Michigan Office of Administrative Hearings and Rules  
Administrative Rules Division (ARD)  
MOAHR-Rules@michigan.gov  
REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT  
and COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS (RIS)  
Agency Information:  
Department name:  
State  
Bureau name:  
Elections & Campaign Finance  
Name of person filling out RIS:  
Jenny McInerney  
Phone number of person filling out RIS:  
517-331-7825  
E-mail of person filling out RIS:  
McInerneyJ1@michigan.gov  
Rule Set Information:  
ARD assigned rule set number:  
2025-49 ST  
Title of proposed rule set:  
Campaign Finance Reports, Contributions, and Expenditures  
Comparison of Rule(s) to Federal/State/Association Standard  
1. Compare the proposed rules to parallel federal rules or standards set by a state or national licensing agency or  
accreditation association, if any exist.  
There are no parallel federal rules or standards.  
A. Are these rules required by state law or federal mandate?  
Yes. MCL 169.215 provides: The secretary of state shall do all of the following: (e) Promulgate rules and issue  
declaratory rulings to implement this act in accordance with the administrative procedures act of 1969, 1969 PA 306,  
MCL 24.201 to 24.328. MCL 169.223 and 169.247 also mandate rule promulgation in certain circumstances,  
although those circumstances will not be addressed in this ruleset and will instead be addressed in the other campaign  
finance rulesets to be promulgated.  
B. If these rules exceed a federal standard, please identify the federal standard or citation, describe why it is  
necessary that the proposed rules exceed the federal standard or law, and specify the costs and benefits arising out  
of the deviation.  
The rules do not exceed a federal standard.  
2. Compare the proposed rules to standards in similarly situated states, based on geographic location, topography,  
natural resources, commonalities, or economic similarities.  
Ohio has similar administrative rules regarding the reporting of in-kind contributions and contributions to joint  
fundraisers (that they be divided equally, unless agreed otherwise by the participants). In addition, Ohio exempts  
certain items from the disclaimer or identification requirements in the Revised Code, just as the proposed Rule 20  
exempts certain items from those requirements. Wisconsin has similar restrictions on corporate contributions—that  
they are generally prohibited but are allowed to independent expenditure committees and referendum committees.  
Proposed rule 14 allows corporate contributions only to independent expenditure committees and ballot question  
committees.  
A. If the rules exceed standards in those states, please explain why and specify the costs and benefits arising out of  
the deviation.  
The rules do not exceed the standards in other states.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 2  
3. Identify any laws, rules, and other legal requirements that may duplicate, overlap, or conflict with the proposed  
rules.  
The rules do not conflict with or duplicate any laws, rules, or other legal requirements. The proposed rules may  
overlap with existing state, federal, and local laws to the extent that there are existing state, federal, and local laws  
that also address campaign finance. However, to the extent that the proposed rules overlap, they are coordinated to  
avoid any actual duplication, as discussed in answer 3(A). The proposed rules would codify existing manuals and  
appendices from the Secretary of State.  
A. Explain how the rules have been coordinated, to the extent practicable, with other federal, state, and local laws  
applicable to the same activity or subject matter. This section should include a discussion of the efforts undertaken  
by the agency to avoid or minimize duplication.  
The proposed rules are coordinated with state law in that they seek to mirror the definitions and provisions in the  
Michigan Campaign Finance Act, 1976 PA 388, MCL 169.201 to 169.282, and existing instructions from the agency.  
No other state laws are applicable to the same activity or subject matter. The proposed rules are not coordinated with  
federal law even though there are federal campaign finance laws because the federal laws, rules, or other legal  
requirements apply to different filers: federal filers are governed by federal law and state law governs state filers. As  
such, no federal laws, rules, or other legal requirements completely overlap with or duplicate the proposed rules.  
However, in writing the proposed rules, the Department reviewed Federal Election Commission rules for federal filers  
to determine if similar provisions should apply to state filers. The Department endeavored to incorporate federal  
standards to the extent they are consistent with the Michigan Campaign Finance Act. The rules are coordinated with  
local laws to avoid any duplication or confusion because the proposed rules clearly indicate that local procedures must  
be followed where applicable. No federal, state, or local laws, rules, or other legal requirements conflict with the  
proposed rules.  
Purpose and Objectives of the Rule(s)  
4. Identify the behavior and frequency of behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter.  
The rules will not alter the behavior of frequency or behavior for filing officials, staff, or filers. However, they will  
codify existing instructions in the campaign finance manuals and appendices and will lend credence to those  
instructions.  
A. Estimate the change in the frequency of the targeted behavior expected from the proposed rules.  
It is not anticipated there would be a change given that the frequency of filings is regulated by the Michigan  
Campaign Finance Act and will not change based on the proposed rules.  
B. Describe the difference between current behavior/practice and desired behavior/practice.  
There would be no difference between current behavior/practice and desired behavior/practice. However, while  
behavior/practice is currently guided by manuals and appendices, going forward they would be guided by the  
Department’s administrative rules.  
C. What is the desired outcome?  
The desired outcome is greater understanding and knowledge of existing behavior/practice.  
5. Identify the harm resulting from the behavior that the proposed rules are designed to alter and the likelihood  
that the harm will occur in the absence of the rule.  
Currently, campaign finance rules are outdated and may be confusing to filers and the 83 county clerks who accept  
campaign finance filings, as well as Department staff. Updated rules are intended to prevent adverse outcomes such as  
campaign finance violations caused by misunderstanding the rules, and the attendant late filing fees and other  
monetary penalties.  
A. What is the rationale for changing the rules instead of leaving them as currently written?  
The existing rules range from 25-46 years old and do not account for statutory changes in the Michigan Campaign  
Finance Act, as well as case law and changes in interpretation over time. The proposed rules intend to modernize the  
rules so they mirror current practice.  
6. Describe how the proposed rules protect the health, safety, and welfare of Michigan citizens while promoting a  
regulatory environment in Michigan that is the least burdensome alternative for those required to comply.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 3  
The proposed rules would reflect current practice, provide clarity to filing officials responsible for working with filers,  
and alleviate the possibility of confusion and conflict regarding campaign finance reporting.  
7. Describe any rules in the affected rule set that are obsolete or unnecessary and can be rescinded.  
There are no obsolete or unnecessary rules in the rule set that can be rescinded because these rules create a new rule  
set and there is no existing rule set.  
Fiscal Impact on the Agency  
Fiscal impact is an increase or decrease in expenditures from the current level of expenditures, i.e. hiring additional staff,  
higher contract costs, programming costs, changes in reimbursements rates, etc. over and above what is currently  
expended for that function. It does not include more intangible costs for benefits, such as opportunity costs, the value of  
time saved or lost, etc., unless those issues result in a measurable impact on expenditures.  
8. Please provide the fiscal impact on the agency (an estimate of the cost of rule imposition or potential savings for  
the agency promulgating the rule).  
It is not expected that the promulgation of rules will have a fiscal impact on the agency promulgating the rules.  
9. Describe whether or not an agency appropriation has been made or a funding source provided for any  
expenditures associated with the proposed rules.  
No agency appropriation has been made, and no funding source has been provided, as it is not anticipated that the  
Department of State will have any expenditures associated with the proposed rules.  
10. Describe how the proposed rules are necessary and suitable to accomplish their purpose, in relationship to the  
burden(s) the rules place on individuals. Burdens may include fiscal or administrative burdens, or duplicative  
acts.  
The proposed rules will largely codify current practice and are not expected to place any additional fiscal or  
administrative burdens on individuals.  
A. Despite the identified burden(s), identify how the requirements in the rules are still needed and reasonable  
compared to the burdens.  
There are no identified burdens.  
Impact on Other State or Local Governmental Units  
11. Estimate any increase or decrease in revenues to other state or local governmental units (i.e. cities, counties,  
school districts) as a result of the rule. Estimate the cost increases or reductions for other state or local  
governmental units (i.e. cities, counties, school districts) as a result of the rule. Include the cost of equipment,  
supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs in both the initial imposition of the rule and any ongoing  
monitoring.  
There are no estimated increases or decreases in revenue to other state or local governmental units. There are no  
estimated increases or reductions in cost to other state or local governmental units.  
12. Discuss any program, service, duty, or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town, village, or school  
district by the rules.  
The proposed rules do not change any duty or responsibility imposed upon any city, county, town, village, or school  
district.  
A. Describe any actions that governmental units must take to be in compliance with the rules. This section should  
include items such as record keeping and reporting requirements or changing operational practices.  
It is not anticipated that governmental units would need to take any additional actions under the proposed rules.  
13. Describe whether or not an appropriation to state or local governmental units has been made or a funding  
source provided for any additional expenditures associated with the proposed rules.  
An appropriation has not been made because additional expenditures associated with the rules are not anticipated.  
Rural Impact  
14. In general, what impact will the rules have on rural areas?  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 4  
The proposed rules are not expected to impact rural areas.  
A. Describe the types of public or private interests in rural areas that will be affected by the rules.  
The proposed rules are not expected to have any impact on public or private interests in rural areas.  
Environmental Impact  
15. Do the proposed rules have any impact on the environment? If yes, please explain.  
The proposed rules will not have an impact on the environment.  
Small Business Impact Statement  
16. Describe whether and how the agency considered exempting small businesses from the proposed rules.  
Small businesses will not be governed or impacted by the proposed rules so the agency did not consider small  
businesses.  
17. If small businesses are not exempt, describe (a) the manner in which the agency reduced the economic impact  
of the proposed rules on small businesses, including a detailed recitation of the efforts of the agency to comply  
with the mandate to reduce the disproportionate impact of the rules upon small businesses as described below (in  
accordance with MCL 24.240(1)(a-d)), or (b) the reasons such a reduction was not lawful or feasible.  
The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
A. Identify and estimate the number of small businesses affected by the proposed rules and the probable effect on  
small businesses.  
The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
B. Describe how the agency established differing compliance or reporting requirements or timetables for small  
businesses under the rules after projecting the required reporting, record-keeping, and other administrative costs.  
The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses and will not have an impact on their reporting requirements.  
C. Describe how the agency consolidated or simplified the compliance and reporting requirements for small  
businesses and identify the skills necessary to comply with the reporting requirements.  
The agency did not consolidate or simplify the compliance and reporting requirements for small businesses as the  
proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
D. Describe how the agency established performance standards to replace design or operation standards required  
by the proposed rules.  
The proposed rules do not apply to performance, design, or operation standards in relation to small businesses.  
18. Identify any disproportionate impact the proposed rules may have on small businesses because of their size or  
geographic location.  
The proposed rules will have no impact on small businesses.  
19. Identify the nature of any report and the estimated cost of its preparation by small businesses required to  
comply with the proposed rules.  
There are no estimated costs for small businesses as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
20. Analyze the costs of compliance for all small businesses affected by the proposed rules, including costs of  
equipment, supplies, labor, and increased administrative costs.  
The proposed rule set will have no impact on small businesses and require no compliance from small businesses.  
21. Identify the nature and estimated cost of any legal, consulting, or accounting services that small businesses  
would incur in complying with the proposed rules.  
The proposed rule set will have no impact on small businesses and require no legal, consulting, or accounting  
services on behalf of small businesses.  
22. Estimate the ability of small businesses to absorb the costs without suffering economic harm and without  
adversely affecting competition in the marketplace.  
There are no estimated costs for small businesses as the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
23. Estimate the cost, if any, to the agency of administering or enforcing a rule that exempts or sets lesser  
standards for compliance by small businesses.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 5  
There are no estimated costs to the agency for administration or enforcement against small businesses as the  
proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
24. Identify the impact on the public interest of exempting or setting lesser standards of compliance for small  
businesses.  
The proposed rules do not apply to small businesses so there will be no impact on the standards of compliance.  
25. Describe whether and how the agency has involved small businesses in the development of the proposed rules.  
The agency has not involved small businesses in the development because the proposed rules do not apply to small  
businesses.  
A. If small businesses were involved in the development of the rules, please identify the business(es).  
No small businesses were involved because the proposed rules do not apply to small businesses.  
Cost-Benefit Analysis of Rules (independent of statutory impact)  
26. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the rule amendments on businesses or groups.  
It is not anticipated that there will be any statewide compliance costs.  
A. Identify the businesses or groups who will be directly affected by, bear the cost of, or directly benefit from the  
proposed rules.  
The new rules will update the current rules regarding campaign financing, most of which have not been amended  
since 1979. Filers, county clerks, and Michigan Department of State (MDOS) campaign finance staff will be affected  
by and benefit from the revisions, as they account for intervening updates to the MCFA and more efficient filing  
processes. Additionally, the rules will codify questions that have arisen and been dealt with informally in the  
Department’s manuals, appendices, declaratory rulings, and interpretive statements. No businesses or groups are  
anticipated to bear a cost associated with the rules.  
B. What additional costs will be imposed on businesses and other groups as a result of these proposed rules (i.e.  
new equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping)? Please identify the types and number of businesses  
and groups. Be sure to quantify how each entity will be affected.  
There will be no costs imposed as a result of the proposed rules. It is anticipated that the rules can be followed with  
the current funding appropriated to county clerks and MDOS staff.  
27. Estimate the actual statewide compliance costs of the proposed rules on individuals (regulated individuals or  
the public). Include the costs of education, training, application fees, examination fees, license fees, new  
equipment, supplies, labor, accounting, or recordkeeping.  
There will be no additional statewide compliance cost. The proposed rules largely codify current practice and would  
be incorporated into existing training. They are not anticipated to impose any additional training costs, and no  
additional costs are anticipated.  
A. How many and what category of individuals will be affected by the rules?  
Campaign finance filers will be minimally affected, as the proposed ruleset will make minor clarifications to existing  
rules. County clerks and department staff will also be affected, as they accept and review filings and will benefit from  
clearer rules. There are 3,941 active committees (campaign finance filers), there are 83 county clerks, and about 10  
department staff who work with campaign finance.  
B. What qualitative and quantitative impact do the proposed changes in rules have on these individuals?  
Filers, county clerks, and MDOS staff rely on the rules to understand aspects of the campaign filing process that are  
not clearly defined in the MCFA. It is not anticipated that the rules would have a quantitative impact.  
28. Quantify any cost reductions to businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or governmental units as a result  
of the proposed rules.  
It is not anticipated that there would be any cost reductions to businesses, individuals, groups of individuals, or  
governmental as a result of the proposed rules.  
29. Estimate the primary and direct benefits and any secondary or indirect benefits of the proposed rules. Please  
provide both quantitative and qualitative information, as well as your assumptions.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 6  
The primary and direct benefits of the proposed rules are qualitative and are to provide clarity and direction on the  
rules regarding campaign finance reporting, contributions, and expenditures. A secondary or indirect benefit is both  
qualitative and quantitative: there will be less confusion about the applicability of the MCFA to a certain fact pattern,  
and fewer individuals will request guidance from the Department in the form of interpretive statements or declaratory  
rulings. The assumption being made is that better clarity and direction improves quality and that if there is greater  
understanding there will be less requests for guidance.  
30. Explain how the proposed rules will impact business growth and job creation (or elimination) in Michigan.  
The proposed rules will not impact business growth and job creation (or elimination) in Michigan.  
31. Identify any individuals or businesses who will be disproportionately affected by the rules as a result of their  
industrial sector, segment of the public, business size, or geographic location.  
It is not anticipated that individuals or businesses will be disproportionately affected by the rules as a result of their  
industrial sector, segment of the public, business size, or geographic location.  
32. Identify the sources the agency relied upon in compiling the regulatory impact statement, including the  
methodology utilized in determining the existence and extent of the impact of the proposed rules and a cost-  
benefit analysis of the proposed rules.  
The agency relied upon the Department of State's current practice and on agency staff and its regulatory experience  
to formulate estimates and assumptions and determine the need for the proposed rules.  
A. How were estimates made, and what were your assumptions? Include internal and external sources, published  
reports, information provided by associations or organizations, etc., that demonstrate a need for the proposed  
rules.  
The agency relied upon agency staff and its regulatory and administrative experience to determine the impact of the  
proposed rules. The agency also sent the rules to the Michigan Association of County Clerks and relied on their  
feedback and expertise. Because the proposed rules largely codify current practice, the agency can reasonably assume  
their implementation will not cause any major change to the processes associated with campaign finance reporting.  
The agency assumes that having the administrative rules reflect current law and practice will be beneficial and  
eliminate any confusion that currently exists.  
Alternative to Regulation  
33. Identify any reasonable alternatives to the proposed rules that would achieve the same or similar goals.  
The reasonable alternative would be to amend the Michigan Campaign Finance Act. However, the Department  
cannot amend the law, so this is not a reasonable alternative that is within the Department’s control.  
A. Please include any statutory amendments that may be necessary to achieve such alternatives.  
The rules are not inconsistent with the MCFA but incorporating them into the MCFA would require a series of  
amendments, ranging from amendments to Section 33 (regarding required reporting) to Section 47 (disclaimer and  
identification requirements).  
34. Discuss the feasibility of establishing a regulatory program similar to that proposed in the rules that would  
operate through private market-based mechanisms. Please include a discussion of private market-based systems  
utilized by other states.  
There are no private market-based mechanisms available to address the needs covered by the proposed rules. The  
agency has not identified any private market-based systems utilized by other states.  
35. Discuss all significant alternatives the agency considered during rule development and why they were not  
incorporated into the rules. This section should include ideas considered both during internal discussions and  
discussions with stakeholders, affected parties, or advisory groups.  
Due to the nature of regulating campaign finance, no significant alternatives to reasonable regulation were considered  
during the development of the proposed rules. The proposed rules are intended to codify the current legal  
requirements and practices.  
Additional Information  
36. As required by MCL 24.245b(1)(c), please describe any instructions regarding the method of complying with  
the rules, if applicable.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
RIS-Page 7  
The rules explicitly inform persons of requirements and methods of compliance.  
MCL 24.245(3)  
;