EO-14432
Streamlining Access to Government Services Through America.gov
- Signed
- Sep 29, 2026
- Published
- Oct 2, 2026
Federal Register: 2026-20319
Source: Federal Register.
Create a single America.gov website and sign-in for federal services
What it does
The order directs the General Services Administration, working with the Office of Management and Budget and the National Design Studio, to build America.gov as one online entry point for federal services that serve more than 100,000 users a year. It requires agencies to connect those services to the site and to Login.gov for sign-in, and to share usage and performance data. Tax filing, the Department of War, and intelligence agencies are excluded, and existing in-person, phone, mail, and agency-site options would stay available.
Who benefits
Members of the public who use federal services online, who might need fewer separate accounts, repeated forms, and agency websites to navigate. People with limited time or technical skill might gain from plain-language, conversational help. Agencies that already offer APIs and forms may reach more users, and GSA, OMB, and the National Design Studio gain a central role in setting common design and quality standards. Federal contractors that build or run digital platforms, authentication tools, and AI systems might see new work. Taxpayers might benefit if duplicate agency websites and repeated identity checks are reduced over time.
Who is affected
Agency staff and chief information officers must identify covered services, integrate systems, and report usage data, which could add workload and cost within existing appropriations. GSA would carry the main building and operating burden. Privacy advocates and users might face added risk if a single sign-in and AI-assisted portal becomes a larger target for breaches or enables broader data linking, even though the order disclaims a centralized system of records. People without reliable internet access, or who are uneasy with AI tools or identity verification, might find the digital-first model less useful, though other channels are preserved. Existing website vendors and agency-specific portals could be displaced or have to change. Errors by the AI system could affect people seeking benefits.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that Americans now must search many agency websites, learn unfamiliar terms, and prove their identity repeatedly. They contend a single sign-in point built on the existing Login.gov service would save time and reduce errors. They note the order keeps each agency in control of its own records, bars a centralized system of records, requires Privacy Act compliance, and keeps phone, mail, and in-person options. They also say common design standards and shared usage data would help agencies find and fix poorly performing services, and that using existing APIs limits cost.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that a single portal with one sign-in and an AI assistant would concentrate sensitive information in one place, creating a larger target for breaches and for later expansion of data sharing despite the order's limits. They contend that using AI to answer questions about benefits and legal obligations risks wrong answers that harm users, and that the order gives few specifics on accuracy or oversight. They also note the order depends on existing appropriations, gives OMB broad power to change which services are covered, and could leave less-connected people with weaker service if agencies shift resources to the portal.
Constitutional basis
Executive orders rest on constitutional authority or statutory delegation. This summary describes the legal grounding cited or implied by the order.
The order relies on the President's executive power under Article II, Section 1 and the Take Care Clause (Article II, Section 3) to direct executive agencies. It also draws on statutory authority including 6 U.S.C. 1523(b)(1)(D) on Login.gov integration, GSA's authorities over federal technology and services, and the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a). A future president could revoke or change it, and it builds on existing digital-services statutes and OMB guidance such as Memorandum M-26-18.