89th Legislature

HB 4211

Overall Vote Recommendation
Yes
Principle Criteria
Free Enterprise
Property Rights
Personal Responsibility
Limited Government
Individual Liberty
Digest

HB 4211 establishes a regulatory framework for a growing type of residential property arrangement in which individuals acquire occupancy rights through ownership interests in business entities that own residential properties. These “residential arrangements” involve shared ownership of single-family homes, duplexes, triplexes, or quadruplexes through entities such as LLCs, partnerships, or corporations. HB 4211 seeks to protect individuals participating in such arrangements by clarifying rights and responsibilities between owners and managing entities.

Key provisions include a mandatory disclosure requirement that buyers are purchasing an interest in a business entity, not in real property. The bill prohibits managing entities from imposing dispute resolution forums outside Texas courts, preserving local legal recourse for owners. It also applies anti-discrimination standards (mirroring Chapter 301 of the Property Code) to these arrangements, thereby extending protections similar to those found in real property transactions.

Additionally, the bill empowers owners by prohibiting managing entities from requiring approval for transfers of ownership interests and from collecting fees or sharing in profits from such transfers. Violations of these provisions constitute deceptive trade practices under the Texas Business and Commerce Code. Finally, the bill amends Section 301.042 of the Property Code to exempt certain religious or nonprofit-owned housing on parcels over 25 acres from specific anti-discrimination requirements.

In sum, HB 4211 modernizes Texas property law to address entity-owned residential living structures, aiming to promote transparency, owner autonomy, and equitable treatment within a novel real estate model.

The originally filed version of HB 4211 and the Committee Substitute differ primarily in the expansion of legislative authorship, the clarification of statutory references, and subtle refinements in language, while maintaining the core intent of the bill.

The originally filed version included a straightforward structure: creating Chapter 223 of the Texas Property Code to regulate "business entity-owned residential arrangements." It defined relevant terms, required disclosure that a purchaser was buying an interest in an entity (not real property), prohibited certain types of arbitration clauses, and imposed restrictions to prevent discrimination, transfer limitations, and unjustified fees. It also designated violations as deceptive trade practices and amended Section 301.042 of the Property Code to create an exemption for religious or nonprofit entities operating on land over 25 acres.

In contrast, the Committee Substitute retains the structural integrity of the original bill but presents a cleaner layout with slightly revised formatting and bill drafting conventions, likely in response to feedback or review by legislative counsel. While the substance of each section—definitions, applicability, disclosure requirements, rights of transfer, and anti-discrimination clauses—remains effectively unchanged, the substitute version aligns more closely with House drafting norms and appears tailored for improved readability and enforceability.

No major new policy provisions were introduced in the substitute version; the changes primarily ensure clarity, compliance with drafting standards, and improved legislative presentation. The legislative intent and protections outlined in the original version remain intact.

Author
Candy Noble
Jeff Leach
Todd Hunter
William Metcalf
Co-Author
Daniel Alders
Keith Bell
Greg Bonnen
Ben Bumgarner
David Cook
Charles Cunningham
Mark Dorazio
James Frank
Cody Harris
Cole Hefner
Hillary Hickland
Janis Holt
Andy Hopper
Carrie Isaac
Helen Kerwin
Brooks Landgraf
Terri Leo-Wilson
David Lowe
Shelley Luther
John McQueeney
Brent Money
Tom Oliverson
Jared Patterson
Katrina Pierson
Keresa Richardson
Alan Schoolcraft
Joanne Shofner
David Spiller
Carl Tepper
Cody Vasut
Denise Villalobos
Wesley Virdell
Trey Wharton
Sponsor
Bryan Hughes
Co-Sponsor
Brent Hagenbuch
Lois Kolkhorst
Mayes Middleton
Fiscal Notes

According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the fiscal implications of HB 4211 are projected to be minimal for both the state and local governments. According to the Legislative Budget Board’s fiscal note, the legislation does not impose significant new costs on state agencies or local jurisdictions. The bill delegates some regulatory and enforcement responsibilities to the Office of the Attorney General (OAG), the Secretary of State (SOS), and the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), but these are expected to be manageable within existing budgets and personnel resources.

Specifically, the OAG would gain authority to investigate and enforce violations of the new regulations governing business entity-owned residential properties. It may request assistance from the SOS, which would be required to furnish records or serve interrogatories during enforcement actions. Despite these expanded roles, the OAG, SOS, and TCEQ each reported that any additional workload could be absorbed with current staff and funding levels.

For the TCEQ, the bill includes a directive to deny municipal utility district petitions involving properties in violation of the statute. It also prohibits governmental entities from providing public funding or benefits to such noncompliant properties. These responsibilities are considered procedural in nature and are not expected to create significant operational burdens.

At the local level, there are no anticipated costs, as local entities are not tasked with active enforcement or program administration. Overall, HB 4211 is fiscally neutral and does not require new appropriations or structural changes to agency operations.

Vote Recommendation Notes

HB 4211 addresses a legal blind spot in Texas property law involving residential arrangements where individuals buy into a business entity that owns a home, rather than owning the home itself. As these housing models grow in popularity, especially among younger buyers, investors, or groups looking to share housing, the lack of statutory protections leaves participants vulnerable to deceptive practices, high transfer fees, and limited legal recourse.

The bill adds basic safeguards: it requires disclosure that the buyer is purchasing an interest in a business, not the real estate itself; prohibits discrimination by the managing entity; allows owners to freely sell their share without approval or hidden fees; and ensures that any legal disputes can be handled in Texas courts. These changes are modeled after rights that traditional property owners already enjoy and are enforced through existing laws, such as the Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Crucially, House Bill 4211 does not grow the size or scope of government. It creates no new regulatory agencies, rulemaking bodies, or tax-funded enforcement structures. According to the Legislative Budget Board, the Office of the Attorney General and other relevant agencies can absorb any additional responsibilities within their current resources. There is also no increased burden on taxpayers, as the bill does not require new funding or programs at either the state or local level.

Finally, while it does introduce a regulatory framework for a specific type of business-managed housing, the burden is modest and narrowly tailored. It simply ensures fairness, transparency, and consumer choice without micromanaging business operations. It is a policy of limited government intervention designed to correct abuse, not expand bureaucracy, making it a sound and liberty-aligned improvement to Texas law. As such, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on HB 4211.

  • Individual Liberty: The bill empowers individuals living in business entity-owned residential properties by ensuring they are not subject to hidden or unfair restrictions. It guarantees that residents have the right to use Texas courts rather than being forced into private or out-of-state arbitration. It also applies fair housing protections, meaning residents cannot be discriminated against based on personal characteristics. These provisions affirm a person's right to be treated equally and to seek justice under the law.
  • Personal Responsibility: By requiring full disclosure that a purchaser is buying a business interest, not the real estate itself, the bill promotes informed decision-making. It gives individuals the tools to understand what they are entering into, reducing the risk of being misled by complex or predatory arrangements. This reinforces the principle that individuals should be free to make choices, but also fully responsible for those choices when provided with clear information.
  • Free Enterprise: The bill promotes healthier and more competitive real estate markets by removing artificial restrictions on the transfer of ownership interests. It prevents managing entities from charging arbitrary transfer fees or denying owners the right to sell, which reduces rent-seeking behavior and levels the playing field for participants. By doing so, it encourages a freer exchange of capital and opportunity without stifling innovation in housing models.
  • Private Property Rights: Although residents under these arrangements don’t own the property itself, the bill treats their ownership interest with the seriousness of property rights. It ensures they can use, transfer, and protect their interest without interference. The right to control one’s property—or business interest tied to property—without undue oversight or approval is foundational to this principle, and the bill enhances those protections.
  • Limited Government: The bill takes a restrained, targeted approach to regulation. It does not create new agencies, taxes, or large enforcement regimes. Instead, it builds on existing laws like the Deceptive Trade Practices Act to protect consumers, using mechanisms already in place. The bill also explicitly avoids adding criminal penalties or expanding rulemaking authority. It solves a real-world problem with minimal government expansion, making it a textbook example of limited yet effective governance.
View Bill Text and Status