Karen Harned, Executive Director of NFIB’s Small Business Legal
Center, made the following statement in response to NFIB’s amicus
brief filing in State of Michigan V. United States Environmental Protection
Agency with the U.S. Supreme Court.
“EPA’s own estimate sets the price tag on these rules at $9.6 billion a year
– but that projection misrepresents the true impact on the American economy
because it ignores indirect costs. The fact is that these rules will
significantly drive up energy prices for small businesses and consumers, and
EPA should be required take those economic impacts into account. Accordingly,
NFIB urges the Supreme Court to defend small business by requiring EPA to
evaluate proposed rules in the context of the associated cost – not in a
vacuum. When the EPA introduces a new rule or regulation, it is imperative that
the agency thoroughly consider the full costs.”
In this case, proposed EPA rules regulating power plants would impose
significant new costs on the plants – and ultimately on the consumers. NFIB
argues that EPA must consider the additional costs in terms of significantly
higher energy costs for businesses and consumers, when estimating the ultimate
cost of the rule.
The cost of energy remains one of the top concerns of small-business owners,
who rely on affordable energy to operate their businesses successfully. NFIB’s Small Business
Problems and Priorities found nearly 35 percent of respondents cited energy
costs as a “critical” issue to their business.