Fiscal impact reports (FIRs) are prepared by the Legislative Finance Committee (LFC) for standing finance
committees of the Legislature. LFC does not assume responsibility for the accuracy of these reports if they
are used for other purposes.
F I S C A L I M P A C T R E P O R T
SPONSOR Gurrola/Silva/Lara
LAST UPDATED
ORIGINAL DATE 2/28/25
SHORT TITLE
Providing Immigration Help Without
License
BILL
NUMBER House Bill 574
ANALYST Chavez
ESTIMATED ADDITIONAL OPERATING BUDGET IMPACT*
(dollars in thousands)
Agency/Program
FY25 FY26 FY27
3 Year
Total Cost
Recurring or
Nonrecurring
Fund
Affected
NMAG
No fiscal
impact
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Indeterminate
but minimal
Recurring General Fund
Parentheses ( ) indicate expenditure decreases.
*Amounts reflect most recent analysis of this legislation.
Sources of Information
LFC Files
Agency Analysis Received From
New Mexico Attorney General (NMAG) Secretary of State (SOS) Health Care Authority Department (HCAD)
Agency Analysis was Solicited but Not Received From
Cultural Affairs Department (DCA) Homeland Security and Emergency Management Department (DHSEM)
SUMMARY
Synopsis of House Bill 574
House Bill 574 (HB574) would amend the definition of “unfair or deceptive trade practice” in
the Unfair Practices Act to include the provision of immigration consultation or services without
being licensed to practice law or without working under a licensed attorney’s supervision.
HB574 also clarifies that NMSA 1978, Section 14-14A-24(C)’s prohibition of non-attorneys
performing notarial acts and identifying as a “notario” or “notario publico” is an unfair or
deceptive trade practice.
This bill does not contain an effective date and, as a result, would go into effect 90 days after the
Legislature adjourns if enacted, or June 20, 2025.
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS
The bill strengthens the Unfair Practices Act by explicitly prohibiting non-attorneys or those not
supervised by an attorney from offering immigration services. This increases the New Mexico House Bill 574 – Page 2
Attorney General’s (NMAG) enforcement responsibilities, but, as NMAG notes, it’s uncertain if
the agency will need more resources or staff to handle the added workload; this analysis assumes
HB574’s fiscal impact would be indeterminate but minimal.
SIGNIFICANT ISSUES
NMAG provides the following:
The existing Immigration & Nationality Law Practice Act (INLPA), NMSA 1978, §§ 36-
3-1 to -10, already prohibits similar conduct. The INLPA is intended “to prevent the
unauthorized practice of law by nonlawyers who hold themselves out as immigration
consultants rendering services in immigration, nationality or citizenship matters and who
are outside pertinent federal regulations regulating the practice of immigration law.” §
36-3-2. The INLPA currently prohibits rendering “for compensation any service
constituting the unlawful practice of law,” which the INLPA defines as giving “legal
advice of any kind or act[ing] on behalf of a client in any legal matter without
authorization under the INLPA.” § 36-3-3(D), -5. The NMAG is authorized to enforce
the INLPA, and “persons having an interest or right which is or may be adversely
affected under the [INLPA] may initiate an action for private remedies [under the UPA].”
§ 36-3-6.
The term “immigration consultations or services” is undefined. It appears that that
HB574 is intended to prohibit nonlawyers from offering what are functionally legal
services. If this is the case, the term could read instead “immigration law consultations or
services” to provide greater clarity.
The Secretary of State provides the following:
Under existing law, a person who uses the term "notario" or "notario publico" who is not
a licensed attorney is guilty of a misdemeanor for each violation and upon conviction
shall be punished by a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000) or by
imprisonment for a period not exceeding six months, or both.
Under the Revised Uniform Law on Notarial Acts, the State Ethics Commission “may
revoke, suspend or impose a condition on a notarial officer for any act or omission that
demonstrates that the individual lacks the honesty, integrity, competence or reliability to
act as a notarial officer.”
ALTERNATIVES
NMAG suggested an alternative is to continue to prosecute conduct similar to that covered in
HB574’s modification of the Unfair Practices Act under the existing Immigration & Nationality
Law Practice Act.
FC/hj