According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), no significant fiscal implications to the state are anticipated from the passage of HB 186. The bill imposes a requirement on social media platforms to implement age verification to prohibit users under 18 from establishing accounts. Enforcement actions for violations would fall under the jurisdiction of the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) through the Consumer Protection Division, treating violations as deceptive trade practices.

However, the Comptroller of Public Accounts and the Office of Court Administration (OCA) both noted uncertainties. The Comptroller stated that it could not estimate the fiscal impact due to the lack of data on how many violations might occur and lead to civil penalties. Similarly, the OCA found it difficult to determine potential court costs because no reliable data exist to project how many new cases or dockets might result from enforcement actions. Despite these uncertainties, the analysis assumes that any increase in civil penalty revenue and docket volume would likely be insignificant.

The OAG indicated that any legal work required to enforce the bill could be absorbed within existing resources, meaning no new appropriations or budget increases would be necessary. Additionally, no significant fiscal impact on local governments is anticipated.

HB 186 seeks to prohibit individuals under 18 from using social media platforms and requires mandatory age verification processes. While the bill is motivated by sincere concerns about minors' mental health risks online, it fundamentally misplaces responsibility by shifting a role that rightly belongs to parents onto the state. Protecting children from online harms is a serious concern, but this bill improperly expands government authority into areas better managed by family discretion and personal responsibility.

This legislation grows the size and scope of government, increasing regulatory oversight over the private sector without creating a new agency, but by expanding enforcement through the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Although the fiscal note projects no significant immediate taxpayer impact, the regulatory demands placed on businesses, especially the costly implementation of age-verification systems, will have wide-ranging consequences. These costs could eventually burden consumers and weaken the competitiveness of Texas's technology sector.

Importantly, the bill dramatically increases the regulatory burden on businesses and individuals by requiring the collection of transactional or personal data for age verification. This raises significant privacy risks: it forces platforms to collect and potentially retain sensitive personal information, creating new targets for hackers and exposing both minors and adults to higher risks of identity theft.

Moreover, HB 186 presents serious constitutional problems. As emphasized in testimony against the bill, federal courts have consistently struck down similar laws on First Amendment grounds. Minors have constitutional rights to access information and engage in free speech, and this bill’s blanket prohibition without even allowing parental consent removes families' ability to make individualized decisions. Instead of empowering parents, the state mandates a one-size-fits-all prohibition that disregards diverse family needs and preferences.

For these reasons—inappropriate government overreach, erosion of parental rights, increased regulatory and privacy risks, and constitutional concerns—Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 186. Protecting children is crucial, but the solution lies in supporting families with tools, education, and voluntary industry standards, not in empowering the state to dictate private online behavior.

• Individual Liberty: The bill infringes on individual liberty by prohibiting minors under 18 from accessing social media, regardless of their maturity level, parental consent, or intended use (educational, religious, civic engagement, etc.). Minors, while not adults, possess constitutional rights to free speech and information access under the First Amendment. By imposing a blanket ban, the government substitutes its judgment for the individual rights of families and young people. In practice, it treats teenagers the same as very young children without allowing for differentiation based on age or circumstance.
• Personal Responsibility: Rather than empowering parents to guide their children's internet usage, the bill removes parental discretion entirely. Families currently have many tools available—from device-level parental controls to in-app settings—that allow them to tailor online experiences for their children. By making these decisions for families, the government erodes personal responsibility and infantilizes both parents and minors.
• Free Enterprise: The bill imposes costly and complex regulatory burdens on private businesses, especially social media companies. Platforms must develop or purchase new age-verification technologies, handle sensitive user data, and comply with rigid account deletion rules under threat of state action. These costs could discourage innovation, deter small businesses, and push digital services to impose heavier restrictions on all users to minimize legal risk.
• Private Property Rights: While the bill doesn't seize property, it compels businesses to fundamentally change how they interact with users and manage their digital services. It limits how companies can structure their terms of service and the types of users they can serve, intruding into private contractual relationships between businesses and their customers.
• Limited Government: The bill significantly expands the scope of government by creating a new class of regulated online activity and empowering the Attorney General to pursue violations aggressively. While the bill does not set up a new agency, it sets a precedent for regulating broad categories of lawful speech and digital interaction, growing government influence over internet activity and family life​.

A Closer Look at the Proposed Social Media Ban for Minors