Washington, DC, June 21, 2006--The National Federation of Independent Business Legal Foundation today applauds the U.S. Supreme Court for reigning-in aggressive regulators that threatened the private property rights of small business.
The NFIB Legal Foundation filed an amicus brief in this case advocating for more limited regulations of small-business property.
"The Court's decision affirms that the government had taken its Clean Water Act authority to regulate private property way too far. The notion that 'navigable waters' or 'waters of the United States' could include—and the U.S. Army Corps could regulate—roadside ditches, storm drains, and even 'ripples of sand in the dessert that may contain water once a year' is absurd. This decision interjects some much-needed, and long-overdue, common sense into the federal regulation of wetlands," said Karen Harned, executive director of NFIB's Legal Foundation.
A September 2005 study commissioned by the Small Business Administration reveals that environmental and tax compliance regulations are the main cost drivers in determining the severity of the disproportionate impact of regulations on small firms. Compliance with environmental regulations alone costs small firms 364 percent more than large firms.
According to another study, on average, it takes 313 days to obtain a nationwide permit at a cost of $28,915. For individual permits, it takes an average of 788 days, with costs of over $271,596—more than many small businesses gross in one year.
"The costs associated with obtaining federal wetlands permits are extremely difficult for small businesses to absorb and deter small businesses from expanding and creating new jobs. This decision will reduce the number of small businesses that are forced to incur these costs."
While this decision restores some common-sense to the federal regulation of private property, the Court declined to draw a clear line as to where federal jurisdiction ends. The NFIB Legal Foundation has advocated for years that the Army Corps must initiate a rulemaking to draw a clear line for small business regarding when they need a federal permit and when they do not. This decision reinforces the need for such a rulemaking.
The case decided was Rapanos v. United States and Carabell v. United States.
