According to the Legislative Budget Board (LBB), SB 648 is not expected to have any fiscal implications for the state. The LBB anticipates that the provisions of the bill, while introducing new procedural requirements for recording certain real property instruments, will not result in additional costs or revenue impacts to state agencies.

For local governments, the fiscal impact is also projected to be minimal. The bill does not mandate the creation of new government programs or the expansion of local services, but rather adjusts documentation and notarization standards for filings related to property conveyance and heirship affidavits. While local county clerks’ offices will be responsible for enforcing these new standards during the recording process, the changes are not expected to significantly increase workloads or necessitate additional staffing or resources.

Overall, the fiscal assessment concludes that the legislation is administrative in nature and will integrate into existing workflows at both the state and local levels without measurable cost. The intent of the bill is primarily legal and procedural, aiming to enhance the integrity of real property filings rather than to expand government operations.

SB 648 aims to prevent title fraud by tightening the rules for recording property documents in Texas. It seeks to ensure that deeds and affidavits of heirship are properly signed, witnessed, and notarized, especially when not filed by a professional like a title agent or attorney. While the bill is well-intentioned and responds to a real concern about property theft through forged documents, its current structure raises serious liberty, access, and regulatory issues that outweigh its benefits in this form.

The bill significantly increases the regulatory burden on individuals, particularly low-income Texans, rural residents, and those handling family land without legal assistance. By requiring multiple acknowledgments, subscribing witnesses, and certification by an officer, the legislation makes it more difficult for individuals to assert property rights, especially heirs seeking to record ownership through an affidavit of heirship. In doing so, it effectively forces more people to turn to professional intermediaries like title companies or lawyers, which introduces additional costs and barriers.

Moreover, while the bill does not increase state spending or expand the size of government, it expands procedural control over the public recording process without clear evidence of widespread abuse. It contradicts the principles of limited government by overregulating a process that many Texans have long handled independently. This could lead to unintended consequences, such as restricting access to justice, particularly for marginalized populations.

For these reasons, Texas Policy Research recommends that lawmakers vote NO on SB 648 unless amended to better protect individual liberty and ensure fair access to the property recording system. Improvements could include streamlined filing procedures for uncontested heirship, hardship waivers, or safe harbors for pro se individuals. Until such revisions are made, the bill imposes too high a cost on everyday Texans in the name of fraud prevention.

• Individual Liberty: The bill imposes rigid procedural requirements for individuals who want to record real property documents without using a professional intermediary. Requiring multiple witnesses and notarizations restricts individuals’ ability to exercise their rights independently, especially in cases involving inheritance or family land. These requirements could unintentionally block rightful owners from accessing or asserting property claims, particularly in rural or low-income communities. This represents a direct constraint on individual autonomy and legal agency.
• Personal Responsibility: On one hand, the bill reinforces the idea that parties involved in property transactions should be thorough and accountable by formalizing documentation standards. However, it undermines personal responsibility by making it nearly impossible for individuals to fulfill those responsibilities without outside help, such as attorneys or title companies. In doing so, it sends the message that you can't handle your own affairs unless you pay someone else to do it for you.
• Free Enterprise: While the bill doesn’t regulate or limit businesses directly, it indirectly benefits certain professional industries (like title companies and real estate attorneys) by routing more filings through them. This may be seen as an artificial market distortion that favors a protected class of service providers, increasing consumer dependency and potentially raising transaction costs. It could also discourage innovation in low-cost or tech-based solutions that aim to help individuals handle their own property affairs.
• Private Property Rights: The bill’s intent is to strengthen property rights by reducing fraudulent filings and improving the integrity of real estate records. However, its overly burdensome procedural requirements risk creating new barriers for legitimate property owners, especially heirs, to claim or defend their rights. As such, it may protect ownership records at the cost of access to rightful ownership—a tradeoff that undermines the very principle it seeks to uphold.
• Limited Government: The bill expands the reach of government by adding new rules, procedures, and verification layers to a legal process many Texans have historically managed without excessive oversight. Even though it doesn’t grow government size or cost, it increases governmental control over how individuals interact with public land records, and does so without strong evidence of systemic abuse. This kind of preemptive regulation contradicts the principle of minimal, restrained governance that only intervenes when necessary.

• HB 4560 (Same As)