According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), the bill is projected to result in a net negative impact of $307,814 to General Revenue over the 2026–2027 biennium. These costs stem primarily from the need for the Department of State Health Services (DSHS) to expand its inspection capacity and implement the new labeling requirements for catfish and similar fish across the food supply chain.

To enforce the bill's provisions, DSHS would hire 1.5 full-time equivalent (FTE) Sanitarian I positions responsible for increased inspection duties. These positions would cost approximately $94,228 in FY2026 (partial year) and $125,637 in FY2027, with similar annual costs continuing through FY2030. Additional recurring expenses, such as staff training and technology support, are projected to stay below $100,000 per year.

Though the bill provides for administrative and civil penalties, the Legislative Budget Board notes that the number of violations and associated fine revenue cannot be reliably estimated. As a result, potential offsetting revenue from penalties is not accounted for in the projected fiscal impact. The Office of the Attorney General indicated that any required legal work related to enforcement could be absorbed within its existing resources.

For local governments, there may be minor implementation costs, particularly for local health departments that issue licenses or conduct inspections. However, as with the state, the fiscal effect on local entities remains indeterminate due to the unknown scale of enforcement actions or violations.

Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote YES on SB 1484 based on its alignment with core liberty principles—particularly personal responsibility, free enterprise, and limited government with accountable enforcement. The bill aims to address consumer protection and market fairness in the seafood industry by requiring accurate labeling of catfish and preventing the misrepresentation of imported fish as domestic catfish. These reforms are designed to support Texas aquaculture producers while providing transparency for consumers.

The bill analysis and sponsor’s intent emphasize the economic significance of aquaculture to Texas and the disadvantages posed by imported fish labeled deceptively. By expanding the bill’s scope to include food service suppliers, wholesalers, and distributors—not just restaurants—it addresses a systemic issue in the supply chain. The inclusion of affirmative defenses for businesses that acted in good faith and the clarification that violators may only be penalized under either administrative or civil provisions (but not both for the same act) reflect a measured approach to enforcement, avoiding regulatory overreach.

From a fiscal perspective, the bill carries a relatively modest projected cost—$307,814 over the 2026–2027 biennium—for hiring a small number of inspectors and implementing new standards. While penalties may eventually offset some costs, they are not projected to be significant or reliably predictable. Nonetheless, the regulatory burden is narrowly tailored and balances state interests in food safety and economic fairness without creating broad new mandates or intrusive surveillance.

Given its purpose, structure, and limited fiscal impact, SB 1484 promotes ethical business practices and consumer empowerment in a way that is consistent with liberty-oriented governance and economic accountability.

• Individual Liberty: While the bill does not directly expand individual freedoms, it supports consumer autonomy by requiring transparent labeling of fish products. This allows individuals to make informed decisions about the food they purchase and consume. Accurate labeling promotes trust and reduces the risk of being misled, reinforcing the principle that individuals should have access to truthful information to exercise their liberty effectively.
• Personal Responsibility: The bill promotes accountability among businesses throughout the food supply chain—restaurants, wholesalers, and distributors alike. It mandates that these entities take responsibility for accurately identifying and representing their products. The inclusion of an affirmative defense for businesses acting in good faith also reinforces the idea that individuals and entities should be judged based on intent and diligence, not merely outcome, which aligns closely with the principle of personal responsibility.
• Free Enterprise: The bill levels the playing field for Texas aquaculture producers, particularly catfish farmers, by targeting deceptive marketing practices that give imported, lower-quality substitutes an unfair market advantage. By curbing misrepresentation, it ensures that honest businesses can compete fairly. While it introduces some regulation, the burden is targeted and tied directly to transparency rather than market control or price manipulation, preserving the essence of a competitive, open market.
• Private Property Rights: The bill does not significantly interfere with ownership or use of property. It imposes no restrictions on what fish businesses may sell, only on how products are labeled and represented. The right to sell and profit from private property remains intact, provided it is done truthfully.
• Limited Government: The bill introduces new enforcement mechanisms via administrative and civil penalties, which naturally expand regulatory oversight. However, it also takes care to prevent duplicative punishment and limits enforcement to entities already licensed by the Department of State Health Services or local authorities. The bill avoids unnecessary expansion of state power by including good-faith exceptions and ensuring penalties are proportionate to the conduct. Thus, it balances the need for public oversight with respect for minimal government intrusion.

• HB 2976 (Same As)