Information Quality Assurance Act of 2025
Summary
What This Bill Does
This bill creates a new information-quality section in title 44. Within one year, the OMB Director must update Information Quality Act guidelines so federal agencies better ensure the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of influential information or evidence used to develop public rules or guidance, or disseminated to explain the basis for those rules or guidance. OMB must publish the updated guidelines on its website.
After OMB updates the guidelines, each covered federal agency has one year to update its own Information Quality Act guidelines, publish them online, make correction mechanisms available for influential information or evidence, and include complaint information in required reports. OMB also must issue public-disclosure guidance requiring agencies to place critical factual material and source citations in rulemaking dockets or guidance administrative records. Agencies must provide notice and comment on critical factual material when using notice-and-comment rulemaking or proposed guidance, update the record when material revisions occur, explain nondisclosure when legal limits apply, and make critical factual material available as an open government data asset when feasible. The bill authorizes no additional funds.
Who Benefits and How
Regulated businesses benefit from greater access to the evidence agencies use when writing rules or guidance. Industry trade association staff benefit because correction mechanisms and public dockets provide stronger tools for challenging weak information. Public commenters benefit from notice and comment on critical factual material before final rules or guidance. Policy researchers benefit from open government data assets and citations to source material. OMB information-quality staff benefit from clearer statutory direction for updating governmentwide guidelines.
Who Bears the Burden and How
OMB information-quality staff must update guidelines within one year and publish them online. Agency rulemaking offices must update their own guidelines, publish them, maintain correction mechanisms, report complaints, place critical factual material in dockets, and explain legal nondisclosure. Agency guidance offices must build administrative records with source citations and revisions. Federal data officers must handle open government data formatting where feasible. Agencies must absorb implementation costs because the bill authorizes no additional appropriations.
Key Provisions
- Requires OMB to update Information Quality Act guidelines for influential information or evidence.
- Requires federal agencies to update and publish agency information-quality guidelines within one year after OMB action.
- Requires correction mechanisms for influential information used in rules or guidance.
- Directs agencies to disclose critical factual material and source citations in rulemaking dockets or guidance records.
- Requires notice and comment on critical factual material when agencies use notice-and-comment processes.
- Requires open government data treatment where feasible and no additional appropriations.
Evidence Chain:
This summary is generated from the full bill text using AI analysis. Expand "Detailed Analysis" below for identified beneficiaries/burden bearers with clause-level evidence links.
At a Glance
What This Bill Does
Requires OMB and federal agencies to strengthen Information Quality Act guidelines for influential information and evidence used in public rules and guidance, create correction mechanisms, disclose critical factual material in dockets or records, and treat critical factual material as open government data when feasible.
Key Policy Areas
Administrative Law, Regulatory Transparency, Government Data
Primary Purpose
Requires OMB and federal agencies to strengthen Information Quality Act guidelines for influential information and evidence used in public rules and guidance, create correction mechanisms, disclose critical factual material in dockets or records, and treat critical factual material as open government data when feasible.
Policy Domains
House resolution provisions
Identified Gains
- Regulated businesses
- Industry trade association staff
- Public commenters
- Policy researchers
- OMB information-quality staff
Identified Costs
- OMB information-quality staff
- Agency rulemaking offices
- Agency guidance offices
- Federal data officers
- Federal agencies using influential evidence
Sponsors
Legislative Progress
ReportedReceived in the Senate and Read twice and referred to …
Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland …
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill …
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules …
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H2276-2277)
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without …
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H2245-2247; text: …
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were …
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate …
Mr. Timmons moved to suspend the rules and pass the …
Stakeholder Effects
cui bono?How this legislation distributes effects. Mention counts reflect frequency, not effect magnitude.
Agency guidance offices, Agency rulemaking offices, OMB information-quality staff
Positive-direction: Public commenters in rulemakings
Negative-direction: Agency guidance offices, Agency rulemaking offices, OMB information-quality staff
Regulated businesses challenging agency rules
Bill Structure & Actor Mappings
Who is "The Secretary" in each section?
- "omb"
- → Office of Management and Budget
We use a combination of our own taxonomy and classification in addition to large language models to assess meaning and potential beneficiaries. High confidence means strong textual evidence. Always verify with the original bill text.
Learn more about our methodology