Leaderboard

I have not given this a great deal of thought, but as Peter notes, won't the impact be limited to agency interpretations/guidance that the agency feels complies with the statute but that a federal court does not (and previously may have been compelled to defer despite its disagreement)? Eliminating Chevron does not mean the agency no longer has authority to write rules; it just means (in my understanding) that a federal court is no longer required to defer to the agency's interpretation if the court thinks a better interpretation is available under the statute. In other words, you would have to find a regulation not only that you dislike, but one that also is so at odds with the underlying statute that a federal judge would change the rule. The judge might still be persuaded that the agency's rule is correct. That said, I would be interested to hear of good examples where this could change the outcome. Also, EPCRS is authorized by statute (29 USC 1202a): (a) In general The Secretary of the Treasury shall have full authority to establish and implement the Employee Plans Compliance Resolution System (or any successor program) and any other employee plans correction policies, including the authority to waive income, excise, or other taxes to ensure that any tax, penalty, or sanction is not excessive and bears a reasonable relationship to the nature, extent, and severity of the failure.