According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 1347 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on state government. The LBB estimates that any additional costs associated with expanding the offense of exploitation of a child, elderly individual, or disabled individual could be absorbed within existing state resources. The fiscal note also concludes that the bill is not expected to have a significant impact on state correctional populations or increase demand for state correctional facilities or supervision resources.

The fiscal note explains that the bill expands the conduct constituting the third-degree felony offense by including exploitation carried out through deception, coercion, or isolation for specified monetary or personal benefits. Although these changes could result in additional investigations or prosecutions, the LBB assumes the resulting workload and associated costs would not be significant enough to require additional appropriations or staffing.

The LBB also anticipates no significant fiscal impact on local governments. It assumes that any additional costs related to enforcement, prosecution, community supervision, or confinement resulting from the expanded offense could likewise be managed within existing local resources.

HB 1347 seeks to strengthen protections for children, elderly individuals, and disabled individuals by expanding the conduct that may constitute criminal exploitation. While protecting vulnerable Texans is an important and legitimate function of government, the bill does so by expanding the scope of an existing criminal statute and granting prosecutors broader authority to pursue criminal charges through newly defined concepts such as coercion, deception, and isolation. Although intended to close enforcement gaps, these additions increase prosecutorial discretion and broaden the circumstances under which criminal liability may attach.

From a limited-government perspective, the bill incrementally expands the state's police power without demonstrating that existing criminal statutes are inadequate. Texas law already provides prosecutors with a range of offenses, including theft, fraud, forgery, and related financial crimes, to address many forms of exploitation. Rather than narrowly addressing a specific deficiency, the bill broadens statutory definitions that may encompass a wider range of conduct and interpersonal disputes, increasing the risk of inconsistent enforcement and overcriminalization. While the legislation does not create a new agency, increase criminal penalties, or authorize additional rulemaking, it nevertheless enlarges the authority of the state to investigate and prosecute private conduct.

The bill does not significantly increase the size of government in an administrative sense, nor does it impose meaningful new costs on taxpayers. According to the LBB, implementation is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on either state or local governments, and any additional enforcement costs are expected to be absorbed within existing resources. Likewise, the bill does not establish new regulatory requirements or compliance burdens for individuals or businesses. Its principal liberty concern is the expansion of criminal liability and prosecutorial discretion rather than bureaucracy, taxation, or regulation.

Because HB 1347 expands the reach of the criminal code without sufficiently limiting prosecutorial discretion or demonstrating that existing criminal statutes cannot adequately address the targeted conduct, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 1347.

• Individual Liberty: The bill expands the scope of criminal liability by broadening the conduct that may be prosecuted through new definitions of coercion, deception, and isolation. While intended to protect vulnerable individuals, it increases the circumstances under which the state may investigate and prosecute private conduct, resulting in a modest expansion of state police power.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill neither meaningfully increases nor decreases personal responsibility. It focuses on punishing those who exploit vulnerable individuals rather than shifting responsibility from individuals to the state or creating new government services or dependency.
• Free Enterprise: The bill does not regulate businesses, create barriers to market participation, impose licensing requirements, or otherwise interfere with private commerce. Any indirect effects on financial transactions are incidental to the bill's criminal enforcement provisions rather than economic regulation.
• Private Property Rights: The bill is intended to better protect the financial resources and property of children, elderly individuals, and disabled individuals from exploitation. By expanding the tools available to prosecute those who unlawfully appropriate another person's resources, it strengthens legal protections for private property ownership and control.
• Limited Government: Although the bill does not create a new agency, increase spending, or expand regulatory bureaucracy, it broadens the authority of the state to prosecute criminal conduct. From a limited-government perspective, expanding prosecutorial discretion and the reach of the criminal code constitutes an incremental increase in government power, even absent significant fiscal or administrative growth.