LEGISLATIVE BUDGET BOARD Austin, Texas FISCAL NOTE 74th Regular Session April 25, 1995 TO: Honorable Kim Brimer, Chair IN RE: House Bill No. 3028 Committee on Business & Industry By: Ehrhardt, etal. House of Representatives Austin, Texas FROM: John Keel, Director In response to your request for a Fiscal Note on House Bill No. 3028 (relating to security deposits provided by residential tenants and prospective residential tenants) this office has determined the following: The bill would make no appropriation but could provide the legal basis for an appropriation of funds to implement the provisions of the bill. The bill would prohibit landlords who own more than two rental properties from commingling tenant security deposits with assets of the landlord. It would require landlords to deposit a tenant's security deposit in an interest bearing trust account in a bank or with a licensed escrow agent, and the bank or escrow agent would be required to promptly transfer accrued interest to the Housing Trust Fund administered by the Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs. The bill also stipulates certain conditions regarding the return of security deposits to tenants. The bill would result in a revenue gain to the Housing Trust Fund. According to the 1990 U.S. Census, there were 2,312,670 renter-occupied housing units in Texas. It is assumed that 15 percent, or 346,900, of those units would be exempted from transferring interest to the Housing Trust Fund because their owners own no more than two units. It is also assumed that the average security deposit is $325, based on the average rent according to the 1990 Census. Using a 3.5 percent interest rate, this would result in a maximum projected revenue of $25.6 million per year. Assuming a 50 percent compliance rate would result in projected revenue of $11.2 million per year, increasing 10 percent per year. Landlords who do not comply with the prohibition against commingling and the required transfer to the Trust Fund would forfeit the right to withhold any portion of the security deposit or to bring suit against the tenant for damages to the premises. They would also be liable for civil penalties in an amount equal to the amount of the security deposit, court costs, and reasonable attorney's fees. The probable fiscal implication of implementing the provisions of the bill during each of the first five years following passage is estimated as follows: Fiscal Probable Revenue Year Gain to the Housing Trust Fund 1996 $11,180,314 1997 13,416,377 1998 15,652,437 1999 17,888,502 2000 20,124,565 Similar annual fiscal implications would continue as long as the provisions of the bill are in effect. No fiscal implication to units of local government is anticipated. Source: Department of Housing and Community Affairs LBB Staff: JK, PVT, RR