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