According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 3349 is projected to have a net negative fiscal impact of approximately $21.8 million to General Revenue through the 2026–27 biennium. This fiscal effect arises from revisions to the Events Trust Fund (ETF) structure, particularly the adjustment of the state’s funding multipliers for events hosted in smaller jurisdictions. Specifically, the bill increases the state’s contribution multiplier from 6.25 to 12.25 for events in counties or municipalities with populations of 50,000 or less. Similarly, jurisdictions with populations between 50,001 and 250,000 would see their multiplier rise to 10.9375, and those between 250,001 and 500,000 would have theirs increased to 9.375. The multiplier for areas with populations above 500,000 remains unchanged at 6.25​.

These increases are expected to significantly elevate the amount of state funds transferred into the ETF from the General Revenue Fund. In fiscal year 2026 alone, this would result in a projected revenue loss of $10.69 million to General Revenue, offset by a corresponding gain to the ETF. This trend is projected to continue and grow, reaching an estimated annual impact of $12.66 million by fiscal year 2030. While these transfers are not appropriations per se, the bill establishes a statutory basis that enables them to occur.

Notably, the bill also repeals obsolete trust funds—including those for the Olympic Games, Pan American Games, and motor sports racing—which could reduce some administrative complexity. However, the core fiscal pressure results from the enhanced state contribution rates to support a broader base of eligible local events.

The LBB anticipates that the Office of the Governor will be able to absorb any administrative costs within existing resources, and no significant fiscal implications are expected for local governments. There is no projected impact on state technology systems​.

HB 3349, as substituted, seeks to consolidate Texas’s various sports and event-related trust funds into a single, streamlined structure under the Events Trust Fund (ETF), while also increasing state contributions to events held in smaller municipalities and counties. While the bill includes administrative clean-up, removes obsolete trust fund mechanisms, and makes the ETF more accessible to rural areas, it ultimately expands a system of taxpayer-funded subsidies that raises significant concerns about government overreach, geographic fairness, and the misuse of public resources.

At its core, the ETF operates by reimbursing local governments for certain event-related expenses using a portion of the state sales and use taxes generated around the event. These reimbursements are matched by the state at a fixed multiplier—currently 6.25, but this bill increases it to as high as 12.5 for smaller communities. While framed as an incentive for economic development, the model effectively redistributes tax dollars collected statewide to support a specific locality's short-term economic benefit, regardless of whether those who fund it (i.e., all Texas taxpayers) receive any return or benefit from the event itself. This violates a basic principle of geographic equity: taxes paid by all Texans should not disproportionately benefit a few.

Furthermore, the bill expands the financial footprint of the ETF without introducing any significant new fiscal safeguards. According to the Legislative Budget Board, HB 3349 would cost the state an estimated $21.8 million in General Revenue over the next biennium, with growing losses projected in future years. These are funds that could otherwise be used to support essential, statewide public services such as education, infrastructure, or tax relief. Instead, they are redirected to underwrite events that are often commercial in nature, hosted by private enterprises or entertainment corporations with significant profit potential. This raises a legitimate concern that government is assuming financial risks and subsidizing industries that should stand on their own in a free market.

Though the bill does make technical improvements to ETF procedures—such as standardized reporting timelines and earlier notice requirements—it leaves the fundamental structure of the subsidy model intact and, in fact, broadens it. It continues to encourage local governments to pursue large-scale events with the promise of state reimbursement, even when the broader public may not benefit from the outcomes. Moreover, by increasing the reimbursement rates for smaller jurisdictions, the bill could encourage riskier local spending decisions with the expectation that the state will backfill any financial gaps.

For those who believe in limited government, prudent fiscal policy, and the principle that public funds should serve public—not private—purposes, this bill does not present a viable reform. Instead, it entrenches and expands a practice that is fundamentally misaligned with those values. While repealing obsolete funds is laudable, the better course would be to eliminate the Events Trust Fund entirely, or at minimum restrict its use to only those events that offer demonstrable, broad-based public benefits. For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on HB 3349.

• Individual Liberty: The bill does not directly restrict or enhance the rights of individuals to speak, worship, associate, or live freely. Its impact is centered on public finance and economic incentives, not personal freedoms. Thus, it is neutral on this principle.
• Personal Responsibility: By using public funds to subsidize private or semi-private events, HB 3349 diminishes the principle of personal (and local governmental) responsibility. Local governments and event organizers are encouraged to pursue large, expensive events with the understanding that the state will absorb a significant share of the financial burden, regardless of performance or return on investment. This creates a moral hazard, shifting the risk from decision-makers to taxpayers statewide, and discourages careful, accountable financial planning.
• Free Enterprise: A central tenet of free enterprise is that businesses should compete fairly without government favoritism. HB 3349 expands a program that uses taxpayer dollars to subsidize certain industries—like professional sports, entertainment, and tourism—over others. These state-backed subsidies distort the market by giving an advantage to politically favored or well-connected sectors. This violates the principle of neutral government and undermines the competitive integrity of the free market.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not infringe upon or enhance private property protections. It does not propose new takings, land use restrictions, or changes to zoning or eminent domain powers. However, to the extent that it directs public funds toward private events or entities, it can be viewed as an indirect redistribution of property (via taxation) to benefit selected recipients.
• Limited Government: The most concerning impact of HB 3349 is on the principle of limited government. Rather than reducing the role of the state, the bill expands the scope and size of government financial intervention. It increases the state’s fiscal exposure through more generous reimbursement multipliers, and it makes the state a more central player in local event funding decisions. While it repeals three outdated funds, it consolidates and strengthens the remaining one (the Events Trust Fund) without imposing new limits, performance thresholds, or sunset provisions. This expansion of financial commitment—funded by General Revenue dollars—shifts state government away from core functions and deeper into the role of event promoter and economic development financier. Such an approach risks politicizing public spending, distorting regional priorities, and growing the administrative and financial footprint of state government far beyond its essential purposes.