Texas House Bill HB1590

Texas 2011 - 82nd Regular

• Introduced: 2/21/11
• Refer: 3/3/11

Impact

The impact of HB 1590 is primarily on the regulation and collection of fees associated with various governmental services. By allowing the suspension of fees when excess revenues are reported, the bill potentially alters the financial landscape for both taxpayers and the state. It offers a mechanism to relieve fees when state revenue conditions warrant such a move, ultimately assisting citizens who may be facing economic challenges. Additionally, it emphasizes the importance of the comptroller's role in monitoring and managing state finances.

Summary

House Bill 1590 pertains to the suspension of certain fees under specific conditions related to the general revenue fund in Texas. The bill mandates that if the revenue credited to particular accounts exceeds the amounts appropriated for a fiscal biennium, the comptroller is tasked with notifying fee collectors that the imposition of fees will be suspended. This suspension aims to ease the financial burden on individuals and entities subject to these fees, which can include fees for services or regulatory purposes.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding HB 1590 appears generally positive among supporters, who see it as a proactive measure to alleviate financial burdens during periods of surplus. Many view the flexibility to suspend fees as a beneficial adjustment to the financial policies of the state, making the government more responsive to the realities faced by its constituents. However, there could also be concern about potential disruptions to revenue streams that support various services funded by these fees, leading to critical discussions on fiscal responsibility versus taxpayer relief.

Contention

Notable points of contention regarding HB 1590 include discussions on how long the suspension of fees should last and whether the criteria set for excess revenue are adequate. While proponents argue it provides essential relief, detractors may worry about the implications of suspended fees on state services that rely on consistent revenue. There could also be debates about the need for transparency in the process whereby fees are suspended, particularly concerning the accountability of the comptroller's decisions and the protection of vital state services dependent on these fees.