Legislative Update: Senate Republicans Advance Targeted TSCA Reforms to Extend User Fees, Streamline Chemical Approvals, and Restore Regulatory Certainty

Senate Republicans Advance Targeted TSCA Reforms To Extend User Fees,  Streamline Chemical Approvals, And Restore Regulatory Certainty

On March 4, the Senate Republicans on the Senate Environment and Public Works (EPW) Committee held a hearing to advance targeted draft legislation to reform the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), focusing primarily on improving the efficiency and predictability of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) new chemicals review process while reauthorizing the agency’s user fee program. The Toxic Substances Control Act Fee Reauthorization and Improvement Act of 2026  would extend EPA’s fee authority for ten years and implement structural reforms intended to address the backlog and regulatory uncertainty that have developed since Congress enacted bipartisan TSCA reforms in 2016.

Republican lawmakers and industry witness Richard Engler of the Coalition for Chemical Innovation argued that the current system has drifted from Congress’s intent, imposing costly and unpredictable restrictions on new chemical approvals that discourage domestic innovation and push investment overseas. They contend that modernizing the law will help restore competitiveness for U.S. chemical manufacturers while ensuring the agency has clearer procedures for evaluating new substances.

These concerns are particularly relevant for sectors such as vinyl and PVC production, which depend on timely approvals for chemical intermediates and processing agents used throughout manufacturing supply chains. Witnesses emphasized that lengthy and unpredictable review timelines complicate business planning and innovation, including discouraging investment in safer chemical alternatives.

In a March 4 statement, VI President and CEO Ned Monroe thanked Sen. Shelly Moore Capito (R-WV) for holding this hearing and acknowledged its importance. “This bill reins in overbroad and open-ended reviews. It refocuses risk evaluations on real-world uses and clear statutory standards, improves accountability, and maintains strong health and environmental protections, Monroe said. “As this process moves forward, VI and its members remain committed to constructive engagement. We support a regulatory framework that focuses on true risks, promotes consistency across federal agencies, and maintains a transparent, science‑based approach. This will enable both strong protections and continued innovation across the vinyl value chain.”

The draft bill proposes amendments to multiple sections of the TSCA, aligning with the broad approach taken by House Energy & Commerce Committee Republicans, despite EPW staff previously signaling that they may only propose changes to EPA’s handling of new chemicals.  The bill focuses heavily on reforming TSCA’s Section 5 new-chemicals review process, which has faced persistent delays since the 2016 amendments expanded EPA’s responsibilities without establishing updated timelines. The draft would require EPA to establish a four-tier review framework for new chemical submissions, allowing lower-risk or well-understood chemicals to move through the system more quickly while reserving longer review periods for complex applications. It would also authorize the use of accredited third-party reviewers to assess the completeness of industry submissions and verify risk analyses, allowing EPA to prioritize its resources and accelerate approvals. In certain circumstances, applications that receive third-party review could qualify for expedited review timelines, with manufacturers potentially allowed to proceed with production if EPA fails to act within the prescribed timeframe. These reforms would create a more predictable regulatory environment while still preserving EPA’s authority to halt production if safety concerns arise.

Beyond the new chemicals program, the draft bill would narrow certain statutory definitions governing EPA’s regulatory authority, including clarifying the meaning of “conditions of use” and providing additional parameters for determining “unreasonable risk.” The legislation also strengthens scientific oversight by requiring EPA to submit risk evaluations of existing chemicals for review by its Science Advisory Committee on Chemicals and by mandating in-person peer review procedures with minimum review periods.

Republicans framed the discussion draft as an initial step toward bipartisan negotiations, stressing that the legislation is intended to spark a policy conversation rather than serve as a final product. Democratic members signaled skepticism about reopening TSCA beyond the upcoming expiration of EPA’s user fee authority, suggesting that Congress could instead pass a straightforward extension of the fee program if broader reforms prove difficult to negotiate. Despite these disagreements, their bipartisan interest in continuing discussions suggests that a narrower compromise could emerge as lawmakers work toward reauthorizing EPA’s TSCA program before the September deadline.

Senate Advances Amended Housing Package for Floor Vote

This week, Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) filed cloture on a broad legislative package addressing housing supply, affordability, and regulatory barriers. In a procedural move that followed House and Senate negotiations, Thune decided to file cloture on the House-passed Housing for the 21st Century Act (H.R. 6644) instead of the Senate bill passed, Renewing Opportunity in the American Dream to Housing Act (ROAD to Housing Act; H.R. 2651) that was passed out of the Senate Banking Committee.

In a show of broad bipartisan support, the Senate agreed (84-6) on the motion to invoke cloture on March 2 and the motion to proceed (90-8) on March 4.  The Senate plans to use H.R. 6644 as a vehicle for a 303-page bipartisan substitute amendment that will replace the House version when the Senate considers it on the floor.   The substitute contains 36 provisions from S. 2651 and six provisions from H.R. 6644, including allowing Community Development Block Grant funds to be used to build affordable housing, authorizing new grants to states and localities, and reauthorizing the HOME Investment Partnership Program

More than a dozen of the House bill’s other bipartisan provisions were already part of the Senate’s original bill.  One major addition important to the White House was banning investor-owned homes.  The inclusion followed President Donald Trump’s February 24 State of the Union speech, when he vowed to make housing affordable and called on Congress to pass the ban.   Lawmakers also included language pushed by House conservatives that placed a moratorium on the Federal Reserve issuing a central bank digital currency, with certain exceptions.

The Vinyl Institute is still urging members to contact their senators and encourage them to vote YES on the final passage of H.R. 6644. Senate leaders anticipate the measure will receive the 60 votes required for cloture. However, the legislative process could extend for up to two weeks due to competing priorities, including consideration of the Iran war powers resolution. If the Senate passes a modified version of H.R. 6644, the House will need to either accept the Senate amendment or negotiate a final compromise through further bicameral negotiations before the measure can be sent to the President for signature.

House Agriculture Committee Advances $1.3 Trillion Farm Bill After Contentious Two-Day Markup

The House Agriculture Committee approved the 2026 farm bill (H.R. 7567) by a 34–17 vote following a two-day markup, sending forward legislation that Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA) said would authorize $1.3 trillion over 10 years, including roughly $1.1 trillion for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The measure would represent the first long-term update to U.S. farm policy since the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018. However, Democrats warned that the path to enactment could be complicated because earlier reconciliation legislation already addressed several farm-bill issues.

Seven Democrats joined Republicans in supporting the bill’s final passage in committee, even as Democratic leaders argued that the process remains incomplete and warned that the legislation may struggle to secure the traditional bipartisan coalition required to pass a farm bill through Congress. After rejecting a series of Democratic amendments aimed at reversing or delaying new SNAP work and cost-sharing requirements enacted in the 2025 reconciliation law.  Ranking Member Angie Craig (D-MN) argued that cuts to nutrition programs and the separation of food assistance from agricultural policy could undermine the longstanding alliance between farm-state lawmakers and anti-hunger advocates that has historically enabled passage of farm bills.

Trade Court Orders Refunds Of All Tariffs As The Administration Plans to Raise Universal Tariffs to 15 Percent

A judge on the United States Court of International Trade (USCIT) has ruled that the federal government must refund all tariffs collected under President Donald Trump’s tariff program imposed pursuant to the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA), following the Supreme Court’s decision in Learning Resources Inc. v. Trump that invalidated the duties. In an order issued March 4, Judge Richard K. Eaton held that all importers of record whose entries were subject to the IEEPA tariffs are entitled to refunds, regardless of whether they individually filed lawsuits challenging the duties. The ruling directs that any import entries that remain unliquidated must be processed without the tariffs and that entries whose liquidation is not yet final must be reliquidated, excluding the IEEPA duties. Eaton noted that millions of import entries are potentially affected and emphasized that his ruling ensures that all importers—not only those that brought suit—receive the benefit of the Supreme Court’s decision.

The decision came in a case filed by Atmus Filtration Technologies, which sought refunds for more than $11 million in tariffs it paid in 2025 and 2026. Eaton said a uniform ruling is necessary to avoid inconsistent outcomes as hundreds of companies pursue similar claims. The order follows the Federal Circuit’s expedited mandate returning the case to the trade court and is expected to accelerate refund claims from more than 900 companies seeking relief. While the court did not address whether interest must be paid on refunded tariffs, additional hearings are scheduled to address implementation issues and the potential scale of the repayments.

Separately, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent indicated that the Trump administration is likely to raise the current 10 percent universal tariff to 15 percent later this week, implementing a previously announced escalation in President Donald Trump’s trade policy. The 10 percent tariff was imposed after the U.S. Supreme Court invalidated much of the administration’s earlier tariff regime, and the higher rate would be the maximum allowed under the temporary authority currently in effect. Bessent noted that the tariff authority lasts only 150 days without congressional approval, during which the administration intends to transition to more durable trade authorities, such as Section 301 and Section 232 tariffs, to restore elements of the prior tariff framework. While administration officials have suggested the higher rate may not apply to all trading partners, Bessent did not specify which countries would be subject to the increase.