According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 2820 would have no significant fiscal implications for the State. This means that increasing the maximum amount of operating capital a charitable bingo organization may retain—from $50,000 to $100,000—would not materially impact state revenues or expenditures. The Texas Lottery Commission and the Comptroller of Public Accounts, the two state agencies involved in administering charitable bingo operations, are expected to implement the bill without needing additional appropriations or staff resources.

The LBB further assumes that any administrative costs incurred by the Texas Lottery Commission to update rules or processes could be absorbed within existing agency resources. This is consistent with the limited scope of the bill, which does not mandate major operational changes but instead raises a financial threshold already overseen by the Commission.

At the local level, the bill also carries no significant fiscal implications. Since charitable bingo activities are conducted by nonprofit organizations and regulated at the state level, local governments are unlikely to be directly affected in terms of revenues, enforcement responsibilities, or administrative overhead.

Overall, the bill's financial impact is minimal while providing enhanced flexibility to nonprofit organizations engaged in charitable bingo, with any fiscal adjustments expected to be managed through current structures and budgets.

HB 2820 is a limited, fiscally neutral adjustment to existing Texas law that governs charitable bingo operations. Specifically, it raises the cap on the amount of operating capital a licensed charitable bingo organization may retain—from $50,000 to $100,000—allowing nonprofits to more effectively manage basic expenses like rent, utilities, and supplies. This cap has not been updated since 2009, despite significant inflation and cost increases. The bill seeks to relieve financial strain on charitable groups that depend on bingo operations to fund essential community services.

Importantly, the bill does not expand gambling, authorize any new forms of gaming, or deregulate existing rules. For those who are generally opposed to regulated gambling, this bill represents a procedural financial update, not a moral or policy shift toward greater gambling access. It simply allows already-licensed nonprofit groups, such as veterans' organizations, churches, or community service clubs, to keep more of their own money in reserve without having to seek bureaucratic approval.

From a liberty and governance standpoint, HB 2820 does not grow the size or scope of government, nor does it impose any new burdens on taxpayers. The Legislative Budget Board confirms that the bill carries no significant fiscal impact and that all implementation can be handled within existing resources. Additionally, the bill eases, not increases, regulatory burdens by reducing the need for discretionary waivers and case-by-case approvals.

In sum, for those committed to limited government, individual responsibility, and fiscal prudence—even with reservations about state-regulated gambling—this bill represents a measured and responsible adjustment to existing law. It supports charitable organizations without inviting expansion of gambling, bureaucracy, or spending. As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on HB 2820.

• Individual Liberty: The bill strengthens individual liberty by giving nonprofit organizations more autonomy in managing their own funds. These organizations—often run by veterans’ groups, religious institutions, or community nonprofits—will no longer be arbitrarily restricted by a cap that hasn’t changed in over 15 years. It reduces state interference in how legally earned funds are held and used for lawful purposes, promoting the freedom of association and voluntary charitable work.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill supports the principle that organizations, like individuals, should be trusted to manage their finances responsibly. By increasing the cap on retained funds, the state shows confidence in these groups’ ability to make prudent financial decisions without requiring them to request exemptions or special permissions. This shift encourages financial planning, stability, and operational accountability.
• Free Enterprise: While charitable bingo exists in a tightly regulated space distinct from true open-market enterprise, this bill does tilt slightly in favor of enterprise freedom within the nonprofit sector. By allowing organizations to retain more capital, the bill reduces friction in the fundraising and event-hosting process. It doesn't unleash market forces broadly but removes an arbitrary constraint that was suppressing nonprofit efficiency.
• Private Property Rights: Allowing organizations to retain more of their legally earned revenue respects the foundational idea that what is lawfully acquired should be lawfully retained and used without unnecessary government restriction. The bill does not alter ownership rights, but it does expand the practical utility of retained income, affirming property rights in practice.
• Limited Government: This is perhaps the bill’s strongest alignment. The bill neither creates new programs nor expands state authority. It actually reduces regulatory micromanagement by making it less necessary for organizations to seek special approval to exceed outdated thresholds. It respects the idea that government should not dictate minor operational details unless there's a compelling public interest—which there is not in this case.