Summary#
This bill would require the President’s annual budget to include detailed information about improper payments by federal programs. It adds a requirement that agencies report amounts and rates of improper payments, explain why they happened, show 3‑year trends, and list incomplete corrective actions and planned next steps. The broad goal is to increase transparency about where federal payments are wrong or at risk.
- Main change: The President’s budget must include, for each executive agency that already reports improper payments, a narrative explaining why improper payments occurred and whether they rose, fell, or stayed the same on average over the past 3 years.
- Main change: The budget must identify programs whose improper payment amounts or rates increased, decreased, or did not change over the previous 3 years.
- Main change: The budget must list incomplete corrective actions (including items from existing corrective action plans) and steps the agency will take to fix improper payment problems.
- Who is covered: Executive agencies that are already required to submit improper payment reports under current federal law.
- What is unclear: The bill does not state when these new budget items must start, whether OMB will set a standard format, or whether extra funding will be provided to agencies to prepare the new material.
(Improper payment: a federal payment that should not have been made or was made in the wrong amount, as defined in federal law.)
What it means for you#
- Executive agencies and program managers: They must prepare new narrative material for the President’s budget. This means explaining causes of improper payments, showing 3‑year trends for each affected program or activity, and reporting incomplete corrective actions and planned steps.
- Office of Management and Budget (OMB): OMB must include these agency-provided entries in the President’s budget submission and may need to coordinate format and content.
- Congress: Lawmakers will receive more detailed information in the budget about where improper payments are happening and what agencies plan to do about them. This could inform oversight and funding decisions.
- Taxpayers and the public: Budget documents would contain more information on improper payments and agency plans to address them, which may increase transparency about waste or errors.
- Programs with rising improper payments: These programs could face greater scrutiny from Congress, OMB, auditors, or the public because the budget will highlight trends and incomplete fixes. This could lead to more oversight or requests for changes.
Expenses#
No publicly available information.
- The bill text does not include a fiscal note or cost estimate.
- This could mean agencies will incur additional administrative costs to collect data, write narratives, and coordinate with OMB.
- OMB may need extra staff time to review and include the material in the budget.
- Agencies might need minor IT or reporting-system changes to track 3‑year trends and corrective-action status.
- In the long term, if the added transparency leads to fewer improper payments, there could be savings, but the bill offers no estimate of that.
Proponents' View#
- The bill appears intended to increase transparency about improper payments and corrective actions across federal programs.
- Supporters may argue that requiring explanations and trend data will help identify problem programs faster.
- The bill could be seen as improving accountability by making agencies explain why errors happened and what they will do to fix them.
- More detailed reporting in the budget may help Congress and the public judge agency performance and target oversight.
Opponents' View#
- One concern is increased paperwork and administrative cost for agencies without providing extra funding.
- The bill does not specify a start date, format standards, or a mechanism to ensure consistent, comparable reporting across agencies.
- There may be duplication with existing improper-payment reports that agencies already file; the added requirement could repeat information rather than add value.
- It is unclear whether the added budget material will lead to better outcomes or simply lengthen budget documents.
- No enforcement or follow-up mechanism is added to ensure agencies act on incomplete corrective actions.