Chamber of Commerce..................................... 212 NFIB Letter.................................................. 214 Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC).................... 217 Dahlia Rizk, Buckle Me Baby Coats............................ 219 Shakia Williams, Cyrenity Sips Winery........................ 221 Lynne Fletcher O'Brien, Line in the Sand..................... 223 Orleatha Smith, Sip Herbals.................................. 225 Jill Osur, Teneral Cellars, Inc.............................. 226 Eric Henry, TS Designs, Inc.................................. 228 Cassie Abel, Wild Rye........................................ 230 Editorial Board.............................................. 232 Advocacy Screenshot.......................................... 235 A VOICE FOR SMALL BUSINESS: HOW THE SBA OFFICE OF ADVOCACY IS CUTTING RED TAPE ---------- WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 7, 2026 House of Representatives, Committee on Small Business, Washington, DC. The Committee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in Room 2360, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Roger Williams [chairman of the Committee] presiding. Present: Representatives Williams, Meuser, Van Duyne, Ellzey, Alford, LaLota, Finstad, Downing, King-Hinds, Schmidt, Patronis, Velazquez, McGarvey, Scholten, McIver, Cisneros, Morrison, Latimer, Tran, Simon, Olszewski, and Goodlander. Chairman WILLIAMS. Before we get started, I want to recognize Mrs. McIver from the great State of New Jersey to lead us in the pledge and the prayer. Following the pledge and prayer, we will have a moment of silence. All. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Mrs. MCIVER. Dear God, thank you for another day. Thank you for allowing us to see 2026. I ask that you place Your hands on each of us, each Member of this Committee, all of our staffers, and help us lead in a better way for the American people, and most importantly, for small businesses, as that is our duty on this Committee. Thank you for breath, for good health. We pray for our colleagues. We pray for those that did not have the opportunity to come back with us in session in 2026. And we pray for those that are still trying to recover and get through to be here with us. In Jesus' name, amen. Chairman WILLIAMS. Would you remain standing, please? We mourn the passage of our colleague, Representative Doug LaMalfa. He represented California's First Congressional District for 13 years. He was a strong advocate for rural America. I know many of us are proud to call him a friend. Please join me for a moment of silence to honor his memory. [Moment of silence.] Chairman WILLIAMS. Thank you. Good morning, everyone. I now call the Committee on Small Business to order. Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess of the Committee at any time. I now recognize myself for my opening statement. I want to say welcome and thank you for being here for today's hearing, ``A Voice for Small Business: How the SBA Office of Advocacy is Cutting Red Tape.'' I want to thank our witness, Dr. Casey Mulligan, the chief counsel of SBA's Office of Advocacy, for appearing before us today. This hearing comes at a critical time for small businesses nationwide. Main street endured inflation, burdensome regulations, and rising interest rates at the hands of the Biden-Harris administration. It is estimated that the total cost of regulations is now over $3 trillion a year, equal to 12 percent of the entire U.S. economy. To put this in perspective, the cost of regulations in the U.S. exceeds the entire economy of the United Kingdom. To make matters worse, the Biden administration's regulatory onslaught cost over $1.8 trillion due to new regulations. Now more than ever, we must ensure that the federal government doesn't make it harder for our job creators to thrive, and that is where the SBA Office of Advocacy comes in. So the Office of Advocacy is an independent voice for small businesses within the federal government and fights against burdensome regulations. Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, or the RFA, federal agencies are statutorily required to ensure that regulations have a limited impact on small business. However, last Congress, this Committee investigated agency compliance, and simply put, agencies skirt the law and end up implementing a mountain of crippling regulations on Main Street America. Despite their best efforts, the Office of Advocacy lacks the legislative authority to hold the agencies accountable for ignoring the RFA, and that must change. Under President Trump, the Office of Advocacy has been pivotal in repealing burdensome, misguided regulations. This includes their work with FinCEN to roll back the burdensome Beneficial Ownership Information reporting rule. I am happy that so many of my colleagues are dedicated to fighting crippling regulations, including those who have joined my bill, H.R. 796, the 1071 Repeal to Protect Small Business Lending Act, which was reported favorably out of the Committee on Financial Services. So I genuinely hope that hearings like this will show how important it is to remove regulatory barriers that stifle American entrepreneurship, which should have bipartisan support. I look forward to discussing how we can strengthen the Office of Advocacy's role and how Congress can give it the tools it needs to continue advocating for main street. I want to thank you, Dr. Mulligan, again for being here today. And, with that, I yield to my friend and distinguished Ranking Member from New York, Ms. Velazquez. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman Williams. Welcome to the Committee, Dr. Mulligan. The Office of Advocacy plays a unique role within the federal government, serving as the independent voice of small businesses and promoting the concerns of small firms before both federal and state policymakers. Advocacy's important work, when done in a thorough and independent manner, as Congress intended, can help prevent well-meaning rules from unintentionally harming small competitors. Small businesses need a strong advocate right now. Over the past year, small firms have lost government contracts, experienced supply chain kills, and endured a constant state of confusion amid President Trump's tariffs, rising prices, and an avalanche of policy changes. Manufacturing jobs have fallen every month since April 2025, extending Trump's losing streak that cost 58,000 jobs. I would like to enter into the record a Wall Street Journal editorial entitled ``Where Are Those Manufacturing Jobs?'' The op-ed contends that tariffs are the primary factor leading to job losses and the broader decline in the economy. That is why it is important to have an independent office that will serve as a strong and credible voice for small businesses within the administration, not one that will echo whatever the administration wants to hear. I have concerns over the growing lack of independence between the Office of Advocacy and SBA, particularly in light of SBA initiatives that task Advocacy with cutting $100 billion in regulations and setting up a deregulatory strike force. That is not the role of an independent office, but one more akin to a political arm of the administration. This administration does not fully understand the long-term cost of rolling back regulations in pursuit of short-term gains. It is important to understand the full picture. Regulations can benefit small businesses, and the unchecked removal of regulations can increase uncertainty. We have heard testimony time and time again that smart, well-crafted regulations provide clear rules of the road for small businesses, offering certainty and ensuring that they can compete on a level playing field. Smart, well-crafted regulations promote innovation, especially in the energy and manufacturing sectors. With that said, I understand certain regulations can be onerous and difficult for small employers to comply with, but deregulation is not the answer. The chainsaw approach will roll back important safeguards and cause uncertainty for small firms. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I will now introduce our witness. Our witness today is Dr. Casey Mulligan. Dr. Mulligan is the chief counsel of the Office of Advocacy at the U.S. Small Business Administration in Washington, D.C. Dr. Mulligan is responsible for representing the independent voice of small businesses before federal agencies, Congress, and the White House, and brings a deep background in economic research. Prior to work at the SBA, Dr. Mulligan served as the chief economist on the White House Council of Economic Advisers from 2018 to 2019, where he provided economic analysis on federal regulatory initiatives, healthcare, labor markets, and tax policies. Dr. Mulligan earned a bachelor of arts from Harvard University and a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Chicago. I am looking forward to our meaningful conversation today. And are you a golfer? You got a mulligan. Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes, sir, a couple times on the first tee. Chairman WILLIAMS. I got you. Okay. So before I recognize the witness, I would like to remind you that your oral testimony is restricted to 5 minutes in length. If you see the light turn red in front of you, it means your 5 minutes has concluded and you should wrap up your testimony. If you don't and keep going, you will hear this, okay? So with that, I now recognize you--we are glad to have you here, Doctor--for your 5-minute opening remarks. STATEMENT OF THE HONORABLE CASEY MULLIGAN, CHIEF COUNSEL, U.S. SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION OFFICE OF ADVOCACY Mr. MULLIGAN. Chairman Williams, Ranking Member Velazquez, and Members of the Committee. I am honored to discuss Advocacy's role in cutting red tape for small businesses. My testimony does not necessarily reflect the views of the administration or the SBA. The Biden administration finalized 12,000 rules that would cost almost $6 trillion--with a T. Against that backdrop, President Trump was elected to stop the, quote, ``ever- expanding morass of complicated federal regulation,'' close quote. He directed agencies to identify regulations that impose undue burdens on small businesses. Advocacy is well-positioned to help agencies follow that direction. During my nomination hearing, I committed to meet small businesses where they are. I have done so, together with our regional advocates who gather small business perspectives nationwide and bring them to 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 understand. One even said Advocacy, quote, ``quite literally saved Christmas,'' close quote. We also help cut foreign regulation. When Canada blocked a U.S. firewood manufacturer's exports, we coordinated with USDA, State, and Congress to resolve it. Shipments resumed, making it America's only exporter of that type of firewood. Agencies and the White House offices have increasingly come to Advocacy for input on regulatory policy. The office has flagged approximately 300 regulatory issues for this administration where deregulatory action would help small businesses. Many of these rules are giving large organizations an artificial advantage over smaller ones. Take the Outpatient Prospective Payment System that pays hospitals more for the same services than it pays independent physicians. Small businesses also flagged 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 understood that the rule would require shade structures even though harvesting occurs at night, in the dark, where there is 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. The RFA's competition channel is a reason for both of these changes. Another indicator of agencies' unprecedented engagement with Advocacy is compliance with the RFA's agenda-sharing requirement under 5 U.S.C. Section 602. With only one or two exceptions, agencies in the prior administration completely failed to comply. In contrast, during my first 5 months as chief counsel, more than 60 agencies have sought Advocacy input on their regulatory agendas. This is an increase in compliance of at least 3,000 percent. While regulators are quick to sanction businesses that violate their requirements, they too often fail to follow the rules that Congress set for them. A frequent practice has been to unlawfully certify important rules as supposedly not having a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. Such certifications are a pathway to capricious enforcement actions against small entities, and they are also obstacles to oversight. My recent report, ``Unlawful Disregard for Small Business Regulatory Burdens,'' examines thousands of certifications. In Orwellian fashion, 65 percent of the major rules from the Biden administration were nonetheless said to lack significant effects on small entities or otherwise not require considering those effects. Small businesses were saddled with costs between 200 and 600 billion dollars without acknowledgement of the magnitude. The report identifies genres of certification ``fiction''-- and that's what it is--including rules that acknowledge heavy paperwork burdens but certify anyway, rules that threaten entire business categories through product bans, and rules with detailed cost estimates that are ignored for RFA purposes. The report is not merely a critique of past process failures. It is a practical roadmap for finding and fixing red tape that is already on the books. To that end, Advocacy has published a ``most wanted'' roster of regulations notorious for their unnecessary burdens on small businesses. Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. As Chief Counsel for Advocacy, I will continue to listen and work toward better policy for all small businesses. I would be happy to answer any questions. Chairman WILLIAMS. Thank you. That is perfect. And we will now move to the Member questions under the 5- minute rule. I will now recognize myself for 5 minutes. Dr. Mulligan, the Office of Advocacy is intended to operate independently from the SBA, yet its statute requires the SBA Administrator to provide Advocacy with office space, equipment, communication facilities, and other support. So the question is, how do you navigate this statutory requirement to receive necessary support from the SBA while ensuring that Advocacy maintains its independent voice in analyzing and advocating on behalf of small business? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. My testimony and my reports have documented that the red tape problem is massive. And one office is not enough. And President Trump has a number of offices really making great contributions, the Office of Management and Budget and the National Economic Council--and my landlord, you might say, the SBA, is another one. They are very much--the Administrator is hearing from small businesses, hears about these red tape problems, and really is a great partner. And I welcome great partners whenever I can get them. In terms of setting the direction for the office, that comes from me. I have the only hiring authority. I mean, Congress is very clear that the Administrator does not need to consent or approve my hires. And, of course, especially in my office, where we don't have machines and things like that, the people are everything. So the hiring decisions are really crucial for putting together a great team to advocate for small businesses. Chairman WILLIAMS. As we said today, the Office of Advocacy was created to be the voice for small businesses in the federal government. Can you discuss how Advocacy is uniquely positioned to hear directly from small business owners, and specifically what concrete steps your office has taken since President Trump took office to expand outreach, gather meaningful feedback, and ensure small business concerns are effectively represented in federal policymaking? Mr. MULLIGAN. I mentioned a number of regulatory partners in the administration. One of the unique things Advocacy has is its outreach. A significant fraction of my staff is not in Washington. They don't have an office or a desk here. Every day they are out listening to the small businesses. And one of the things that we did, I believe we set a record, with no close second place, in filling the regional advocate positions, making sure there was somebody in place there. And we have put together quite a training program for them, and they are very well-integrated with what we are doing here in Washington. So that outreach is crucial to the whole mission of Advocacy and really to having good government here. Chairman WILLIAMS. This Committee has sounded the alarm on many of the burdensome regulations from the Biden-Harris administration. Regulations like the 1071 rule, Beneficial Ownership reporting requirements, and the independent contractor rule added unnecessary burdens and costs to Main Street America, and Advocacy has taken proactive steps to fight back against many of these regulations. So my question is, can you tell us about those efforts and how Advocacy will continue to identify and remove burdensome regulations? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. The first step always is listening to the small businesses, and they raise with us every one of those rules that you mentioned. I suppose you have heard from your constituents about them as well. And the next step is we communicate with the agencies who are--we don't make the rules at Advocacy. There are other agencies that make them. We communicate with them and let them know what we have heard. One thing that has been really a blessing in this administration is often before I can do that, they are coming to Advocacy and saying, the different Cabinet agencies: Hey, what are you hearing from small businesses? How can we do better with our regulations? And so a number of agencies, including some that you mentioned, really approached Advocacy. And we were ready, based on our outreach, to let them know what small businesses are experiencing. Chairman WILLIAMS. Let me go quickly to my last question. The Regulatory Flexibility Act is supposed to provide critical protection for small business, and last Congress the Committee's investigation found that agencies often skirt requirements and enact costly regulations to the detriment of small businesses. So, quickly, what factors limit Advocacy's ability to ensure agencies are complying fully? Mr. MULLIGAN. Well, I suppose in the prior administration that the administration itself wasn't very supportive. And President Trump has been very supportive of what we are trying to do, and that is a big reason why we had the 3,000 percent increase in compliance. If you want something more robust, when President Trump is no longer our President, I think some statutes, like the ones you mentioned, the PROVE IT Act, I think would be helpful. Chairman WILLIAMS. Well, thank you for that. My time is up, and I now recognize the Ranking Member for 5 minutes of questions. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Dr. Mulligan, is the Office of Advocacy an independent office? Mr. MULLIGAN. It is the Office of Advocacy. And we refer to ourselves---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Is it independent? Just say yes or no. Mr. MULLIGAN. The word ``independent'' is not in the statutes. We call ourselves an independent voice in the executive branch for small business. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Do you circulate to the Office of Management and Budget, White House, or Small Business Administration for clearance of your testimony? Mr. MULLIGAN. No. They get it the same time that you guys get it. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Congress intended that the chief counsel have a great deal of latitude and not be a yes man for the agency. Prior to being confirmed, were you working as a senior adviser on economics to the SBA Administrator, reporting to her chief of staff, yes or no? Mr. MULLIGAN. I don't remember the title, but, yes, I did work in a role---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. Thank you. Mr. MULLIGAN.--in her side of the office, yes. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. In my view, this is a direct conflict of interest for a nominee to an office which is statutorily required to be independent of the SBA. Moving forward, will you commit to representing the views and interests of small businesses even when those views directly conflict with or oppose actions taken by the Trump administration, yes or no? Mr. MULLIGAN. I already do that. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I am sorry? Mr. MULLIGAN. I already do that, yes. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. In December, the Wall Street Journal editorial board warned that tariffs are contributing to manufacturing job losses, 58,000 jobs since January. Have you conveyed these concerns to the White House? And what response have you received? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I have so many dealings with the White House, I don't know how to summarize them in this short time. Let me---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. But you don't recall? You know, everyone is discussing---- Mr. MULLIGAN. I recall so many things. Ms. VELAZQUEZ.--tariffs and the impact---- Mr. MULLIGAN. I recall dozens of things. I don't have time to--let me tell you one story. So during the shutdown---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. No, no, no, no. I just want to hear if you have conveyed---- Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. Because the U.S. Chamber of Commerce believes broad-based tariffs raise prices for consumers and businesses and are especially a big problem for small businesses that do not have many resources to understand them. Given the negative impact tariffs are having on small businesses, why hasn't Advocacy taken a more visible role in pushing back against these policies? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. My office, under my leadership, has achieved a 3,000 percent increase in compliance. And I understand that---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I am not discussing compliance. I am asking you a question about tariffs. Mr. MULLIGAN. I am answering your question, with all due respect. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. Mr. MULLIGAN. I am answering your question. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. Mr. MULLIGAN. I work with the agencies. I need to persuade them. I cannot make any rules. I cannot change any rates. I cannot do any of that stuff. I need to be persuasive. And I think my methods have been very effective, as you can see from the compliance changes. I understand that you are recommending some different methods to persuade. Those aren't my methods, and that is not what I am doing. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Okay. So, Chief Counsel, in your book ``You're Hired!'' you state that tariffs are taxes. Do you believe that tariffs are taxes, yes or no? Mr. MULLIGAN. Tariffs are a revenue source. The President calls them external revenue as opposed to internal revenue. And his policy--and I was there in Milwaukee in the summer of 2024, helping him get that to be on the platform. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Sir, I asked you a yes-or-no answer---- Mr. MULLIGAN. It is a revenue source. Ms. VELAZQUEZ.--based on what you wrote in your own book. Mr. MULLIGAN. The platform is different than the policies that we had in the first Trump administration. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. We are discussing the impact of tariffs on small businesses and consumers. You stated in your book that tariffs are taxes. Mr. MULLIGAN. President Trump's policy---- Ms. VELAZQUEZ. And now you are providing a different interpretation. Mr. MULLIGAN. No, it is not a different interpretation. It is a different policy. President Trump's policy--and it is very clearly stated in the platform, anyone can read it right now, the Republican platform--is to reduce internal revenue and replace it with external revenue. And that has been his policy. That is a different policy than the first administration. And it has different effects, because it is a different policy. We know that small businesses are very burdened by internal revenue, and that is part of President Trump's policy to relieve them from that burden. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. I think you are changing your tune, based on the fact that you are working for the administration. That is not what you put into this book. I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The lady yields back. I now recognize Mr. Alford from the great State of Missouri for 5 minutes. Mr. ALFORD. Thank you, Mr. Chair and Ranking Member, for holding this. Mr. Mulligan, would you like to respond to the Ranking Member, anything you would like to say after that last comment? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question and that opportunity. Policy needs to be analyzed carefully. I have done that for my entire career. I am not a young man. I have been doing that a long time. And the policies may have the same label but different things. There are different policies. And policies in the Trump two administration, I analyzed the Trump two policies. And the policies that we had in the platform in Milwaukee are not the same policies as before, and they need a different analysis. It would be dishonest to do it any other way. Mr. ALFORD. Very good. As you know, this Committee really stands as a staunch advocate for Main Street America under the leadership of our Chairman. That is what this has been about since I have been on this Committee. I think all of us up here are firmly committed to make sure that Main Street America is fairly, justly supported, that we help small businesses start and grow. If we do not maintain our champion attitude for main street interests, we risk losing the small businesses that are really integral to the fabric of America. The last 4 years, small businesses have been under attack from an administration determined to crush main street under the boot of big government. In the previous administration, federal agencies finalized over 1,000 regulations, costing taxpayers a whopping $1.8 trillion in compliance. That is not a small number, $1.8 trillion, and this is the same as the entire federal discretionary budget for fiscal year 2023. It is unacceptable that federal agencies can put this burden on the taxpayers of this country. And that is why the taxpayers spoke when they elected Donald J. Trump, who appointed Administrator Loeffler to take the SBA in a new direction. In just the first 100 days, reforms from the SBA Office of Advocacy have saved small businesses more than $48 billion in regulatory cost. Thank you. Thank you for that. And since taking office, the President has saved over $111 billion in regulatory cost. That is a savings of about $325 per American, money that instead of being wasted in useless compliance to support bureaucratic bloat, will stay in the pockets of Americans. Dr. Mulligan, the Advocacy Office does exist as the voice of small businesses to make sure that any bureaucrats in the Beltway must consider main street when creating regulations. What current regulations are you hearing about from small businesses across the country that really need attention the most? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. There are so many, as you mentioned, getting into the thousands. Mr. ALFORD. Give me your top three. Mr. MULLIGAN. We have a ``most wanted'' list that we put on our website. The OSHA Heat rule that I mentioned in my testimony is in there. The requirements for nursing home staffing is another one that is in there. The filing of quarterly payroll forms is another one on our ``most wanted'' list. It could be annual is something we should look into, making it annual instead of quarterly. Mr. ALFORD. I am also on the Appropriations Committee Subcommittee for FSGG, and I know the Office of Advocacy requested an additional $4 million. This is not an Appropriations hearing, I understand that, but that could not be included in the House mark this go-around. Can you please speak to what Advocacy would be able to do for the taxpayer with additional funding? And we have 40 seconds. Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We are a small office. There are thousands of regulations. And making sure that we follow through, and not just in identifying, but follow through in removing those regulations that need to be removed, reform the ones that need to be reformed, it would be helpful to have additional staff than just the few dozen that we have. Mr. ALFORD. I would like to have a continued conversation with you and Dave Joyce, our Subcommittee Chair, on this. Let's make that happen. Thank you so much for your service, for looking out for Main Street America. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize Mr. McGarvey from the great State of Kentucky for 5 minutes. Mr. MCGARVEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I just want to point out one thing quickly. When we are talking about rules and regulations, the first Trump administration issued 1,313 rules and regulations. The Biden administration issued 1,167 rules and regulations, less than Trump one. I am very interested in making sure that our small businesses don't have a regulatory burden. I just want us to be honest about the data and the numbers when we are talking about them. So, Dr. Mulligan, one thing I want to talk with you about is in your written testimony you use the words ``regulation'' and ``regulatory'' 55 times. You never once mention the word ``tariff.'' Zero times do you talk about tariff. That is frustrating to me, because right now if you want to come to Louisville, Kentucky, and walk around and talk to small business owners with me, that is the number one thing they are talking about. And you are supposed to be the small businesses' voice and advocate here in Washington. So the concern isn't just anecdotal. It is not just somebody telling me at their business what this is doing to them and their customers. All of the data bears this out. And even though you don't mention tariffs at all in your written testimony, you have talked about tariffs before, and you have talked about the damage that a tariff policy, specifically when there is no strategy involved, does. I can point you to chapter 8 in your book ``You're Hired!'' where you say a tariff is simply a tax on imports, where you say, quote, ``The most damaging protectionist measures are import prohibitions and their equivalents, tariffs that are so high that imports stop altogether.'' You also said, quote, ``Tariffs are taxes on top of all the other taxes and regulations of our economy,'' and they, quote, ``reduce employment, real incomes, and GDP.'' Your last point is actually proving correct right now. And in the wake of President Trump's tariffs, according to his own Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate has increased to 4.6 percent last year and the number of unemployed people increased to 7.8 million over the last year. The Chamber of Commerce has reported that a majority of small businesses expect to raise prices and have less revenue than usual, so less disposable income is going to come back into our local economies and stimulate growth. And, of course, it is making things harder for small businesses from Louisville across this country. Are you all hearing the same thing from small businesses about tariffs that we are hearing? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. There were a number of incorrect premises, with all due respect. On my--on our website---- Mr. MCGARVEY. I was just quoting you. Mr. MULLIGAN. Biden did not make 1,000 regulations, he made 12,000, and about 8,600 of them are on my website. Mr. MCGARVEY. I asked you, are you hearing about tariffs from small businesses? Are you? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes. Mr. MCGARVEY. Of course you are, because that is what they are talking about. That is what is hurting them right now. Mr. MULLIGAN. For example, the fishermen--I brought my fish tie today. The fishermen from Massachusetts, they came. We visited them. They visited us. And one of the things they raised is how the Europeans are stealing our fish and selling it back to us. That is not an exaggeration. And they are asking could there be a tariff so that we could fight--have a President who fights back against terrible trade deals---- Mr. MCGARVEY. So what has your office done---- Mr. MULLIGAN.--and crushing our small businesses from Europe. Mr. MCGARVEY. What work has your office done to help small businesses with the burden they are facing from tariffs? Are you doing anything? You are supposed to be the advocate. Mr. MULLIGAN. You are right. I am the advocate. And job number one is I listen to---- Mr. MCGARVEY. What have you done? Because we have got limited time. What have you done? Mr. MULLIGAN. Two things: listen and make sure the policymakers are hearing what I am hearing. Mr. MCGARVEY. Because the President, when he went in front of the Supreme Court, said this is regulatory. He called tariffs regulation. That is the point of his argument to the Supreme Court. He said that he, quote, ``has the power to regulate.'' That was the specific word they used on international trade. And what I am hearing from you today is that you are basically ignoring what is happening with our small businesses with the tariff problem, because you have changed your opinion that you used to write about now that you are working for the administration. Our small businesses need you more than you need to be loyal to this administration. You didn't have much good to say in your book about Peter Navarro, the President's trade guru and, quote/unquote, ``unique China expert.'' Mr. Navarro is the principal author of our country's current tariff policy. You called him--these are your words-- you called him boorish and double-dealing. You wrote that you were, quote, ``stunned'' by how misinformed he was in policy discussions. You accused him of economic illiteracy. You even pointed out that he was so out of touch that he went around Capitol Hill making a big stink about a bill--and I am not making this up--that he named The FART Act. Setting aside your personal differences with Mr. Navarro, you seem to have diametrically opposed views on tariffs and what he does. Do you think he is the right man to be leading our trade policy right now? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. It loaded in a ton of---- Mr. MCGARVEY. Quotes. Mr. MULLIGAN.--false premises. Mr. MCGARVEY. Quotes. They are called quotes. Mr. MULLIGAN. A number of quotes that you quoted from that book were about Ronald Reagan's policy. If you look at that chapter that you are quoting from, there is a picture of Ronald Reagan next to a picture of Donald J. Trump. And the whole discussion in that chapter is about Reagan's import prohibitions and Reagan's policies and how President Trump's policies---- Mr. MCGARVEY. I must have the old copy, not the new copy. Mr. MULLIGAN. There is only one copy. And I wrote that chapter. It is very much about Reagan versus Trump. And you were attributing to President Trump Reagan's---- Mr. MCGARVEY. You are ignoring the question about Peter Navarro. What about Peter Navarro? I didn't ask about Ronald Reagan. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman's time is up. Mr. MCGARVEY. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize Mr. Finstad from the great State of Minnesota for 5 minutes. Mr. FINSTAD. Thank you, Chairman Williams. Thank you for holding this important hearing today. And thank you to our witness, Dr. Mulligan, for being here. I am excited to be here today to discuss the important role the SBA Office of Advocacy plays in ensuring small businesses have a strong voice in government. For many small businesses, especially those in rural communities, like the communities that I represent in southern Minnesota, federal regulations can be confusing and costly. The SBA Office of Advocacy serves as a vital resource for engaging with small business owners, and it holds agencies accountable to the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Since 2009--and we have heard this a few times already-- federal government regulations have cost small businesses $732.2 billion, and, probably more egregiously, has added 483.8 million hours in administrative time to our small businesses. The Biden administration alone accounts for $450 billion of these costs and nearly 280 of the administrative hours, 280 million of these hours. I introduced the PROVE IT Act to give small businesses a seat at the table during this regulatory process and provide them with the much-needed regulatory relief by giving teeth to existing law, the RFA, the Regulatory Flexibility Act. So with that, Dr. Mulligan, the PROVE IT Act passed this Committee, the Judiciary Committee, and the full House of Representatives last Congress. This year, I reintroduced this legislation with the hope that it again passes the House and hopefully spurs the Senate for action. With the Chairman's permission, I would like to offer a letter received this morning from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce for the record that supports the PROVE IT Act. Chairman WILLIAMS. Agreed. Mr. FINSTAD. So, Dr. Mulligan, as the House considers the PROVE IT Act, I want to know your thoughts on this legislation and hear how you believe it could help small businesses. Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. Fictional certifications is an even bigger problem than was thought, and this Committee was early to identify it as a serious problem, and legislation such as the PROVE IT Act is directly trying to solve that problem. It is a problem that needs solving. If we don't solve it-- in this administration, President Trump is extremely supportive of small businesses. But he is not always going to be our President, and after that I think we need some legislation to prevent these fictional certifications. If fictional certifications continue, we have several problems with that for small businesses. Number one, it undermines the regulatory review process. So that protection for small businesses to be able to go back and look at old regulations and take them out when they are outdated, et cetera, will be undermined. Another key issue is being able to understand the rules to follow. Back in the old days, Martin Luther said the common man should be able to read the word on his own. Well, we have something like that in the federal government, small entity compliance guides, but the agencies avoid that through these false and fictional certifications. And last but not least would be, particularly for some of these special agencies like EPA, that when you have a false certification that the PROVE IT Act would prevent, it bypasses the panels and the great feedback we would get for small businesses and make better rules. The Ranking Member talked about well-crafted rules. The way to craft them well is to listen to the small businesses. Thank you. Mr. FINSTAD. It is probably a simple yes or no, but, Dr. Mulligan, you understand that small businesses--95 percent of the businesses in my district are small businesses. We are talking mom-and-pops, 10, 15, in some cases two, three employees. You understand that they don't have time day in and day out, because at some point in the day they are the CFO, they are the CEO, they are the janitor, they are the mechanic, they are the cook. You name it, they are doing it all in that day. You understand they don't have the time to keep up with the thousands upon thousands of regulations that a big, bloated government puts onto our small businesses. You get that, right? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes, I do. Mr. FINSTAD. All right. So a tool like the PROVE IT Act is something that will provide opportunities for common sense to prevail for our small businesses again. So how would the PROVE IT Act aid your office to influence or challenge agency rules that underestimate their impact on small businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. Well, the PROVE IT Act gives an additional role to small business voice, maybe delivered through the Office of Advocacy, in terms of questioning these fictional certifications and going ahead with the rule that acknowledges the cost that it creates and helps with the compliance and finding alternatives, less costly alternatives of achieving the same goals. Mr. FINSTAD. I appreciate what you do. Thank you for being here today. And, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize Ms. Scholten from the great State of Michigan for 5 minutes. Ms. SCHOLTEN. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Madam Ranking Member, and Dr. Mulligan, for joining us here today. Great to have a fellow Midwesterner in our presence. The topic of the day is tariffs, how do we combat the terrible impact that tariffs are having on our small business. You are here because we are looking to you to help us protect small businesses. I have here five different letters that I would like to enter into the record from small businesses across the country who reached out to this Committee desperate for help to try and combat the devastating impact of this administration's tariff policies on their small businesses. One small business owner, Lynne Fletcher O'Brien from McLean, Virginia, wrote in, and she actually used--and people here use the words, ``They are targeting us. They are attacking us.'' They see this administration as literally targeting small businesses. Lynne Fletcher O'Brien writes in and talks about actually punishing small businesses, talks about a procedure that Customs and Border Protection employs where officials are actually destroying items when they can't properly assess the value because of this chaotic tariff policy. She said, ``I am urging you to push for tariff relief that doesn't punish small American businesses and consumers.'' You are in the Office of Advocacy. They are looking to you to help. In west Michigan, our agricultural sector in particular is struggling. Rural America is struggling. President Trump's tariffs, including many businesses in the agricultural sector, he is punishing these businesses. Michigan is not only the nation's second-largest producer of apples. In my district, Grand Rapids is the apple capital of the State. As a result of the President's tariffs, fresh apple exports have declined by 58 percent this year. West Michigan produces nearly three-quarters of Michigan's harvested apples in 2024, so you can imagine how devastating these tariffs have been to my district's food and agricultural small businesses. Dr. Mulligan, you said that, when my colleague Mr. McGarvey was asking you what are you doing about it, you said you were making sure that individuals have information about it. Is that all? Is that all that you are doing? Is that all that the Office of Advocacy can do to help from small businesses feeling like they are being punished by this administration? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. Advocacy has two basic roles. The outreach. Listening, in other words. Listening to small businesses. And I would be glad to look at the letters that you are putting in the record. I think every small business voice counts. Ms. SCHOLTEN. Great. We have them here for your review. Mr. MULLIGAN. And the second role is to communicate to the agencies and try to be persuasive in terms of making sure they know what the small business concerns are and urging them to seek policies that promote success of small businesses. I have found the partnership in the administration to be incredible. As I said in my testimony, they are coming to me before I can go to them in many cases, including in the tariff area. I had an entrepreneur from Chicago who came to Washington. I met with her. And she mentioned--she sells coffee, purchases imported coffee. She said coffee is getting pretty expensive. That was during the shutdown, so I couldn't meet with the people at that time. But the very first day the shutdown was over, I was told to come to the White House and share what I have been hearing. And before I could share that Chicago entrepreneur's story, the Commerce principal said: Hey, we are cutting the tariff on coffee and some other items immediately. So that is the kind of experience that I have had. They are very eager to hear about small businesses and to take fast action to make things better. Ms. SCHOLTEN. And what action is that? I mean, we are still seeing these small business owners writing in and saying: We feel like we are being punished here. I mean, what would you say to Lynne in her letter here who says please do something about these policies that are punishing us? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I would be glad to read the letter. I don't reply to letters I haven't read. Ms. SCHOLTEN. I mean, I am reading them to you right now. I am reading it verbatim. She says: I am urging you. This certainly can't be the first time you have heard from someone who feels--and I would question whether you truly are listening if you are telling me you have never heard from people who say they feel---- Mr. MULLIGAN. Wait a second. I just got done explaining about the Chicago entrepreneur who was importing the coffee. I heard from her. I went to the--I was called to the White House to share what I am hearing and---- Ms. SCHOLTEN. And you share with them that people feel like they are being punished and destroyed by these tariffs? Mr. MULLIGAN. I shared what the Chicago entrepreneur said, not what you are saying. Ms. SCHOLTEN. So have you shared with the White House that American small businesses feel like they are being punished by this tariff policy? Mr. MULLIGAN. I have not heard a business tell that they me that they are being punished. Ms. SCHOLTEN. You do not feel that this--you have not heard from any small businesses that feel that this would be a---- Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady's time is up. Ms. SCHOLTEN.--devastating impact on their small business? Then I am glad I entered these into the record. We encourage you to come to west Michigan and talk to small businesses who are experiencing devastating consequences of this tariff policy. I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize Ms. King-Hinds from the Northern Mariana Islands for 5 minutes. Ms. KING-HINDS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank you, Dr. Mulligan, for making time to be with us today. So, as the Chairman has stated, I represent the Northern Mariana Islands. And 99 percent of our problem out of--we have 99 problems. Ninety-eight percent of our problems can be directly attributed to rules--federal rules and regulations. We have one industry, which is the tourism industry. And just the other day, a few days ago, on my way back here, I was informed by one of our largest employers in the private sector that they are considering closing down. And this is an issue that the economy of the CNMI is something that I am deeply passionate about. And I have been communicating the challenges that we are having to the federal government as early as during the tenure of Secretary Pete Buttigieg, because when tourism is your primary industry DOT rules and regulations have a very significant impact. So I don't really have any questions for you, but I do have an ask, because all too often these federal policies have mainland firms in mind or mainland small businesses in mind. So I would ask for you to consider or committing to a direct outreach to small businesses in the CNMI, whether it be through virtual or whatever means. I also ask that your research and economic analysis, don't just lump us all in with Region 9, and I think that is the region that we fall under, because we are not like the West Coast. We are a remote island community. And also, it would be amazing if you guys could track and report the real world impact so that we can start actually getting ahead of some of these issues so that we can prevent a complete economic collapse of the CNMI, which I don't think anybody at the federal government wants. That is it. Thank you for your time. I yield my time. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize Mrs. McIver from the great State of New Jersey for 5 minutes. Mrs. MCIVER. Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, for convening this hearing. And thank you to our witness, Mr. Mulligan, for appearing before the Committee today. The SBA Office of Advocacy was created by Congress to be an independent voice for small businesses before the government, to make sure the real world cost of government policies are actually understood, and to ensure small business owners have someone in their corner when they are competing with big businesses. That mission is especially important right now. Small businesses are facing some of the toughest economic conditions since the Great Recession. Costs are up, margins are thin, and uncertainty is high. At the same time, Trump's administration has made deregulation a central policy priority and has directed its Office of Advocacy to gut key services to small businesses under the guise of cutting red tape across the federal government. When done thoughtfully, regulatory reform can help small businesses grow. I think all of my colleagues here can agree to that. But when it is rushed or done without transparency, it risks shutting small businesses out of the very processes meant to protect them. I have listened to the concerns of actual small businesses in my district and nationwide across a range of industries. Their concerns are very clear, Dr. Mulligan. They tell me that what is hurting them most right now is persistent inflation, tariffs, and rising healthcare costs after the Republican majority let the enhanced ACA tax credits expire. Small businesses need to know that the Office of Advocacy is fulfilling its statutory role as an independent, Dr. Mulligan, advocate. They also need to know whether the SBA's work is focused on the real economic conditions small businesses are facing or if it is serving a more partisan interest, Dr. Mulligan. Dr. Mulligan, Congress intentionally structured the Office of Advocacy as an independent entity within the SBA so that it could speak candidly, even when that means disagreeing with the administration. I want to inform you, Dr. Mulligan, that it is okay to disagree with the administration. Will you certify here that you did not have to clear the statements you made here today by any organ of the White House, especially the Office of Management and Budget and SBA? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. As I mentioned earlier, the OMB, Office of Management and Budget, they get a copy of my testimony at the same time that this Committee does. Mrs. MCIVER. That is your answer? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes. I would not call that clearing. That is a courtesy copy. ``Guess what, guys, I am going to the Hill. I am going to be part of a hearing. And here is what I am going to be saying.'' Mrs. MCIVER. Did you have to get approval, yes or no? Mr. MULLIGAN. No, I did not get approval. Mrs. MCIVER. Dr. Mulligan---- Mr. MULLIGAN. I sent it to you before they could possibly-- -- Mrs. MCIVER. Dr. Mulligan---- Mr. MULLIGAN.--open their mouth and comment on it. Mrs. MCIVER. Dr. Mulligan, when I say your name, that means I am reclaiming my time. How can America's small businesses trust you to speak truth to the administration when you couldn't even speak to us here today without their approval? Mr. MULLIGAN. Well, that is loaded with false--thank you for your question, but it is loaded with false premises. I did not need their approval for my testimony today. Mrs. MCIVER. Dr. Mulligan, can you describe clearly on the record how you define independence in your role as chief counsel and what concrete safeguards are in place to ensure your office's positions are not directed or constrained by this administration? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yeah. Thank you for your question. The Office of Advocacy was really blessed with special statutes from Congress. They are so special I have them laminated. I carry them with me everywhere. Mrs. MCIVER. I mean, you obviously have a lot of things laminated right there in front of you. Mr. MULLIGAN. So actually this is the only laminated thing in front of me. Mrs. MCIVER. Well, you have all your statements there. Mr. MULLIGAN. And these special statutes include being open during the shutdown. That was special. If you want to call that independent, that is fine. It is not in the statute. But the hiring authority, it used to be, in the old days, to hire people the chief counsel needed the consultation and approval of the Administrator. That is no longer true. I have that in my laminated statute. The reporting rules, that there should not be clearance from OMB and the other federal agencies, that is another special rule that the office has, and we appreciate that and we follow that. Mrs. MCIVER. Mr. Mulligan, that concludes my questions. I will say that that question specifically should not need a laminated document for you to respond to. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize Ms. Van Duyne from the great State of Texas for 5 minutes. Ms. VAN DUYNE. Thank you very much. And, Dr. Mulligan, I appreciate your testimony today. You have a really important job. I mean, I am listening to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle and it sounds like you have the most important job for small businesses in the government. Like, your job is to be the massive advocate. Can you tell me a little bit about your predecessor in your position? Since this is such an important job under the Trump administration and everybody on my Democrat colleagues recognize the fact that this is such an important job that small businesses have this advocate voice. Can you tell me about your predecessor? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We have an empty chair right here. That is what it was for 9 years. President Biden didn't even bother to nominate somebody for this. I think it is an important job. I enjoy doing it. And I am blessed that President Trump asked me to do this job. Ms. VAN DUYNE. I recognize that. And I recognize that we have finally realized that we need to have a voice for our small businesses, because it seems like during the 4 years of the Biden administration they got absolutely crushed. How many additional regulations did you say that the Biden administration put on our small businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. If we just count the final rules that were published in the Federal Register, it is 12,025. Ms. VAN DUYNE. 12,000 in 4 years. And what was the cost of all those? Mr. MULLIGAN. I mean, there are so many it is a little bit hard to say. But my best estimate is for the entire economy $6 trillion--with a T. Ms. VAN DUYNE. Wow. Okay. And that crushed small businesses, right? Because they are at a disadvantage when you are looking at corporations, because corporations actually can have, like, an entire regulatory agency--or an entire regulatory department, a division. Small businesses don't have that. So they are relying on folks like you to be able to say: Look, when we have these regulations that we think are little that are coming out of these agencies, this can crush us. I mean, it is averaging what? It was $50,000 an employee, is what the small businesses were having to pay in addition to during the Biden administration? It is absolutely astonishing to me that after the previous 4 years of that administration that we are finally having advocacy from our Democrat colleagues for small businesses, the $1.8 trillion that they added. We are hearing about tariffs and crushing the economy. I am sorry. What was the GDP growth last quarter? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I believe it was 4.3 percent annualized rate. Ms. VAN DUYNE. Wow. Okay. And we finally have wages now that are outgrowing inflation, right? So this is great for our small businesses. And the unemployment that they were talking about, what sector was that unemployment in, the increase in unemployment? It is the public sector, right? It was government jobs, right, that we had lost? But in the private sector, didn't we see an increase? Didn't we see more small businesses hiring? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yes, that is correct. I mean, one very important statistic that we are seeing is new business applications. They were skyrocketing in 2025 to historic levels. We have never seen something like that. A lot of people say, including the previous administration, that those sort of applications, employer identification number applications, are quite an important predictor of future employment growth. Ms. VAN DUYNE. So it seems like this administration actually gets it, that we are helping on the tariff side to make sure that our small businesses are able to compete globally, that we are helping them on the tax side with the One Big Beautiful Bill and the 199A on pass-through, recognizing that we want them to be able to compete with corporations. And then I actually have a bill that was passed off the House floor. It is the H.R. 2965, the Small Business Reduction Act of 2025. And basically what that says, it is a bill that any new rulemaking by the SBA is at no cost to small businesses. Now, it is not saying that you can't have additional regulations as necessary, as needed; but what it does say is you are going to have to cut some that are duplicative, that are unnecessary, that don't even reflect the intent of the law. Can I ask you how we can make that permanent, that we can actually codify the decrease in regulations on small businesses? And how do we create, like, a systemic culture of regulatory discipline where agencies will have to review with regulatory scrutiny? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. Just a few seconds we have left. I think regulatory budgeting is worth looking at. President Trump did that in the first term, EO 13771, and he is doing it again in this term. That is something that could be in the statute that Congress could be involved with, not just setting the money budget but also setting the regulatory budget. Ms. VAN DUYNE. Okay. Fantastic. I appreciate that. What has your office--in, like, the 10 seconds that you have got--what would you say are the top three things that you have gotten accomplished since you have been here? Mr. MULLIGAN. I think being part of the regulatory agendas, saying what rules we are going to add and subtract and reform, that is huge. I am very, very gratified that so many agencies have asked for our input. Ms. VAN DUYNE. Fantastic. Thank you very much for what you do, and I appreciate your testimony here today. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize Dr. Morrison from the great State of Minnesota for 5 minutes. Ms. MORRISON. Thank you, Chairman Williams and Ranking Member Velazquez, for holding the hearing. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan, for being here to testify. Since you represent the Office of Advocacy, which is intended to be the voice of small businesses, I am sorry to be redundant this morning, but I have to begin by asking you about the number one concern that I am hearing from small businesses in my district, which of course are the tariffs. Dr. Mulligan, during your testimony, you said that, ``When regulation tilts markets toward incumbents and away from new entrants, it directly undermines the small businesses that drive American innovation and job creation.'' Do you agree that allowing large tech companies like Nvidia and Apple to negotiate directly with the President for tariff exemptions tilts markets towards incumbents? Yes-or-no question. Mr. MULLIGAN. I am not familiar with the premise of the question, so I am not sure how to analyze. I haven't been part of the President's discussions with large businesses. My attention is on the small businesses. Ms. MORRISON. I will just give you one more chance. Do you agree that allowing large tech companies like Nvidia and Apple--we are all aware this happened--to negotiate directly with the President for tariff exemptions tilts markets towards incumbents? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I am not familiar with the policy. I can't really opine on something I am not familiar with. Ms. MORRISON. Okay. We will move on. Do you think tariffs are helping small businesses stimulate job creation? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. Probably the quickest way to answer it would be to go back to what I have heard about European terrible trade deals. I have heard these--again, this is not my opinion, my study. This is what I hear from the small businesses. Europe has a bunch of supply chain regulations that are going to cost small businesses a trillion dollars--with a T-- and we didn't even get to vote for those people. President Biden was weak and ineffective on that policy---- Ms. MORRISON. Dr. Mulligan, I am sorry to interrupt you, but I am not asking about Europe. I am talking about American small businesses. Mr. MULLIGAN.--and small businesses want a President who will fight back against these terrible international policies. Ms. MORRISON. Dr. Mulligan, I am reclaiming my time, respectfully. What I have been hearing repeatedly from small businesses is that they are the ones bearing the brunt of President Trump's tariff war. They are the ones being forced to eat the costs or lay off staff while larger corporations are able to lobby the President and receive exemptions. I really hope that during the coming months the Office of Advocacy does more than it has done this past year to protect small businesses from the impact of tariffs and ensure that small businesses are able to not just survive but to grow and prosper. During our first Small Business Committee hearing last year, I asked Mr. Karl Hutter, the CEO of Click Bond, a small, family-owned manufacturing business, how we can strike the right balance with regulations to encourage small businesses to thrive. His response was very clear. Small businesses, he said, need predictability, clarity, and workability. Dr. Mulligan, during your time here today you have made it clear that this administration has a very ambitious deregulatory agenda. In other words, we are going to see, and we are already seeing, a great deal of change and uncertainty in the regulatory space. What is the Office of Advocacy doing to help small businesses navigate the uncertainty deregulation brings with it? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We have our Constitution and Presidents serve two terms at most. Ms. MORRISON. That is a relief to hear. Mr. MULLIGAN. And so the executive branch turns over. What has proven to be more durable are the statutes. And so one of the things that the Office of Advocacy does is advocate for small businesses here on the Hill, in writing statutes. And this Congress has been quite productive in that regard, 22 Congressional Review Act disapprovals passed. And those are things that will last beyond the current administration, and that's providing a much-wanted certainty for our small businesses. Ms. MORRISON. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan. I did not hear how you are helping small businesses navigate the uncertainty that deregulation brings. But one final question. I am a physician by trade, so I am very familiar with the pain and frustration caused by administrative burden. I am sympathetic to the concerns raised by small business owners that extensive regulations can be onerous and burdensome. But I also recognize that regulations are critical to keeping people safe and healthy and keeping our air, land, and water clean. I hope we can all agree that finding that right balance between protecting Americans' health and safety while ensuring that small businesses can flourish is a goal worth pursuing. In the midst of the Trump administration's calls for deregulation, what steps will your office take to ensure there is that balance struck between this deregulatory agenda and protecting the health and safety of our small business owners and their employees. Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. Yes, the balance is quite important. You need to listen to the small businesses. The false certifications are not achieving balance. That is ignoring costs and pretending they don't exist. You can't balance something that you are ignoring. Ms. MORRISON. So no comment on the air, land, and water? Mr. MULLIGAN. No, there is a balance between the mission-- this is in the RFA itself--the mission of the regulatory---- Chairman WILLIAMS. The time is up. Ms. MORRISON. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentlelady yields back. I now recognize Mr. Downing from the great State of Montana for 5 minutes. Mr. DOWNING. Well, thank you, Mr. Chair. And thank you, Dr. Mulligan, for being here today. I represent Montana's Second District, central and eastern Montana, very rural, and small businesses are very vital to our rural communities. And being somewhat of a glutton for punishment, I come out of the private sector. I have created a lot of--I have run a lot of small businesses in everything from manufacturing to distillation to securities to insurance to manufacturing. And I have personally seen how heavy-handed and unreasonable regulation can stifle growth and make it difficult, especially on small businesses, in being successful. And a lot of that, if you are boots on the ground, watching how this--everybody cares about bad actors. Everybody cares about protecting consumers. I would say bad actors are bad for industry. Nobody wants bad actors in their business. And so the thought that deregulating is going to create this petri dish of bad actors, I think, is misplaced. We do need to have reasonable side boards, but we also need to allow small businesses to be successful. And one of the things that caught my attention here is about raising the barrier to entry for competing in an industry and how that is different between larger companies who can manage the costs and the administrative burdens caused by this regulation, and main street really can't. And, Dr. Mulligan, in your testimony you mentioned this artificial advantage that government regulation creates for large businesses over small ones. Can you elaborate on the negative impact this artificial advantage has on economic innovation? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yeah. Thank you for your question. I think a vivid example that is worked on in some detail in a letter I sent to Commissioner Oz over at CMS about what has happened to independent physicians. They used to be a majority of physicians, and now they are quite a fairly small minority. And a lot of these regulations that we are discussing are part of the issue. The fact that the big hospitals, when they employ the physicians, they get extra government money that the independent physicians don't. That has been a factor in driving down the capability of independent physicians to stay in their small business mode. Mr. DOWNING. Right, right. By the end of 2024, the Biden administration had imposed $1.8 trillion in regulatory costs on American businesses. In your view, how much has the regulatory environment changed since President Trump's swearing-in, and what impact has it had on small business? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. It has been a 180-degree turn, such a huge change. I mean, there was so much regulation. I think $6 trillion is the best estimate that we have of the Biden regulations, just 4 years' worth of them. And now, there are some new regulations coming out, but a lot more regulations being taken away. What has been the impact on small businesses so far? I think it has been over $100 billion reduced costs as a result of President Trump's agencies' actions. Mr. DOWNING. Well, thank you. And under your leadership, in what ways has the Office of Advocacy influenced rulemaking under the Trump administration in support of small businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. Really the two steps I like to talk about is listening. We continue to listen. That is my favorite part. I learn so much talking to the small businesses and hearing what they experience. And then relaying those experiences and trying to put it in practical terms for the agencies. Here are some rules you should look at. Here is what the small businesses are saying about the reasons to reform those rules. Mr. DOWNING. Right. Thank you. Well, I really appreciate your testimony here today. And, on that, Mr. Chair, I yield back the remainder of my time. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back his time. I now recognize Mr. Cisneros from the great State of California for 5 minutes. Mr. CISNEROS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to thank you and the Ranking Member for holding this hearing today. Dr. Mulligan, in your response to the Ranking Member's letter from November you declined to answer her question about the number of submissions related to tariffs because it was not in the scope of a hotline. After my colleagues across the aisle rejected my amendment to the bill that would codify the hotline, I introduced my own bill that would increase the scope of the hotline to give Advocacy an explicit role in hearing concerns from small businesses regarding tariffs. Is this something you would support, Dr. Mulligan? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I haven't been able to read your bill. I would like to study it before declaring my support or resistance. Mr. CISNEROS. Well, I mean, it is a simple question, right? Would you support the hotline reporting the information on tariffs, that you want to take a bigger concern in that? Is that something you would support? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. What I am clear on--one of the reasons our office has had such great successes in just 5 months is we used the right tool for the job, something my parents taught me, the right tool for the job. And the right tool for the red tape hotline is red tape. That is the job that you use the red tape tool for. So I wouldn't advocate using a hammer when you need a screwdriver or a wrench. Mr. CISNEROS. Well, it is a simple thing, right, to include more information right there? Tariffs are obviously hurting small businesses, and to gather that information to report it to the Committee is something that I hope you would support. And I hope you will take a look at my bill and do that, because it seems to align with what you said in the past, which is, it is consistent with your statement where you ask this Committee to consider legislation that gives the Office of Advocacy a more official role in trade policy. So with that, I will move to my next question. I hope you agree that the regional advocates are crucial because they serve as direct liaisons between local and small businesses and federal regulators. Region 9 covers California and several other States and Territories. I would like to read you the bio of the Region 9 advocate for the Office of Advocacy website. It reads, ``Vacant, bio coming soon.'' Mr. Chairman, I ask for unanimous consent that this Region 9 advocate bio is entered into the record. Chairman WILLIAMS. So moved. Mr. CISNEROS. Dr. Mulligan, are you aware of how many small businesses there are in the State of California? Mr. MULLIGAN. I don't have the exact number off the top of my head, but I would guess it is in the millions. Mr. CISNEROS. 4.3 million--4.3 million small businesses. Now, Dr. Mulligan, while there is no regional advocate for California's 4.3 million small businesses, when do you expect an appointment to be made for Region 9 advocates to ensure California's 4.3 million small businesses have their voice heard? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We set a record over all other Presidencies before in terms of getting our outreach advocacy team, our regional advocacy team, filled in. We still do need to fill in Region 9. There was a long delay in my confirmation. I wasn't allowed to interview people for that position. But as soon as the Senate finally finished the job, I was interviewing people. And it wouldn't surprise me if it is just a matter of days or weeks that we have that position filled. Mr. CISNEROS. Do you have somebody that you have already talked to, that you have interviewed? Mr. MULLIGAN. I have talked to a number of people. It is a big priority to hear from small businesses everywhere. Mr. CISNEROS. So you have somebody in the pipeline that should be there, and so within the next few days I should hear a name, that somebody has been appointed to this? Mr. MULLIGAN. There is a lot of red tape in hiring people, so it is hard to commit to a date. But it is a priority, and I interview and I am pushing---- Mr. CISNEROS. Well, I guess we are here to hear about cutting the red tape. So how do we kind of make this--do you make those cuts so you can make this? Look, I served in the previous administration. I know what it takes, and I know how it can be difficult sometimes. But this needs to be a priority, right? And this is, like, California has 4.3--and that is not including the other States in the region that add businesses to this too, and they deserve to have an advocate for them that is supporting them. You know, when we have had previous discussions before you came on board, it just did not seem to be a priority of this administration to put somebody in charge there. And, look, we have seen numerous times where the President has singled out California because it does not support him. And so I hope you are arguing or telling the administration to look beyond the political disagreements and that we need to support our small businesses, and we should have a Region 9 director, and that they start making this a priority. And with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. I now recognize Mr. Meuser from the great State of Pennsylvania for 5 minutes. Mr. MEUSER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much, Dr. Mulligan. Appreciate your testimony. Appreciate the idea of--well, getting to know you better and working with you. I, too, am a small business advocate. I think we all are up here. And it is quite important, to say the least. Recently the NFIB put out some data that--and of course they have got tens of thousands of members--that small business optimism is way up, almost 10 percent since last November. So over the course of a year--or November of 2023, so over the course of President Trump's first year--we are up in optimism over 10 percent. And that is largely due, let's face it, to the taxes that all Republicans voted for in the 199A. Without those tax reductions, small businesses' taxes would have gone up 25 percent, approximately, maybe slightly more in some cases depending upon level of income being earned. And that is enormous. I mean, many small businesses, of course, said they would be out of business if that weren't the case. Yet all Democrats felt it was in their interest to vote against it. That is amazing, I mean. Would you say that is a small business advocate that would vote to increase small business taxes by nearly 25 percent? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We hear a lot from small business. Maybe the top thing, the internal revenue burden on small businesses, that is tough for so many of them. And so they would have problems with any new statutes that add to that. Mr. MEUSER. It would probably send some products overseas, wouldn't it, as well, right, even in spite of the so-called tariffs? And I want to get to that. But the work you have done on regulations is so very important. I would like you to make a side note where we need to codify some--whether the regulations, whatever. If you were sitting in my seat, what would you work on codifying? And we can talk about that afterwards. I won't just ask you to name it off the top of your head. But permitting, energy costs. Energy costs have been unbelievably important for small business. They have come down 30 percent, something of that nature, over the course of the last 14 months. Workforce improvements. No tax on overtime is now kicking in. No tax on tips. There is a big difference--under President Trump we started rethinking trade, right? And we were taught: Oh, free trade, free trade, free trade. What did that do to U.S. manufacturing? Okay. Sent it overseas, I mean, like a giant sucking sound as we heard before. Japan had a hundred percent tariff on us. China had all kinds of tariffs on us. Everything was being made in China. Now we are bringing it back. And you know what many people don't understand? Because I was in small business for a long time too. Many small businesses' best customers are large businesses, right? So when those large businesses start sending their products overseas, guess what, it flattens, it destroys the small business. So the so-called tariffs--by the way, we had our shock and awe, we got the whole world's attention--now they have come down considerably. And, frankly, my office, we are small business advocates. We are not getting the calls on it. Initially, yeah, what is going to happen, particularly certain sectors. But would you say that in the small business world and in the calls that you are getting--and, by the way, your red tape hotline, I suggest you rename it the blue tape hotline, just a suggestion. But if you would, what sort of calls are you getting these days to your hotline? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. We get a variety of regulations. As I mentioned, 12,025, there is a whole variety. Mr. MEUSER. Right. Mr. MULLIGAN. Regulations related to procurement is a fairly common one. A lot of health, Food and Drug Administration-type of regulations, CMS, HHS. Paperwork around IRS, we hear a fair bit about that. Mr. MEUSER. Well, while I have 45 seconds left, what would you suggest that we work on codifying that you are working on, and how else can we support your efforts? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I would like to get together with you afterward because I think it is important. President Trump won't always be our President. Congress can do things on a more durable basis. And we do hear from small businesses that they do appreciate when Congress comes in and provides durable solutions. Mr. MEUSER. Well, I absolutely welcome you up to Pennsylvania's Ninth Congressional District. It is a lovely ride. Maybe we can do that sometime in the near future. With that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman? Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. Mr. Chairman? Chairman WILLIAMS. Yes, ma'am. Ms. VELAZQUEZ. A correction here. It is not red--blue tape. It is blue waste that is coming. Chairman WILLIAMS. I now recognize Mr. Tran from the great State of California for 5 minutes. Mr. TRAN. Good morning. Thank you, Chairman and Ranking Member, for convening today's important meeting. Dr. Mulligan, welcome. Thank you for being here. While the future rates of tariffs are still uncertain, the costs are becoming clearer. Analysts estimated tariffs cost small business owners an additional $25,000 per month from April to September. Small business bankruptcies are up 10 percent this year and up 23 percent in November alone. According to data from ADP, small businesses lost 120,000 jobs in November, while larger ones continued gaining. I am deeply concerned because the data is showing that the U.S. bankruptcies and employment levels are reaching levels not seen since the Great Recession. What are you hearing from small businesses about the overall impact of tariffs on their businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your questions. One of the key duties of the Office of Advocacy--in fact, it was the first one, even before the RFA--is economic research. And I appreciate your pointing to some of the statistics. That is something we try to track very carefully. One of the things that we have noticed, very large increase in new business applications in 2025, and we know that is essential for innovation. The new companies, not just small ones, but the small new ones, the new small ones, whichever way you want to call it. And there is a real boom in that area, and we are researching to understand more about exactly what parts of our economy, what parts of the country that is occurring, but that is something we are tracking pretty closely. Mr. TRAN. Great. And what steps have you taken to make sure that you convey these concerns and these views with the White House and the administration? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I am meeting with them regularly. As I mentioned in my testimony, they are reaching out to our office and saying: What input do you have? So this is happening literally every day. I guess, with the exception during the shutdown, it was a little quiet because the people on the other end of the phone weren't able to talk. But my office was open. Mr. TRAN. Dr. Mulligan, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, over 30 percent of small businesses are minority-owned and 42 percent are owned by women. My first question to you is, how will the office, your office, ensure that the outreach will reflect the geographical and demographic composition of small businesses throughout the country? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. There are a variety of things we do. One of the keys was very quickly try to fill in these regional advocate jobs. And I understand Region 9 is empty. But as I said, as soon as I was constitutionally allowed to start working on that, I have been working on that. I would like to see all regions filled. And I want to visit, myself, all the regions. So regional is one thing that is pretty easy to track, and it is important that I hear from all parts of the country, not just specific States or hot geographic areas. The whole country counts. Mr. TRAN. Great. And you are planning to have listening sessions or roundtables to listen to these folks all throughout the country? Mr. MULLIGAN. Yeah. Thank you for your question. Roundtables is one of our favorite activities. Also, just crossing thresholds. I have gone out to different parts of the country and visit a business. Go to the Iowa State Fair, cold call on businesses who are--small businesses who are there. So we try to use all the tools that we have because, again, it is something that a lot of the other agencies in Washington don't have this outreach. So we need to do outreach well, and I appreciate your interest in it, and we are going to do everything we can to listen because that is what is really missing here in Washington. Mr. TRAN. That is great. And I welcome you to come out to my cities out in southern California to listen to the small businesses and their concerns out there. Then my final ask of you is, can you commit to providing this Committee with a breakdown of your outreach efforts, including location, participant types, business sizes, sectors, and demographics, so that Congress can evaluate the effectiveness of your outreach and determine whether you are meeting the needs of the entire small business community? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I would be very happy for the entire Committee to be aware of what regions we are making contact with. Mr. TRAN. Thank you, Dr. Mulligan. And with that, Chairman, I yield back. Thank you. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. Now, at this time, we are going to stand in recess because of the briefing we have at the CDC with Secretary Hegseth and Secretary Rubio. I ask that Members please return after the briefing to continue Member questions. [Recess.] Chairman WILLIAMS. The Committee will now come to order. I want to thank everybody for hanging in there with us. We will now resume Member questions under the 5-minute rule. I now recognize my friend from Maryland, Mr. Olszewski, for 5 minutes. Mr. OLSZEWSKI. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I want to thank you, our Ranking Member, and Dr. Mulligan for today's conversation. I also, as I mentioned, Dr. Mulligan, want to appreciate your outreach to our Maryland fishermen. You mentioned the tie earlier in the briefing. So I do appreciate your outreach to us on that important issue. I am going to actually open my remarks this afternoon by acknowledging that I am a Democrat who is willing to admit that it was wrong and it is a mistake for the Biden administration not to name someone to fill your role in the past. And I think it is important that Members of our own parties are willing to do that. So just as I am willing to make that admission here, I know that we don't have as many Members on the other side of this recess, but I think it is really important that Republican Members of this Committee and this Congress also be willing to acknowledge when there is a disconnect or disagreement with the Trump administration. And so I just want to put that on the record. And I say all that because I know I often hear from small business owners who are impacted by misguided regulations that limit their ability to thrive in this economy. So we are looking for even the smallest of ways that we can make progress together. And, unfortunately, the Trump administration has in many plaices made costs go up--and not necessarily in small ways, but in massive, crushing ways. As we talked about earlier, tariffs was a huge issue we were discussing, and the Center for American Progress estimates that between April and September of 2025, small businesses paid about $25,000 more per month for imports compared to those in the same period of 2024. Tariffs on key commodities like steel and aluminum have added new layers of red tape, not fewer. And while I appreciate the outreach on the fisheries, this is an area where I feel like the Office of Advocacy could do better to substantively address these issues. Moreover, tariffs, as awful as they have been, are, sadly, not the only problem. The Republican majority of this Congress, with the full-throated support of President Trump, sat on the sidelines as tax credits to keep healthcare affordable expired. Now, why does this matter? It matters because half of all adult enrollees in the Affordable Care Act marketplace either own a small business or work for one. The Republican resistance to addressing these healthcare costs have led to, on average, a 75 percent increase in premiums. That is over $4,750 for the average American family. It is why I hope that my colleagues this week will join me in voting to roll back this shortsighted Republican tax on hardworking Americans and small businesses by extending these credits. Students at the University of Maryland School of Business recently came together to survey the impact on federal policy changes on the Maryland business economy. When asked about the most significant challenges they faced as business owners in 2025, Maryland business owners said answers like DOGE, federal policy changes, and our own government working against us to kill our industry. So we have some real challenges ahead. I look forward to working with the Chairman and you to find legitimate solutions that are for the small business owner. Chief Counsel, I know earlier you mentioned advocating for businesses. I guess my first question is, what, if anything, has your office done to calculate the impact of tariffs on small businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. The two big steps I have been engaged in my first 5 months are, number one, listening to the small businesses wherever they are, whatever they have to say, and then communicating that to those who make the rules. My office doesn't make the rules---- Mr. OLSZEWSKI. But do you have any anything quantified, though, that you are using in terms of advocating for those small businesses? Mr. MULLIGAN. A project--and I have only been here 5 months--one of the projects I have been quite interested in is the revenue burden on small businesses. Believe it or not, there is not a summary statistic of that, and we have hired some very good people to work on that. We are not finished yet. And revenue consists of particularly the internal revenue, but there is an external revenue component to it too. Mr. OLSZEWSKI. Yeah. I hope that we would have that kind of data before the administration would choose to make those choices, and certainly want to support you so you have that kind of data, so you can argue against these tariffs that are hurting the average American business, the average American, in the same way that we know that these healthcare costs are crushing small businesses. And I want to work with you to help quantify that so that we can advocate for solutions. Our healthcare system costs have also gotten out of control. But in the meantime, we have to have a solution to address the fact that these are really tax increases crushing our businesses and Americans across this country. I thank you again for your presence, look forward to working with you. And with that, Mr. Chairman, yield back. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. And I would like to let everybody know that Representative Schmidt is running up the hallway. Mr. OLSZEWSKI. I am happy to take a few more minutes, if you want, Mr. Chairman. Chairman WILLIAMS. And if you would like to take one more minute, I will give it to you. Mr. OLSZEWSKI. I appreciate that, sir. Thank you very much. I know another area where we have talked a little bit about are the reductions and the rollbacks to the Inflation Reduction Act. President Trump has chosen to suspend a lot of those. There have been particularly green energy businesses across this country who have seen that. I am just curious, Dr. Mulligan, what your engagement has been like with those affected industries, and what you are hearing, and how you are helping them navigate those rollbacks. Mr. MULLIGAN. Thank you for your question. I am not sure I have organized my interactions under different statutes like the Inflation Reduction Act, but one that does come to mind, again, the fishermen. Fishermen are so unbelievably regulated. And they have repeatedly expressed to me concerns--environmental concerns-- around the Inflation Reduction Act with especially the wind farms. And they are churning out hot water in places that are not supposed to be hot water, and it is hurting the whole fishing operation. And I think Secretary Burgum has been very quick to take action and to investigate that and stop any further damage to the fishing grounds due to wind farms. Mr. OLSZEWSKI. I appreciate that. I appreciate the extra time, Mr. Chairman. And, again, Dr. Mulligan, I will just say I look forward to working with you to actually getting those quantifiable numbers around both the tariff impacts as well as the healthcare cost increases that we are trying to do something about this week. I thank you so much. Chairman WILLIAMS. The gentleman yields back. And do we have a Dr. Schmidt sighting, or did he fall down in the hall or---- VOICE. I hope not. Chairman WILLIAMS. Well, I will just take this time too to--okay, he is coming in? STAFF. He is not in this hallway. I don't know which hallway he is in. Chairman WILLIAMS. Okay. I want to thank you for coming, to witness today. We appreciate it very much. I am a small business owner myself. I am in the car business back in Texas. And regulations and all the things which both sides have talked about today are damaging to the industry, and we appreciate you continuing to speak up and fight for us very much so. All right. Okay. You want to say anything, Mr. Witness? You want to talk about those mulligans you get on the first hole or anything in closing? Mr. MULLIGAN. Well, thank you for your question. Small businesses are very appreciative that now there is bipartisan agreement that Advocacy is an important office, and the chief counsel role needs to be filled. And they are thrilled that I am out there with my people listening to them. They feel heard. They feel like this is a real opportunity for change. And everything your Committee has contributed to that process, we appreciate that. Chairman WILLIAMS. Well, thank you very much. We have a bipartisan Committee pretty much on just about everything, and we just want main street to thrive. I want to thank you again for your being here today, your testimony. Without objection, Members have 5 legislative days to submit additional materials and written questions for the witness to the Chair, which will be forwarded to the witness. I ask the witness to please respond promptly if that happens. No further business, without objection, the Committee is adjourned. Thank you. [Whereupon, at 1:04 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] A P P E N D I X [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT] [all]