2023 Wisconsin Statutes & Annotations › Chapter 227 - Administrative procedure and review. › 227.137 - Economic impact analyses of proposed rules.

227.137
Economic impact analyses of proposed rules.
(2)
An agency shall prepare an economic impact analysis for a proposed rule before submitting the proposed rule to the legislative council staff under s. 227.15.
(3)
An economic impact analysis of a proposed rule shall contain information on the economic effect of the proposed rule on specific businesses, business sectors, public utility ratepayers, local governmental units, and the state's economy as a whole. The agency or person preparing the analysis shall solicit information and advice from businesses, associations representing businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule. The agency or person shall prepare the economic impact analysis in coordination with local governmental units that may be affected by the proposed rule. The agency or person may also request information that is reasonably necessary for the preparation of an economic impact analysis from other businesses, associations, local governmental units, and individuals and from other agencies. The economic impact analysis shall include all of the following:
(a)
An analysis and quantification of the policy problem that the proposed rule is intending to address, including comparisons with the approaches used by the federal government and by Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, and Minnesota to address that policy problem. If the approach chosen by the agency to address that policy problem is different from those approaches, an economic impact analysis prepared by an agency shall include a statement as to why the agency chose a different approach.
(b)
An analysis and detailed quantification of the economic impact of the proposed rule, including the implementation and compliance costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to the businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule, specifically including all of the following:
1.
An estimate of the total implementation and compliance costs that are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals as a result of the proposed rule, expressed as a single dollar figure. With respect to an independent economic impact analysis prepared under sub. (4m) or s. 227.19 (5) (b) 3., the person preparing the analysis shall provide a detailed explanation of any variance from the agency's estimate under this subdivision.
2.
A determination, for purposes of the requirement under s. 227.139, as to whether $10,000,000 or more in implementation and compliance costs are reasonably expected to be incurred by or passed along to businesses, local governmental units, and individuals over any 2-year period as a result of the proposed rule.
(c)
An analysis of the actual and quantifiable benefits of the proposed rule, including an assessment of how effective the proposed rule will be in addressing the policy problem that the rule is intended to address.
(d)
An analysis of alternatives to the proposed rule, including the alternative of not promulgating the proposed rule.
(e)
A determination made in consultation with the businesses, local governmental units, and individuals that may be affected by the proposed rule as to whether the proposed rule would adversely affect in a material way the economy, a sector of the economy, productivity, jobs, or the overall economic competitiveness of this state.
(f)
Except as provided in this paragraph, if the economic impact analysis relates to a proposed rule of the department of safety and professional services under s. 101.63 (1) establishing standards for the construction of a dwelling, as defined in s. 101.61 (1), an analysis of whether the proposed rule would increase the cost of constructing or remodeling such a dwelling by more than $1,000. This paragraph applies notwithstanding that the purpose of the one- and 2-family dwelling code under s. 101.60 includes promoting interstate uniformity in construction standards. This paragraph does not apply to a proposed rule whose promulgation has been authorized under s. 227.19 (5) (fm).
(g)
An analysis of the ways in which and the extent to which the proposed rule would place any limitations on the free use of private property, including a discussion of alternatives to the proposed rule that would minimize any such limitations.
(4)
On the same day that the agency submits the economic impact analysis to the legislative council staff under s. 227.15 (1), the agency shall also submit that analysis to the department of administration, to the governor, and to the chief clerks of each house of the legislature, who shall distribute the analysis to the presiding officers of their respective houses, to the chairpersons of the appropriate standing committees of their respective houses, as designated by those presiding officers, and to the cochairpersons of the joint committee for review of administrative rules. If a proposed rule is modified after the economic impact analysis is submitted under this subsection so that the economic impact of the proposed rule is significantly changed, the agency shall prepare a revised economic impact analysis for the proposed rule as modified. A revised economic impact analysis shall be prepared and submitted in the same manner as an original economic impact analysis is prepared and submitted.
(4m)
(a)
After an agency submits an economic impact analysis for a proposed rule to the legislature under sub. (4), but before the agency submits the proposed rule for approval under s. 227.185, either cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules may request an independent economic impact analysis to be prepared for the proposed rule.
(am)
1.
A request by the senate cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules for an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a) requires approval by the committee on senate organization.
2.
A request by the assembly cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules for an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a) requires approval by the committee on assembly organization.
(b)
1.
If a cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules requests an independent economic impact analysis under par. (a), and the request is approved under par. (am), the cochairperson shall notify the agency proposing the proposed rule and shall contract with a person that is not an agency to prepare the independent economic impact analysis.
2.
Costs of completing an independent economic impact analysis shall be paid as follows:
a.
If the estimate in the independent economic impact analysis of total implementation and compliance costs under sub. (3) (b) 1. varies from the agency's estimate by 15 percent or more or varies from the agency's determination that there will be no implementation or compliance costs, the cochairperson shall assess the agency that is proposing the proposed rule for the costs of completing the independent economic impact analysis.
b.
If the estimate in the independent economic impact analysis of total implementation and compliance costs under sub. (3) (b) 1. does not vary from the agency's estimate by 15 percent or more or is in accord with the agency's determination that there will be no implementation and compliance costs, the costs of completing the independent economic impact analysis shall be paid from the appropriation account that corresponds to his or her house of the legislature under s. 20.765 (1) (a) or (b).
c.
Notwithstanding subd. 2. a. and b., if the maximum potential obligation under the contract for completing the independent economic impact analysis exceeds $50,000, the cochairperson of the joint committee for review of administrative rules who is requesting the independent economic impact analysis shall submit the proposed contract to the joint committee on finance for the purpose of determining the funding source for the costs of completing the independent economic impact analysis, and the costs of completing the independent economic impact analysis shall be paid as provided by the joint committee on finance. If the joint committee on finance does not act to determine the funding source within 90 days, the costs of completing the independent economic impact analysis shall be paid as provided in subd. 2. a. and b.
(c)
A person preparing an independent economic impact analysis under par. (b) shall do all of the following:
1.
Include in the analysis the information that is required under sub. (3).
2.
Upon completion of the analysis, submit the analysis to the agency, to the department of administration, to the governor, and to the chief clerks of each house of the legislature, who shall distribute the analysis to the presiding officers of their respective houses, to the chairpersons of the appropriate standing committees of their respective houses, as designated by those presiding officers, and to the cochairpersons of the joint committee for review of administrative rules.
3.
Complete the independent economic impact analysis within 60 days after contracting to prepare the analysis.
(d)
When an independent economic impact analysis is requested under par. (a), the agency may not submit the proposed rule for approval under s. 227.185 until the agency receives the completed independent economic impact analysis.
(5)
This section does not apply to emergency rules promulgated under s. 227.24.
History:  2003 a. 118; 2005 a. 249; 2011 a. 21 ss. 7 to 18, 21 to 26; 2011 a. 32; 2013 a. 166 s. 76; 2015 a. 391; 2017 a. 57.
In this case, the plaintiff failed to establish undisputed facts from the record that would allow the court to assess to any degree of specificity whether the change in economic effects were significant due to the draft rule change so as to warrant the preparation of a new economic impact statement under sub. (4). Applegate-Bader Farm, LLC v. DOR, 2020 WI App 7, 390 Wis. 2d 708, 940 N.W.2d 725, 18-1239.
Reversed on other grounds. 2021 WI 26, 396 Wis. 2d 69, 955 N.W.2d 793, 18-1239.
Changing the Rules on Rulemaking. Sklansky. Wis. Law. Aug. 2011.