Summary — HB 4160 (Administrative Procedures: prohibit state rules more stringent than federal standards)
Status and sponsors
- Bill: HB 4160 — amends sections 32 and 45 of the Administrative Procedures Act (1969 PA 306; MCL 24.232 & 24.245).
- Introduced: Feb. 26, 2025 by Rep. Gina Johnsen. (Clerk filing on Oct. 15, 2025 lists Rep. Tracy Katz Muhl as primary; bill shows multiple co-sponsors in the introduced text.)
- Latest procedural status: Passed by the Michigan House (9/24/2025, immediate effect); referred to the Senate Committee on Government Operations (9/29/2025).
Purpose / intent
- To limit state agencies from issuing administrative rules that are stricter than applicable federal standards unless there is a documented, high evidentiary showing (a “clear and convincing” need) to exceed the federal standard. The bill reinstates language that was enacted in 2018 and repealed in 2023.
Key provisions
- Prohibition: Agencies may not adopt or promulgate rules more stringent than an applicable federal standard except:
- where the federal government has mandated state rulemaking: only if the agency director determines there is a “clear and convincing need” to exceed the federal standard; or
- where the federal government has not mandated state rulemaking: only if a Michigan statute specifically authorizes the stricter rule or the agency director finds a “clear and convincing need.”
- Exceptions:
- Emergency rules under section 48 of the Administrative Procedures Act are exempt.
- Amendments to the current Michigan special education rules (R 340.1701–R 340.1862) are exempt; but new special-education rules would be subject to the prohibition if those rules are rescinded.
- Regulatory impact statement requirements (sec. 45): If the director determines a need to exceed a federal standard, the agency’s regulatory impact statement must include:
- the specific facts establishing the clear and convincing need, and
- explanation of the exceptional circumstances necessitating the stricter standard.
- For rules not tied to federally mandated standards, the agency may instead cite the specific Michigan statutory authorization.
- Definitions and scope: Applies to executive-branch state agencies as defined in the Act; excludes legislative/judicial branch agencies, the governor, certain higher-education governing bodies, the State Civil Service Commission, and some retirement/insurance associations (per existing Act definitions).
Who or what would be affected
- All state executive agencies engaged in rulemaking under the Administrative Procedures Act would face a new limitation on adopting standards stricter than federal norms. Businesses, local governments, service providers, and regulated individuals could see fewer state-imposed requirements that exceed federal obligations. Special education rulemaking and agencies enforcing public-health, environmental, licensing, or safety standards could be particularly affected depending on federal counterparts.
Fiscal and legal implications
- Fiscal impact is indeterminate. Potential costs include:
- agency legal and analytical work to justify stricter rules and to prepare more detailed regulatory impact statements;
- litigation and legislative/judicial interpretation costs because “stringent” is not defined;
- enforcement-cost shifts if existing state stricter standards are rescinded or limited.
- The bill could reduce regulatory variability between state and federal standards but may also constrain agencies’ ability to address state-specific conditions.
Stakeholder positions (from committee record)
- Support: Michigan Manufacturers Association, NFIB, Chamber and business groups, Mackinac Center, Americans for Prosperity, among others.
- Opposition: Attorneys for Animals, Michigan Environmental Council, Michigan League for Public Policy.
Relevant citations
- Amends MCL 24.232 (sec. 32) and MCL 24.245 (sec. 45) of the Administrative Procedures Act of 1969.
