Will Trump Repeal Biden’s “Ridiculous” USPS Regulation for Shipping Cremated Remains?

A recent memo issued by The White House is inspiring hopeful speculation that the current administration will abolish the recently-updated regulations for shipping cremated remains. However, the cryptic language of the memo has created more questions than answers about a potential repeal, even as professionals who deal with cremains are adapting their procedures to comply with the new rules.

March 1 mandate

In late 2024, the United States Postal Service (USPS) proposed “improvements” to the process for shipping cremated remains “to enhance visibility in the mailstream.”  The final mandate, which went into effect on March 1, 2025, required that “customers shipping cremated remains (human and animal ashes), either Domestic or International, must use only Priority Mail Express® (PME) service.”

In addition, the former, relatively bland 3” x 1.857” label has been replaced by a larger, bright orange version that graces all six sides of the new Priority Mail Express Cremated Remains box, which measures 10” high, 10.25” deep, and 14.75” wide.

Supplies are free, but not shipping

Although the boxes and shipping supplies are available at no cost to businesses and individuals, the size of the required boxes will exponentially increase the cost of shipping even the smallest amount of cremated remains. It’s a problem that will have a direct impact on families and companies like Reminiss Memorials, which creates handcrafted glass memorials incorporating cremated remains. 

“It’s problematic, to be frank,” says Ha Ly, who founded Reminiss in 2022. “We used to ship with the cremated remains sticker adhered onto a bubble envelope; for unique uses like ours, we only need to transport about a tablespoon of remains. Now we have to ask families to pay sometimes double to put their cremains inside of a large box so we can produce memorials for them. It seems extreme.”

Parting Stone’s Justin Crowe agrees with Ly. Families choosing solidified remains are now required to use the new kits to ship partial or entire cremated remains of their loved ones to Crowe’s Santa Fe, New Mexico facility.

“The continued mandate to ship via USPS Priority Mail Express (PME) imposes a staggering $100 shipping cost on families simply trying to return their loved one’s remains,” Crowe says. “This feels like an unnecessary financial burden and an exploitative policy that takes advantage of grieving families at an already difficult time.”

Why change now?

The justification for the change from simple labels to the large box was seemingly “to increase the visibility of packages containing cremated remains and to ensure those packages are more secure for processing and a timely delivery,” per a memo from the National Funeral Directors Association (NFDA). However, some question whether the problem of cremated remains being lost in the mail was prevalent enough to justify such a drastic change.

In a 2023 radio interview with the Federal News Network, U.S. Department of Commerce Audit Director Amy Jones was asked about what prompted Indiana Senator Mike Braun to request an inquiry into the USPS procedures for transporting cremated remains — the inquiry which eventually led to the new March 1 shipping requirements.

“So what we found overall is that they [both customers and companies] were not in compliance with those acceptance procedures, properly labeling them and inducting them into the network,” Jones said. “What we also found is that procedures for monitoring shipments of cremated remains within the processing facilities were not always followed. And we also found an opportunity to reduce the potential risk of missing and damaged cremated remains by enhancing packaging requirements.”

However, when the interviewer asked Jones specifically if a constituent had complained to their senator about missing cremated remains, she said this was not the case. 

“So we did not identify any lost or damaged cremated remains,” Jones said. “We just identified the potential that there could be if the procedures were not followed appropriately.”

Taking credit

Interestingly, a Southwest Florida family and their local news station are taking credit for the new rules based on their “demand for change” to the shipping and tracking process. 

In February, WINK News reporter Olivia Jean covered Port Charlotte resident Stacie Claytor’s frustration with the USPS, which had lost track of her husband’s cremated remains. Jean reportedly reached out to lawmakers, and her “pressure led to the package being found just days later.” When the March 1 mandate was announced, Claytor “expressed her satisfaction, telling WINK News, ‘We did this!’”

Neither Jean or Claytor expressed any disappointment or problem with the way the funeral home that assisted her family handled the shipping, placing the blame squarely on the USPS. Although Crowe doesn’t believe requiring shipping in boxesthe new labels and boxes are is the right solution, he does agree that the USPS needs to make changes to their shipping process, including creating tracking procedures like those used in deathcare.

“The death care industry’s top priority is ensuring that decedents are treated with safety, dignity, and respect while in our care and that they are securely returned to their families,” Crowe says. “Funeral homes, crematories, and suppliers follow strict chain of custody protocols to uphold these standards. However, the USPS mandate to ship via Priority Mail Express (PME) undermines this by requiring cremated remains to be transported on FedEx-operated planes, removing them from USPS’s direct custody and disrupting the tracking safeguards that ensure the highest level of security for the remains.”

Ridiculousness?

On March 6, The White House posted to its website a memo-style article entitled “President Trump’s Deregulation Effort Has Already Saved Families Thousands of Dollars.” The subject line of the article read, “President Trump Saves American Families $2,100 Each by Halting Costly Biden Regulations.”

The memo says that Trump has “blocked” many of Biden’s proposed rules and “has initiated an aggressive deregulatory agenda that requires substantial cuts in existing regulations.” This statement is followed by a list of “notable,” “costly,” and “expensive” regulatory actions enacted by former President Biden, along with the costs associated with each. 

The last heading in the memo reads: “In addition to the expensive regulations highlighted above, the Biden Administration also excelled at producing ridiculous regulations” and is followed by this: A U.S. Postal Service regulation “requiring mailers to solely use the Cremated Remains shipping supplies provided by the Postal Service when mailing human or animal cremated remains, also referred to as cremains or ashes, domestically or internationally.”

Impact on deathcare

Technically, the memo doesn’t specifically say that this regulation is going to be blocked or repealed, even though it’s quite clear that the current administration believes the change was “ridiculous.” Although deathcare professionals may not express their thoughts in the same way as the president, they do share a similar sentiment about the impact of the new regulation on the industry and the families it serves.

“For families navigating grief, receiving a stark, government-issued box labeled for human remains is unsettling and disrupts the sense of care and trust we work so hard to create,” says Crowe. “This change has directly impacted our direct-to-consumer experience by forcing us to send collection kits in USPS-branded cremated remains boxes rather than our thoughtfully designed packaging that reflects the warmth and compassion of our service.”

“At a time when the industry is evolving to better serve families with empathy and personalization, this regulation feels like a step backward,” he adds. “We would like to see USPS allow families and suppliers to ship cremated remains via Priority Mail or return to permitting Registered Mail, which meets the step-by-step chain of custody expectations of the funeral profession. We hope to see solutions that balance security with the dignity, trust, and emotional well-being of the families we serve.”

President Trump and his Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) leader Elon Musk are rapidly looking at costs that are currently in the government budget that may be able to be whittled out.  It may not be perfect and it may not even be proper — as is discussed in this Yahoo Finance article about the government financial procedure of “Empoundment” — but it may eventually create a bigger “margin” between tax revenues and government expenses.

So, I believe, regardless of how you feel about the Trump/Musk team taking a chainsaw to the federal budget, there may be something to learn from their desire to do so.

I’m of the opinion that if original budgeted expenses are not annually watched and acknowledged they become expenses that grow in cost and, over time, may not be needed.  Take, for instance, a funeral home budget for advertising and marketing.  Maybe that budget has $12,000 appropriated for ad space on highway billboards.  Instead of simply adding a number such as 3% inflation to that $12,000 for the next year making the expense $12,360, one should look at the line item of $12,000 and determine if that number is still appropriate and is actually doing for the funeral business what was expected of that $12,000 expenditure.

Some items, like advertising spending, can be tough to quantify, but they should be looked at and discussed with potential options in mind. . . . Maybe social media, or radio or cable tv would bring better results. . . . and at the same time be less costly.

Tom Anderson
Funeral Director Daily

My main point about the Trump/Musk “efficiency” project should be an annual project at your business.  However you widen the gap between revenue recieved and expenses paid increases your bottom financial line.  The two ways to do that are “enhancing revenues” and “containing costs” and forever fine-tuning those items will lead to a stream-lined financial business that will create increased value over time.

Going over your revenue and expense line items annually and putting some thought into each line is somewhat time-consuming and can be challenging as you may have to have the courage to change some expense items.  However, the failure not to do annual zero-based budgeting will lead to, more than likely, receiving less than the optimum income you should be able to bring in and create a bloated, inefficient expense budget.

Again, in my opinion, bloated, ineffecient budgets of some traditional funeral homes will eventually invite competitors who can come to market with less expensive options and still have a sufficient margin.  That is why in this day of growing choice of Death Care disposition services it is more and more important to keep watching your costs.

Empoundment —  This article from Yahoo Finance questions the President’s authorization on the issue of “Empoundment”.  What is meant by that is, “Does the President have the legal authority to not pay, or remove from the budget, items that have been authorized by Congress to be paid and signed by a former President (in this case President Biden).”

The challenge argument to Empoundment is that not paying these authorized amounts seemingly removes the separation of powers from the United States government.  i.e. It seems to put “spending” on the President’s table rather than Congress’.  The article states that this issue is on the path to be settled at the Supreme Court.

A Business created with “Enhanced Revenues and Cost-Containment” — One of the businesses that I have been associated with and founded during my business life was the International Basketball Association.  While there is a much longer story to my involvement let me say that the impetus for starting this business was to be able to bring minor league sports, in this case basketball, to smaller communities.

In the business conceptual planning the only way possible to do that was to find a way to bring costs down to the point where smaller communities, with less available ticket payers and advertisers, had the income available to build a profitable margin.  That was my challenge.

Over time I was able to create profitable margins by taking existing minor league basketball budgets and looking at ways to enhance revenue and contain costs which would allow profits in smaller communities with less opportunities for ticket sales and advertising revenue.  We enhanced revenues wherever we could by not only selling admission tickets and advertising but by creating fan clubs, youth clubs, royalties on concessions, etc.  The cost-containment side was even more scrutinized with the biggest savings developed by transporting players via charter buses rather than airline travel and partnering with arenas on rent dependent on the size of the crowds we drew for each game.

Because of the charter bus travel geographic locations of teams had to be in close proximity.  We operated very well for about five or so years with profitable clubs. . . which actually led to headaches as we grew.  The distances between teams grew and some of the cost-containment features were lost as we became a league that stretched from Saskatoon, Alberta, to Youngstown, Ohio.

We eventually discovered that we should have became a confederation of smaller regional leagues rather than stretch our distances creating a national-like league in scope.

Again, it points out the importance of knowing who you are and how you bring in your financial margins.

More news from the world of Death Care:

Enter your e-mail below to join the 3,120 others who receive Funeral Director Daily articles daily:

“A servant’s attitude guided by Christ leads to a significant life”

This morning I read the edition of “Wall Street Breakfast” from Seeking Alpha and it gave very good information on the pros and cons of the “Trump Tariffs”.  Since I wrote on the that issue and its possible effects on the Death Care profession/industry in this morning’s edition, I thought I would send this quotation from Wall Street Breakfast out since it gives such good information on the issue.

There is no doubt that there will be some effect on American business because of this decision.  It’s up to all of us to understand how it will effect our own businesses and then make our adjustments accordingly.  One good thing I foresee is that I believe that tariffs will have less effect on Death Care than many other businesses. .

Here’s a portion of the Wall Street Breakfast explanation:

Stock futures are sliding, the dollar is surging, crypto is tumbling, and oil is on the rise, after President Trump imposed his long-promised tariffs on Mexico, Canada and China. Markets don’t like uncertainty, or the retaliation, especially when it’s likely to be the first of many such actions under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. . . . . .

The case for tariffs:Trump believes that first shots were fired long ago, with Mexico and Canada not cracking down on migration and allowing fentanyl to pass through their borders, as well as “ripping off” the U.S. with trade deficits and restricting the flow of American products into their countries. He also maintains that the nations have the lower hand in any negotiations, with the U.S. having all the resources it needs, like “unlimited energy” and “more lumber than we can ever use.” The end goal of the tariffs is for companies to make their “product in the USA,” and the return of a tariff-driven federal revenue model, which “should have never ended, in favor of the Income Tax System, in 1913.”

“WILL THERE BE SOME PAIN? YES, MAYBE (AND MAYBE NOT!),” Trump wrote on Truth Social over the weekend. “BUT WE WILL MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN, AND IT WILL ALL BE WORTH THE PRICE THAT MUST BE PAID. WE ARE A COUNTRY THAT IS NOW BEING RUN WITH COMMON SENSE – AND THE RESULTS WILL BE SPECTACULAR!!!”

The case against tariffs: The levies can mean higher costs for necessary imports, risking elevated prices for American consumers. If not universal, tariffs can also be avoided by having goods transported through third-party countries, or by companies creating alternative supply chains (like what happened in Vietnam after Chinese tariffs were first imposed in 2018). Protectionism and the limiting of foreign competition also mean more government involvement to ensure sufficient domestic competition to prevent complacent corporate behavior or monopolistic practices.

Enter your e-mail below to join the 3,120 others who receive Funeral Director Daily articles daily:

“A servant’s attitude guided by Christ leads to a significant life”

The International Trade Association defines tariffs as such:  “A tariff or duty (the words are used interchangeably) is a tax levied by governments on the value including freight and insurance of imported products. Different tariffs applied on different products by different countries.”

I’m writing this on Saturday morning and the “Trump tariffs” are supposed to be imposed on certain imports from Mexico, Canada, and China today.  How might that affect Death Care?

It’s easy to see why countries want to sell their products in the United States.  Democracy and free enterprise have made the United States  arguably the nation with over 300 million consumers who have the most spendable income in the world.  The “consumers with spendable income” is the prize.

It’s a little like the Willie Sutton story.  Sutton, when asked why he robbed banks said, “That’s where the money is”.  Manufacturers of products from all over the world would say the same thing about selling their wares in America, “That’s where the consumers are”.  It’s easy to see why others want to have their products available for sale in America.

So let’s look at a basic reality of purchasing by consumers.  Let’s assume a “Widget” is built in some Far Eastern country for $20 and it costs $5 dollars to bring that product to the United States . . . that’s a total cost of landed product in the US of $25.  Let’s also assume that that “Widget” can be manufactured in America for $30 — the additional cost being the higher wages and First World level of benefits to employees. . . . pay and benefits that give America those “consumers with spendable income”.

In our example the foreign (low cost producing) nation lands their “Widget” in the US for $25 and the US manufacturing firm, paying better wages and benefits completes their “Widget” for $30.  Let’s also assume that each company needs a $20 margin on their product to operate their business.  That gives the foreign manufacturer a $45 price tag and the American manufacturer a $50 price tag.

Tom Anderson
Funeral Director Daily

President Trump has said he wants a 25% tariff on products coming from Mexico and Canada and a 10% additional tariff on products currently coming from China.  That tariff (or tax) will be paid to the United States government adding to our revenues.  And, on $25 that 25% tariff would equate to $6.25 making the final, taxed, cost of landing “that fictional Widget” in the United States $31.25.  Again, assuming that $20 margin, the final retail cost would be $51.25. . . .more than the comparable American product at $50.

The final theory being that that retail cost would not only allow for tax revenue to flow to the U.S., but it should make American products be the product of choice more often because of the closer price proximity to the foreign product.  And, more American products being bought will give more American workers jobs and be good for America.

The downside, however, is that American consumers no longer have access to that “low-cost” product from a foreign country because its price has went up due to the tariff.  And, that is generally considered a negative for the American consumer.

Another downside, of course, is that American manufacturers want to sell their products in other countries around the world.  And, those countries have the ability to put tariffs on American-made imported products.

Of course, President Trump has a firm belief that those tariffs on America products is already being done and American manufacturers are being taken advantage of and being charged these tariffs.  Part of his logic on tariffs is “What is good for the goose is good for the gander”.   However, many see President Trump’s viewpoint on that particular fairness issue as not totally correct.

What about Death Care:  A large portion of Death Care revenue is “Services” and not merchandise.  In a world of tariffs that’s a good thing for Death Care.  However in checking, and I will not call out individual companies, but it appears that some major distributors of caskets in America either manufacture or purchase for distribution caskets built in whole or in part in Mexico, Canada, and/or China.

So, one would expect, unless there is a carve-out for Death Care products, those caskets made in Mexico and Canada to have this tariff of 25% put on them and for caskets coming from China, one would expect President Trump’s tariffs to add 10% to those units.

In my way of thinking, this is just another reason why true service charges should be increased, set, and priced and the price of products that are sold by Death Care providers,such as caskets, should be at or near cost with little mark-ups.  It was back in the late 1980’s or early 1990’s that my funeral home greatly raised our service charges and set our casket prices at the actual wholesale cost.  It was a decision that greatly increased our profitability.

Related — Tariffs helped build the United States of America — Most people don’t know but the Tariff Act of 1789 was the first major piece of legislation passed by Congress after the ratification of the United States Constitution.

The Tariff Act of 1789 — Wikipedia

From this passage of the Wikipedia insert you realize that some of the same arguments are made by some of the same consituencies in the arguments as today.  i.e. tax revenue, American manufacturing and industry, consumer costs, and fairness. . .

“The debates over the purpose of the tariff exposed the sectional interests at stake: Northern manufacturers favored high duties to protect industry; Southern planters desired a low tariff that would foster cheap consumer imports. Ultimately, (Congressman and future President James) Madison navigated the tariff to passage, but he was unable to include a provision in the final bill that would have discriminated against British imports. After passing both houses of Congress, President Washington signed the act in law on July 6, 1789 when they used it to pay off the US war debt.”

More news from the world of Death Care:

Enter your e-mail below to join the 3,120 others who receive Funeral Director Daily articles daily:

“A servant’s attitude guided by Christ leads to a significant life”