The Stop Wasteful Advertising by the Government Act (SWAG Act) prohibits agencies from using federal funds to purchase, acquire, or distribute free promotional merchandise (“swag”) intended to advertise or promote an agency, program, or agenda, and bars federal funds for manufacturing or using mascots for promotional purposes. The bill also requires each agency to include its prior-year public relations and advertising spending in its annual budget justification to Congress and permits agencies to estimate return on investment for those expenditures.
The statute defines key terms (advertising, public relations, swag, mascot) and creates narrow exceptions—allowing swag tied to mission-driven programs that demonstrate a positive ROI, recruitment-related swag for armed forces and federal employment, and Census Bureau distribution—while exempting mascots that are already declared U.S. property or used for military recruitment and academy athletics. The Office of Management and Budget must issue implementing regulations within 180 days.
For compliance officers and communications directors, the bill shifts how agencies justify and document outreach spending, limits certain outreach tools, and leaves several implementation and enforcement questions unresolved.
At a Glance
What It Does
The bill forbids federal funds from buying or distributing free promotional merchandise and from producing or employing mascots to promote agencies, subject to enumerated exceptions. It requires agencies to report last fiscal year’s public relations and advertising spending in their annual budget justifications, optionally including ROI estimates.
Who It Affects
Federal agencies with public affairs, outreach, recruitment, or advertising budgets; vendors and contractors supplying promotional merchandise; the Census Bureau, military recruitment offices, and agencies that use mascots or promotional products for public-facing campaigns.
Why It Matters
It tightens fiscal oversight of government communications and narrows permissible outreach tools, shifting the compliance burden onto agencies and vendors and giving Congress a standardized reporting line on advertising and PR spending. The OMB regulation deadline forces agencies to make quick operational changes.
More articles like this one.
A weekly email with all the latest developments on this topic.
What This Bill Actually Does
The SWAG Act starts by defining the categories of activity it targets: advertising and public relations that are intended to inform or persuade an audience, a broad definition of swag that lists many common giveaways, and what counts as a mascot. The law’s meat is a straightforward prohibition—federal money may not be used to buy or distribute free promotional merchandise nor to produce or use mascots for promotional purposes—unless an enumerated exception applies.
That structure means agencies must treat branded giveaways and mascot-driven promotions as presumptively off-limits unless they meet a narrow exception.
Reporting is the bill’s transparency lever. Instead of creating a new auditing bureaucracy, the Act folds PR and advertising disclosure into the annual budget justification that agencies already send to Congress, asking agencies to report prior-year spending and optionally estimate return on investment.
That requirement creates a paper trail Congress can use to compare agencies, spot outliers, and press for cuts, but it relies on budget submissions rather than a centralized public registry.Exceptions matter here. The bill allows swag when it supports an agency program’s mission and demonstrably produces a positive ROI, permits recruitment-related merchandise for both military enlistment and federal employment, and explicitly exempts Census Bureau distribution.
Mascot exceptions are narrow: mascots already legally declared U.S. property and mascots used for military recruitment or military academy athletics remain permitted. Those carve-outs preserve longstanding recruitment and census practices while leaving routine public-education giveaways in doubt.Operationally, agencies will need to inventory existing contracts for merchandise and mascot use, change procurement language, and decide how to calculate and document ROI where they intend to rely on the mission-support exception.
The Office of Management and Budget has 180 days to issue implementing regulations, which will be decisive for defining ambiguous terms and setting compliance mechanics. The bill contains no new criminal penalties or enforcement agency; enforcement would likely come through budget controls, OMB oversight, and congressional oversight processes.
The Five Things You Need to Know
The bill prohibits use of federal funds to purchase, acquire, or distribute 'swag'—a defined list of giveaway items—intended solely to advertise or promote an agency or program.
It bars manufacturing or using mascots with federal funds to promote an agency, organization, program, or agenda, but exempts mascots already declared U.S. property and mascots used for military recruitment or academy athletics.
Agencies must include their prior fiscal year public relations and advertising spending in their annual budget justification to Congress and may include an estimated return on investment.
Swag is allowed only when tied to a mission-supporting program that generates a positive return on investment, and specific carve-outs exist for military and federal recruitment and Census Bureau distributions.
The Office of Management and Budget must issue regulations to implement the Act within 180 days of enactment; the bill contains no separate enforcement mechanism or criminal penalties.
Section-by-Section Breakdown
Every bill we cover gets an analysis of its key sections.
Short title
Provides the Act’s popular names: 'Stop Wasteful Advertising by the Government Act' and 'SWAG Act.' This is purely nominal but signals Congress’s framing of the measure—targeting perceived waste in government marketing.
Definitions of covered terms
Establishes precise statutory definitions for advertising, agency, mascot, public relations, return on investment, and swag. The list-oriented definition of swag names many common giveaway items and carves out brochures, diplomatic gifts, and certain military recognition items. Those definitional choices determine the statute’s reach and will be central in OMB’s forthcoming regulations because small changes in meaning will change many routine outreach activities from permissible to prohibited.
Core prohibitions and reporting requirement
Subsection (a) creates the substantive bans on federal spending for swag and for mascots used for promotion. Subsection (b) requires each agency to report public relations and advertising spending from the preceding fiscal year as part of its annual budget justification to Congress, and permits agencies to estimate ROI. Together these provisions substitute transparency for direct policing: agencies can be restricted by budget controls and congressional oversight rather than by new criminal or civil penalties.
Swag exceptions
Carves out three categories where swag remains fundable: (A) mission-supporting agency programs that can show a positive ROI, (B) recruitment for military enlistment and federal employment, and (C) items distributed by the Census Bureau to assist census-taking. The ROI condition places an evidentiary burden on agencies that want to use giveaways for outreach and raises practical questions about acceptable ROI metrics and recordkeeping, which OMB will need to clarify.
Mascot exceptions
Permits mascots that are already declared U.S. property under existing law and allows mascots used for Armed Forces recruitment or to support military academy athletics. The narrow military and statutory-property exceptions preserve long-standing uses while otherwise restricting mascot-based public engagement.
Regulatory authority and timeline
Directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to issue regulations within 180 days to implement the Act. Those OMB regulations will be pivotal: they will define ambiguous terms in practice, set documentation and ROI standards, instruct agencies on integrating reports into budget justifications, and determine how the prohibitions interact with other statutory authorizations.
This bill is one of many.
Codify tracks hundreds of bills on Government across all five countries.
Explore Government in Codify Search →Who Benefits and Who Bears the Cost
Every bill creates winners and losers. Here's who stands to gain and who bears the cost.
Who Benefits
- Congressional appropriations and oversight committees — gain standardized reporting on PR and advertising spending embedded in budget justifications, making it easier to compare agencies and flag outliers.
- Taxpayers and fiscal watchdogs — receive a statutory firewall against certain promotional expenditures and increased transparency into agency communications budgets.
- Military recruitment offices and federal HR recruitment teams — retain explicit carve-outs allowing use of merchandise and mascots for enlistment and federal hiring, preserving recruitment tools.
- Census Bureau operations — remain explicitly authorized to distribute items needed to conduct the census, avoiding disruption to an essential enumeration activity.
Who Bears the Cost
- Federal agencies’ public affairs and outreach offices — must change procurement practices, document ROI to claim exceptions, and potentially curtail common outreach tools, increasing compliance workloads.
- Vendors and contractors supplying promotional merchandise — face lost or reduced federal demand for custom swag and possible contract term modifications or cancellations.
- Office of Management and Budget and agency budget offices — must develop implementing regulations, guidance, and review systems within a 180-day window, absorbing administrative burden without an appropriation in the bill.
- Programs that rely on outreach (public health campaigns, community engagement units) — may lose an effective communication channel if they cannot demonstrate a positive ROI under criteria that are not yet defined.
Key Issues
The Core Tension
The statute pits two legitimate aims against each other: the desire to curb apparent wasteful or political promotion of government agencies and the need for effective government communication. Measures that eliminate easily visible 'waste'—branded giveaways and mascots—also remove simple, low-friction outreach tools that agencies use for recruitment, public health, and community engagement, and the bill delegates the hardest choices (how to measure ROI and distinguish promotion from information) to OMB and agency budget processes.
The bill resolves one question—limiting government promotional giveaways—but raises several practical and legal implementation issues. First, core terms like 'advertising,' 'public relations,' and 'return on investment' are defined but remain operationally vague.
Agencies will confront difficult measurement problems when asked to show a 'positive return on investment' for outreach activities that produce diffuse, long-term, or non-monetary benefits (for example, trust-building in marginalized communities or preventive public health messaging). Absent clear ROI standards from OMB, agencies will face inconsistent application or conservative interpretations that curtail legitimate public-education campaigns.
Second, enforcement is indirect. The statute contains no penalties or private right of action; compliance will hinge on OMB guidance, agency budget examiners, and congressional oversight.
That structure risks uneven enforcement across agencies and possible gaming through reclassification of activities as 'informational' rather than 'promotional.' Third, the 'unless otherwise expressly authorized by law' language leaves open conflicts with other statutes that authorize specific outreach programs funded by appropriations or grants; resolving those conflicts will require careful statutory analysis and possibly further rulemaking or litigation. Finally, the 180-day regulatory deadline is operationally aggressive: agencies with existing multi-year contracts for merchandise or that use mascots in ongoing programs may face abrupt disruption or expensive contract modifications before OMB provides clarifying rules.
Try it yourself.
Ask a question in plain English, or pick a topic below. Results in seconds.