According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of HB 1846 project a net negative impact to the state’s General Revenue Fund of approximately $4.18 million over the 2026–2027 biennium. Although the bill does not include an appropriation, it provides the legal foundation for funding necessary to support the Electric Truck Advisory Council’s activities.

The Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), to which the council is administratively attached, is expected to absorb most of the operational costs using existing funds. However, the estimated fiscal burden primarily stems from the development and implementation of the council’s statewide strategic plan for electric truck charging infrastructure. In fiscal year 2026 alone, $2.51 million is expected to be spent on producing the initial strategic plan. Beginning the same year, ongoing annual implementation efforts are estimated to cost $500,000 per year.

Additionally, the bill necessitates the creation of two new full-time equivalent positions within TxDOT to support the council. These positions will incur recurring personnel costs of approximately $285,780 annually, with an additional $50,000 in administrative support expenses. While the fiscal note indicates these costs are manageable for TxDOT, no additional fiscal impact is anticipated for other participating agencies or local governments, which are expected to absorb any associated costs within their existing resources.

HB 1846 proposes the creation of the Electric Truck Advisory Council within the Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT), tasked with developing a statewide strategic plan for electric truck charging infrastructure and promoting electric truck technology across the public and private sectors. While described as an advisory council, the structure, scope, and mandated activities embedded in the bill reveal a significant expansion of government authority and taxpayer obligations under the banner of transportation innovation.

This bill grows the size and scope of government. It establishes a permanent, cross-agency council requiring continuous support, staffing, coordination, and strategic oversight. The Council’s broad mandate includes advocating for electric truck adoption, influencing technology development, promoting certain innovations, and facilitating government-industry coordination. These are not neutral policy roles—they represent a targeted government endorsement of one specific technology sector, giving the Council a quasi-industrial planning function inappropriate for a limited government framework.

The burden on taxpayers is immediate and ongoing. According to the Legislative Budget Board, HB 1846 will cost over $4.1 million during the 2026–2027 biennium, with an annual cost approaching $835,000 thereafter. The bill authorizes two new full-time positions at TxDOT, large-scale strategic planning efforts, and recurring administrative functions. More concerning, it lays the groundwork for future taxpayer-funded infrastructure investments in a sector with astronomical cost projections—potentially in the tens or hundreds of billions nationwide.

The bill also introduces a soft regulatory burden. It mandates that state agencies not only receive the Council’s recommendations but respond with formal implementation plans or written justifications for noncompliance. This creates bureaucratic pressure to conform to policy preferences without legislative debate or administrative rulemaking. It is regulatory expansion by another name, and it risks future mandates framed as “guidance.”

Further, electric freight infrastructure places a known strain on Texas's power grid, and electric trucks themselves carry battery weight that can further degrade state highways, costs that will fall on taxpayers. The bill’s stated goals of promoting industry-wide adoption and advancing specific technologies suggest the government picking winners and losers, a role inconsistent with free enterprise or limited government.

In effect, HB 1846 represents a green energy policy vehicle wrapped in technocratic language. Texans consistently express a desire for smaller, more accountable government, not new bureaucracies that use “advisory” labels to advance costly, impractical agendas. For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 1846.

• Individual Liberty: The bill does not directly restrict individual freedoms, but by promoting a specific transportation model and influencing future policy and infrastructure priorities, it could limit consumer choice over time. As public investment tilts the playing field, non-electric alternatives may become disadvantaged through regulation, availability, or access to resources.
• Personal Responsibility: By encouraging reliance on government planning and public investment to advance EV truck infrastructure, the bill reduces incentives for the private sector to take ownership of its own logistical and technological transitions. The market should determine the viability of electric freight solutions based on cost, reliability, and user demand, not government planning or subsidies.
• Free Enterprise: The bill places the state in the position of actively promoting a specific industry: electric trucks and associated charging infrastructure. The bill authorizes the state to encourage the adoption of electric trucks, promote battery and drivetrain technology, and lead coordination among government and private entities. This represents a clear case of the government picking winners and losers in the marketplace, potentially disadvantaging other transportation technologies and freight solutions. Taxpayer resources are being used to facilitate a particular market direction, rather than allowing consumer demand and innovation to determine outcomes organically.
• Private Property Rights: The Council is tasked with identifying “strategic locations” for electric truck charging infrastructure. While the bill doesn’t authorize land seizure or eminent domain directly, history shows that such strategic planning often leads to pressure on local governments and private landowners to accommodate the resulting infrastructure. Furthermore, the possibility of future mandates or zoning overlays could affect how private property may be used in freight corridors.
• Limited Government: The bill expands government by creating a new bureaucratic entity: the Electric Truck Advisory Council. This council is permanent in nature, requires new full-time staff, and places long-term planning and coordination obligations on TxDOT and other state agencies. Though framed as advisory, its mandated strategic planning and agency response requirements create enduring obligations and open the door to further regulatory and fiscal involvement.