According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 2496 is not expected to have a significant fiscal impact on either state or local government. The LBB concludes that any administrative costs associated with implementing the bill can be absorbed within existing agency resources, meaning no additional appropriations or new funding are anticipated to be necessary.

The fiscal analysis assumes that courts and other affected entities can implement the bill's revised protective order standards as part of their existing operations. Although the legislation expands the findings under which courts may issue protective orders, the LBB does not expect the resulting workload to generate significant additional costs for the judiciary or other state agencies.

The LBB also reports no significant fiscal implication for units of local government. Counties, district courts, and other local entities involved in protective order proceedings are expected to administer the changes using existing personnel and resources without requiring additional funding. The fiscal note was based on information provided by the Office of Court Administration and the Texas Judicial Council.

HB 2496 makes a targeted revision to the standards governing family violence protective orders by requiring that a court find either that family violence occurred within the two years preceding the application or that the respondent was imprisoned or confined for a family violence offense and released within the preceding two years. The Committee Substitute preserves protections for victims by recognizing recent release from incarceration as an alternative basis for obtaining a protective order while making conforming changes to the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to the bill analysis, these changes are intended to better align protective orders with their purpose of providing timely relief while preventing their use to address remote historical incidents.

From a limited-government perspective, the bill does not meaningfully expand the size or scope of government. It creates no new state agency, program, fund, or regulatory authority, grants no additional rulemaking power, and establishes no ongoing administrative bureaucracy. Instead, it refines the legal standards courts apply within an existing statutory framework, providing clearer and more objective criteria for issuing protective orders while limiting judicial decisions to specified statutory findings rather than broad discretionary authority.

The bill also does not diminish procedural due process protections. It does not eliminate the existing judicial process, notice requirements, hearings, or required court findings applicable to final protective orders. Rather than authorizing protective orders based solely on allegations, the legislation modifies the substantive eligibility criteria while preserving the judicial determination required before relief may be granted. The additional basis for a protective order, recent release from incarceration for a family violence offense, is tied to an underlying criminal proceeding that itself afforded constitutional due process protections.

Finally, the bill does not increase the burden on taxpayers or impose new regulatory burdens on individuals or businesses. The LBB determined that the legislation will have no significant fiscal implication for either state or local government and that any implementation costs can be absorbed using existing resources. Likewise, the bill does not create new licensing requirements, compliance mandates, reporting obligations, or restrictions on private economic activity. Because the legislation clarifies existing law, preserves due process, avoids meaningful government growth, imposes no significant taxpayer costs, and does not expand regulatory burdens, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES.

• Individual Liberty: The bill clarifies when courts must issue protective orders by requiring either recent family violence or recent release from incarceration for a family violence offense. It does not create new criminal penalties or expand government authority beyond the existing protective order process. Importantly, it preserves existing judicial procedures and due process protections while providing more objective statutory standards.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill reinforces accountability by tying protective orders to recent acts of family violence or recent incarceration for a family violence offense, focusing legal consequences on individuals whose conduct demonstrates a current risk. It does not shift responsibility to the state through new programs or services.
• Free Enterprise: The bill has no meaningful effect on businesses, employment, markets, competition, licensing, or commercial regulation. It neither imposes new compliance requirements nor alters the regulatory environment for private enterprise.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not affect ownership, use, transfer, or regulation of private property. It neither expands nor restricts property rights beyond the existing legal consequences associated with protective orders.
• Limited Government: The bill does not create a new government program, agency, fund, or regulatory authority. It grants no new rulemaking authority, imposes no significant fiscal costs, and does not expand bureaucracy. Instead, it narrows and clarifies statutory standards governing an existing judicial process, providing clearer legislative direction while preserving judicial due process. The Legislative Budget Board found no significant fiscal impact on state or local government.