Without a dramatic shift at the White House, a bill to lift crude oil export restrictions would likely be vetoed on arrival, though analysis shows resumed exports would pay off.

On Oct. 9, the U.S. House approved a bill 261-159 “to adapt to changing crude oil market conditions” by authorizing crude oil exports.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated in September that the legislation would reduce net direct spending by $1.4 billion over the 2016-2025 period by increasing offsetting receipts from federal oil and gas leases.

U.S. oil and gas royalties make up one of the federal government’s largest nontax revenue sources, according to the Government Accountability Office (GAO). The Department of Interior reported it collected $48 billion from fiscal 2009-2013 royalties and other payments.

The trick would be getting the Department of Interior to collect the rest. For years, the agency has been under fire for struggling to provide adequate staff for inspections and production monitoring in order to collect.

The bill also adds no intergovernmental or private sector mandates that would impose costs on state, local or tribal governments.

Most of the estimated savings – about $1.2 billion – would come between 2020 and 2025.

The CBO also expects that the removal of existing permitting restrictions would increase demand for U.S. oil. That would raise the prices received by some domestic firms and encourage additional production.

The agency said that its March 2015 baseline projections estimate a rise of roughly $2.50 per barrel over the 2016-2025 period.

Higher wellhead prices would also increase royalties and the amounts producers would be willing to pay for leases on federal lands.

“CBO estimates that the increases in domestic prices and production would boost federal receipts from federally owned oil and gas leases, which are calculated as a percentage of the value of the oil produced on the lease,” the CBO report said.

The CBO said that its estimates are based on federal royalties generated by increased prices and production. However, the Interior Department has shown an inability to collect funds since at least 2011, GAO said.

The GAO for years has viewed the management of federal oil and gas resources by the Interior Department as inadequate. The department’s revenue collection efforts are rated as a high-risk area by the GAO.

“Interior’s capacity to address weaknesses in revenue collection is uneven,” GAO said in a February report.

In recent years, offshore staff has focused on inspections and came close to, but did not meet, its goals.

Onshore, the department did not meet its production inspection goals, which officials attributed in part to insufficient inspection staff.

In any case, the new legislation appears stuck for now, despite any economic benefit.

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) signaled on Oct. 7 that the bill would be vetoed by President Obama. While the OMB noted that oil production has strengthened the economy and created jobs, the administration has worked to support safe and responsible growth including cutting methane leaks, protecting water and improving offshore safety.

“Legislation to remove crude export restrictions is not needed at this time,” the OMB said. “Rather, Congress should be focusing its efforts on supporting our transition to a low-carbon economy.”

The House bill addresses greenhouse-gas emissions with a requirement that the secretary of energy would have to prepare a study on the net greenhouse-gas emissions that result from repeal of export restrictions.

States receive 49% of proceeds from most onshore federal oil and gas leases.

“Given the political mess in the U.S. House of Representatives these days, it has been challenging getting anything voted on … after more than three years of rhetoric on the issue,” said Pavel Molchanov, Raymond James Equity Research.

Molchanov said the Senate seems indifferent to the bill and the White House veto makes the vote moot until at least 2017.

“As before, domestic oil producers are in favor of the export ban being lifted. On the other hand, domestic refiners are lobbying to maintain the status quo in order to capture the maximum spread from refined product exports,” he said. “For at least the next 16 months, refiners will get their way.”