Executive Order 13771: Reducing Regulation and Controlling Regulatory Costs
President: Donald J. Trump
Established a regulatory-budget process that generally required agencies to identify deregulatory actions and control incremental regulatory costs.
Status: Revoked. Is Executive Order 13771 still in effect? No. EO 13992 expressly revoked EO 13771 on January 20, 2021. EO 14192 created a different regulatory-offset policy on January 31, 2025.
What does Executive Order 13771 do?
EO 13771 introduced regulatory budgeting and a two-for-one policy for executive agencies. Trump directed agencies proposing or issuing a new regulation to identify at least two existing regulations for repeal, unless law prohibited that approach. For the remainder of fiscal year 2017, the total incremental cost of new rules, after accounting for repeals, was generally to be no greater than zero. Signed order.
The order treated regulatory compliance costs as something to manage through an annual budget, alongside the government's management of public expenditure. Beginning with fiscal year 2018 planning, agencies had to identify offsets for rules increasing incremental costs and estimate the costs or savings of both new and repealed requirements. OMB set each agency's allowable annual total; the allowance could permit an increase or require a reduction. This was a management instruction for covered rulemaking, not a self-executing repeal of two particular laws whenever an agency issued a rule. Signed order.
Before and after
Before the order
Agencies already operated under EO 12866's planning and centralized-review structure and their authorizing statutes. EO 13771 layered numerical offsets and an incremental-cost cap onto that process. Military, national-security and foreign-affairs regulations were excluded, as were organization, management and personnel rules and further categories OMB exempted. Signed order.
After the order
OMB supplied implementation guidance defining cost measurement, qualifying new and offsetting actions, cross-year accounting and circumstances for waivers. Agencies had to include approved regulations in the Unified Regulatory Agenda and normally obtain written advance approval for an action missing from the latest agenda. Biden revoked EO 13771 through EO 13992 on January 20, 2021. Trump returned to regulatory-offset policy in EO 14192 on January 31, 2025, using a ten-for-one policy rather than reinstating this order's exact two-for-one text. Signed order. Sources: EO 13992: express revocation; Agency removal of rescinded executive-order references; EO 14192: new 2025 framework.
Who had to do what
| Agency / office | Action | Timing / position |
|---|---|---|
| Executive agency heads | Identify at least two offsetting regulations when proposing or issuing a new rule and account for incremental costs. | During fiscal year 2017, generally net cost no greater than zero unless law or OMB written advice permits otherwise. |
| Executive agency heads | Identify offsets and estimated costs in regulatory plans; stay within annual cost allowance and use the Unified Regulatory Agenda. | Fiscal year 2018 plans and each year thereafter; advance written OMB approval for off-agenda rules unless law requires issuance. |
| OMB Director | Issue implementation guidance, define costing and waivers, approve covered actions and set annual agency incremental-cost allowances. | Initial 2017 implementation and annual presidential budget process; no fixed day-count deadline. |
What happened next
Trump signed the two-for-one regulatory cost order. Official source
EO 13992 expressly revoked EO 13771. Official source
A later agency rule removed references to EO 13771 following its revocation. Official source
EO 14192 established a new ten-for-one deregulatory framework. Official source
Legal and source detail
How it works legally
The signed order cited the Budget and Accounting Act, 31 U.S.C. 1105 and presidential delegation authority under 3 U.S.C. 301. It repeatedly qualified its directives by law. Section 2(c) expressly required an agency eliminating regulatory costs to comply with the Administrative Procedure Act and other applicable law. A statutory duty to issue a rule therefore could not disappear because an agency lacked enough discretionary offsets, and repeal itself still required lawful procedure. OMB could grant exceptions or written approval within the order's framework, but not override a congressional command. Estimates of regulatory cost also differ from federal-budget spending and from a legal judgment that a rule is invalid. Section 5 preserved agency authority, appropriations limits and the absence of a privately enforceable benefit. Later agency actions to withdraw EO 13771 references are evidence of the 2021 policy change, not a court ruling striking down every regulation adopted during Trump's first term. Signed order. Sources: EO 13992: express revocation; Agency removal of rescinded executive-order references; EO 14192: new 2025 framework.
Sources by type
If a source is unavailable, first check the cited publisher or another official repository. The cited publisher remains the authority.
Primary and official sources
Orders, laws, court records and official implementation material.
How we checked this
Last checked against the sources above on September 15, 2026. How we research →
EO 13771 did not itself repeal regulations. Agencies remained bound by their organic statutes, notice-and-comment requirements and judicial review; cost accounting could not override a statutory duty.