According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of HB 2067 are minimal. The analysis concludes that no significant fiscal impact to the State of Texas is anticipated. The Texas Department of Insurance, which would be tasked with implementing and overseeing the bill’s new requirements—including quarterly insurer reporting and expanded notice protocols—is expected to absorb any associated costs within its current budget and operational capacity.

Additionally, the fiscal note indicates no significant impact on local governments. This aligns with the scope of the bill, which regulates private insurers and does not place any direct mandates or financial obligations on local entities or municipalities. Most provisions involve administrative or regulatory adjustments that would be handled at the state agency level and within the private sector.

Overall, while HB 2067 imposes new procedural and reporting requirements on insurers, particularly in the form of quarterly reports to the Department of Insurance, the fiscal note confirms that these can be managed without additional state appropriations or local government expenditures. This finding supports the bill’s feasibility from a budgetary standpoint, assuming current agency infrastructure is capable of scaling oversight functions as required.

HB 2067 represents a targeted yet modest reform of the Texas Insurance Code, addressing procedural transparency in the declination, cancellation, and nonrenewal of insurance policies. By removing the requirement that applicants or policyholders must request written explanations for these actions, and instead making such disclosures automatic, the bill strengthens consumer rights. It also brings consistency to existing provisions by extending written notice requirements to include policy declinations for liability and commercial property insurance. These changes empower individuals to make informed decisions about their insurance coverage and align with principles of individual liberty and personal responsibility.

However, the bill also introduces new regulatory obligations for insurers. Chief among these is the requirement to submit quarterly reports to the Texas Department of Insurance (TDI) summarizing actions taken on policies, categorized by ZIP code. While this data could aid in monitoring regional disparities and promoting market fairness, it may also impose new compliance burdens, particularly on smaller or regional insurers. This could, over time, influence pricing models or lead to market consolidation. Such concerns touch on the principles of free enterprise and limited government, suggesting a policy trade-off between consumer protections and regulatory expansion.

Importantly, the Legislative Budget Board’s fiscal note confirms that HB 2067 would have no significant fiscal impact on the state or local governments. Administrative costs for implementation are expected to be absorbed within TDI’s existing budget, and no new appropriations are required. This reassures that the bill does not create an undue financial burden on taxpayers or public institutions.

Taking all factors into account, Texas Policy Research remains NEUTRAL on HB 2067. The bill offers genuine benefits in transparency and fairness, but these are counterbalanced by increased regulatory reporting requirements and potential effects on market dynamics. As such, HB 2067 does not constitute a clear advancement or regression in terms of core liberty principles, making neutrality the most appropriate and measured stance.

• Individual Liberty: The bill enhances individual liberty by ensuring policyholders automatically receive written explanations when their insurance is declined, canceled, or not renewed. This strengthens consumer rights by providing transparency, preventing insurers from making arbitrary decisions without accountability. However, the quarterly reporting requirement for insurers, organized by ZIP code, raises privacy concerns since it involves tracking and aggregating consumer insurance data.
• Personal Responsibility: By requiring insurers to provide clear, written reasons for policy decisions, the bill empowers consumers to make informed decisions about their coverage and financial planning. Policyholders can better understand why they were declined or canceled and adjust their behavior accordingly, whether by improving risk factors, shopping for alternative coverage, or disputing unfair denials. This promotes personal accountability in managing insurance coverage.
• Free Enterprise: The bill adds administrative costs and compliance burdens to insurers, particularly through the quarterly reporting mandate. While it does not directly interfere with insurers’ ability to set rates or issue policies, the additional reporting requirements could increase costs for insurance companies, which might be passed down to consumers in the form of higher premiums. This could reduce market efficiency and discourage competition, especially among smaller insurance providers.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not directly infringe on private property rights, as it does not dictate how insurers operate or whom they must cover. However, by mandating additional reporting and disclosure requirements, it compels insurers to share more internal business data with the government. While this does not amount to a seizure of property, it does increase government influence over private-sector operations.
• Limited Government: The bill expands the Texas Department of Insurance’s (TDI) authority by modifying its rulemaking powers and requiring insurers to submit quarterly reports on policy actions. While consumer protections are a valid function of government, the bill adds bureaucratic oversight without clear evidence of widespread insurer misconduct. The lack of a significant fiscal impact suggests that TDI can absorb these new duties within its existing budget, but the long-term regulatory precedent could lead to future expansions of government authority in the insurance market.

• SB 1006 (Same As)