According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), HB 3803 is not expected to have any significant fiscal impact on the state. The Department of Banking, which is the agency responsible for implementing the bill, operates as a self-directed, semi-independent (SDSI) agency. This status means the agency funds its operations entirely through the assessments and fees it collects from regulated entities and does not receive appropriations from or impose costs on the state’s General Revenue Fund.

Because the Department of Banking is not subject to the legislative budgeting process and must cover its own operational expenses, any administrative costs associated with implementing the confidentiality provisions of this bill, such as changes to records handling procedures or interagency communication protocols, would be absorbed internally without requiring new state funding or appropriations.

The bill is also not anticipated to have a significant fiscal impact on local governments. Since enforcement and disclosure decisions remain centralized within the Department of Banking, there is no direct administrative or financial burden imposed on counties, municipalities, or other political subdivisions.

In summary, HB 3803 maintains a fiscally neutral profile, with implementation expected to proceed within the existing operational framework of the Department of Banking, and without imposing costs on either the state treasury or local government entities.

HB 3803 proposes to codify confidentiality provisions for financial information related to perpetual care cemeteries and their trust funds under Chapter 712 of the Health and Safety Code. This change brings the treatment of these records into alignment with the Finance Code provisions that already protect similar data for prepaid funeral services. The legislation addresses a regulatory inconsistency, as many regulated entities operate as both perpetual care cemetery operators and prepaid funeral contract sellers. By harmonizing these confidentiality standards, the bill advances statutory clarity, consistency, and more predictable regulatory enforcement.

The bill substantially supports liberty principles in several key ways. First, it enhances individual liberty and private property rights by protecting sensitive financial information held by private cemetery operators, ensuring it is not subject to public disclosure absent a compelling regulatory justification. Second, it upholds the principle of limited government by restricting the unnecessary exposure of private financial data while still preserving the state’s ability to enforce the law. The bill allows the Texas Department of Banking to share confidential information with other state or federal regulatory agencies when it determines that such disclosure is in the public interest and necessary for law enforcement.

However, while the bill is sound in structure and purpose, it raises some concerns about transparency and regulatory discretion that merit targeted improvement. The commissioner is granted broad authority to determine when disclosure is appropriate, but the bill lacks defined criteria, procedural safeguards, or reporting requirements governing how such determinations are made. This could lead to inconsistent application of the law or unintentional shielding of entities that ought to be held accountable to oversight. Additionally, the complete lack of public access, even to aggregate financial trends or risk indicators, may hinder informed consumer decision-making and reduce the ability of external parties (e.g., legislators, consumer advocates, researchers) to assess the financial health of the perpetual care cemetery industry.

To strengthen the bill’s alignment with transparency and limited government principles, it is recommended that amendments be adopted to:

• Require the commissioner to document and publish the rationale for disclosures made under the "public interest" standard.
• Allow for the publication of anonymized or aggregate financial data to promote public awareness and oversight.
• Include language to ensure that the confidentiality protections do not inhibit compliance with court orders, subpoenas, or legislative audits.

Importantly, none of these amendments is a prerequisite for support. The bill, as drafted, meaningfully enhances privacy protections and legal consistency for regulated entities without imposing new costs on taxpayers or regulatory burdens on local governments. The Department of Banking, a self-directed, semi-independent agency, will absorb any administrative adjustments within its existing operational framework, and the Legislative Budget Board has confirmed that no significant fiscal impact is expected.

Accordingly, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on HB 3803 while also suggesting some amendments to strengthen the bill as described above. It is a constructive step toward protecting private financial data and resolving statutory inconsistencies, and while it can be improved, it already represents meaningful progress in support of liberty-focused governance.

• Individual Liberty: The bill strengthens individual liberty by protecting the privacy of financial information related to perpetual care cemeteries and trust funds. These entities hold and manage long-term care funds on behalf of individuals and families making end-of-life arrangements. Shielding such sensitive financial information from public disclosure, except under specific conditions, safeguards personal and business privacy from unnecessary government or public intrusion. This is consistent with the concept of individual autonomy and control over personal information.
• Personal Responsibility: While the bill does not directly affect personal responsibility, its confidentiality provisions could have a subtle, indirect effect. On one hand, by preserving the confidentiality of financial data, the bill encourages businesses to engage candidly with regulators, trusting that information will not be improperly disclosed. On the other hand, reduced public transparency could remove an external layer of accountability that encourages operators to manage funds responsibly. That said, internal regulatory oversight by the Texas Department of Banking remains intact, balancing this concern.
• Free Enterprise: The bill supports free enterprise by protecting businesses, specifically cemetery operators, from competitive harm that could arise from public disclosure of sensitive financial records. This creates a more stable regulatory environment and lowers reputational risk for businesses acting in good faith. However, by removing a level of public accountability, the bill may reduce market forces that would otherwise hold underperforming or financially unstable operators accountable. This could impact consumer confidence in the sector unless transparency is maintained through other means, such as aggregate reporting or enhanced regulatory communication.
• Private Property Rights: Financial data and business records are a form of intangible property. The bill reinforces property rights by recognizing these records as the rightful private domain of the cemetery operators and their trust administrators. By codifying the protection of such information, the bill reaffirms the principle that property, whether physical or informational, should not be subject to unwarranted public appropriation or exposure.
• Limited Government: The bill takes a positive step in limiting unnecessary public access to private financial information and avoids expanding state enforcement or regulatory authority. However, it also grants broad discretionary power to the banking commissioner to determine when disclosure is in the “public interest” or necessary to enforce the law. The absence of procedural checks or transparency requirements in how that discretion is exercised raises concerns. Without clear criteria or oversight, such broad latitude could enable inconsistent application or overreach, undermining the principle of limited, accountable government. This can be addressed through strengthening amendments.