BILL ANALYSIS |
C.S.H.B. 1624 |
By: Cortez |
Business & Industry |
Committee Report (Substituted) |
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE
Interested parties contend that a parent limited liability company is not required to file any public documents acknowledging the formation of a new series limited liability company and that when a new series is created, the naming of such a series remains substantially unregulated. C.S.H.B. 1624 seeks to clarify the law relating to an assumed name for a limited liability company.
|
||||||||
RULEMAKING AUTHORITY
It is the committee's opinion that this bill does not expressly grant any additional rulemaking authority to a state officer, department, agency, or institution.
|
||||||||
ANALYSIS
C.S.H.B. 1624 amends the Business & Commerce Code to clarify that the definition of "assumed name," as defined in the Assumed Business or Professional Name Act, for a limited liability company means a name other than the name stated in its certificate of formation or a comparable document, including the name of any series of the limited liability company established by its company agreement.
|
||||||||
EFFECTIVE DATE
September 1, 2013.
|
||||||||
COMPARISON OF ORIGINAL AND SUBSTITUTE
While C.S.H.B. 1624 may differ from the original in minor or nonsubstantive ways, the following comparison is organized and highlighted in a manner that indicates the substantial differences between the introduced and committee substitute versions of the bill.
|
||||||||
|