SBA Waited. 8(a) Applications Froze.

SBA published a final rule on September 29 removing four provisions from its Title VI regulations. It took effect the day it published.

Read the rule: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2026-09-29/pdf/2026-19878.pdf

The question was not close, and it was not new. A federal court settled it in July 2023.

In Ultima Services Corp. v. U.S. Department of Agriculture, the court enjoined SBA’s eligibility presumption for the 8(a) program. After that, every applicant had one route in: prove social disadvantage individually.

In December 2025, the Department of Justice told the Supreme Court how that has worked in practice. Opposing certiorari in Hierholzer v. Loeffler, DOJ wrote that “[s]ince July 2023, the government has made ‘all social disadvantage determinations’ pursuant to 13 C.F.R. 124.103(c), which requires each applicant to establish individual social disadvantage by a preponderance of the evidence.”

DOJ told the Court something else. Consistent with 28 U.S.C. 530D, it had already informed Congress that it would no longer defend the provision in court.

So the agency knew. The courts had ruled. The government had stopped applying the rule. DOJ had put it in writing to the Supreme Court.

SBA waited anyway. Individually owned 8(a) applications have sat for a year.

When SBA finally acted on September 29, the change required no process at all. No proposed rule. No comment period. No delayed effective date. It was done in a day.

That is the measure of the delay. Nothing about the change took three years. The waiting did.

Sources: Removing Constitutional Concerns From SBA Programs, 91 Fed. Reg. 61,295 (Sept. 29, 2026) (RIN 3245-AI72); Brief for the Respondents in Opposition, Hierholzer v. Loeffler, No. 25-14 (U.S. Dec. 2025); Ultima Servs. Corp. v. U.S. Dep’t of Agric., 683 F. Supp. 3d 745 (E.D. Tenn. 2023); 13 C.F.R. 124.103(c). Observations on delayed processing are culled from federal databases and not denied by SBA.