Congress's Own Investigators Said Move HHG Out of FMCSA. That Was 16 Years Ago.

The Government Accountability Office is Congress's independent, nonpartisan investigative arm. When Congress wants to know whether a federal agency is doing its job, it asks GAO. GAO has investigated FMCSA's household goods consumer protection program three times: in 2001 (GAO-01-318), 2007 (GAO-07-586), and 2010 (GAO-10-38). Each time, it found the same problems. Each time, it made recommendations. Each time, FMCSA was slow to implement them or did not implement them at all.

In its 2010 report, GAO evaluated three organizational options for enhancing consumer protection in the household goods moving industry:

Option 1: Retain oversight at FMCSA with a stronger commitment to consumer protection.

Option 2: Create a separate office within the Office of the Secretary of Transportation (OST) similar to the Office of Aviation Enforcement and Proceedings (OAEP), focused on interstate household goods consumer protection.

Option 3: Relocate oversight of the household goods moving industry to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC).

GAO analyzed the advantages and disadvantages of each option. The report did not make a formal recommendation to move HHG out of FMCSA, but its analysis of the advantages of Options 2 and 3 reads as an indictment of Option 1.

GAO found that creating a separate office within OST, modeled on OAEP's Aviation Consumer Protection Division, would have several advantages:

'Separating consumer protection and safety responsibilities could help address the concerns we have raised in this report about FMCSA's lack of focus on consumer protection for the interstate household goods moving industry by eliminating the competition between FMCSA's current priorities for carrying out both its safety mission and its household goods consumer protection responsibilities.'

The new office could leverage relationships with other OST offices, including OAEP and the Office of the General Counsel. The General Counsel's staff 'would be particularly useful given the legal complexities of the household goods moving industry and perhaps provide better opportunities to enhance enforcement tools, beyond assessing financial penalties.'

GAO noted that DOT had already solved the exact same problem for aviation. When DOT was deciding where to place aviation consumer protection, 'it considered placing oversight with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA). However, because FAA handles safety regulation and operates in support of a safety mission, DOT officials realized that there was the potential for consumer protection efforts to be lost in FAA's safety mission, so they created OAEP within OST.'

The parallel to FMCSA is explicit: FAA's safety mission would have swallowed aviation consumer protection, so DOT separated them. FMCSA's safety mission has swallowed HHG consumer protection, and DOT has not separated them.

GAO also evaluated transferring HHG oversight to the FTC. The FTC's overarching mission is consumer protection. Its strategic objectives are aligned with enforcement, education, partnerships, and complaint monitoring.

The advantage: 'FTC's strategic objectives, performance measures, and implementing strategies are aligned to support its strategic goal in four categories of consumer protection: (1) enforcement; (2) establishing and maintaining partnerships; (3) conducting education and outreach; and (4) collecting, monitoring, and reporting complaints.'

The disadvantage: FTC lacks transportation expertise and legal authority specific to HHG regulation. Legislative changes would be needed.

GAO concluded that regardless of which option was chosen, 'the problems with the current program that were previously discussed will need to be addressed.' The report noted that Option 1 (keeping it at FMCSA) required 'FMCSA and DOT senior management to focus more attention on this area and make a stronger and timelier commitment to implementing all the outstanding mandates and GAO recommendations.'

Sixteen years later: FMCSA has not made that commitment. The proficiency exam Congress required in 2012 does not exist. The HHG Working Group's 19 recommendations (2017) are mostly unimplemented. FMCSA cancelled its hostage load compensation policy in 2020. The agency has closed zero broker enforcement cases since September 2024. The agency lost 15-20% of its workforce including the Chief of Commercial Enforcement and the Lead HHG Investigator.

GAO told Congress in 2001 that FMCSA needed to improve. It said the same thing in 2007. It said it again in 2010, this time formally evaluating whether HHG should be moved to a different agency. In 2026, the problems are worse than when GAO first documented them.

GAO-10-38 included Table 4, tracking the time FMCSA took to implement 12 GAO recommendations and 6 SAFETEA-LU mandates. As of 2010:

Recommendations completed within one year: 3 (the easy ones: press releases, website posts, notifying states) Recommendations taking 1-3 years: 3 Recommendations taking 3-5 years: 2 Recommendations taking more than 5 years: 2 Recommendations not fully implemented: 5

Among the items 'not fully implemented' as of 2010:

- Develop a procedure to forward complaint information to state authorities (SAFETEA-LU mandated within 1 year of enactment) - Require movers to submit quarterly reports on shipments, complaints, and claims - Modify broker regulations requiring disclosure of DOT number, FMCSA handbook, carrier list, and broker status - Determine whether additional licensing requirements would reduce illegitimate carriers - Develop performance strategy with goals and measures for consumer protection

Many of these remain unimplemented in 2026, 21 years after SAFETEA-LU and 25 years after GAO's first report.