WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2747

Relating to requiring certain health care entities to submit notice of material change transactions to the attorney general and the attorney general's authority to conduct certain related studies; imposing civil and administrative penalties.

89th Legislature (2025) Introduced by James Frank

Texas health care entities must notify the attorney general before completing major ownership or structural changes, allowing regulatory review and enforcement penalties for violations.

Committee report sent to Calendars
#attorneygeneral(v2811) #civilremedies&liabilities(i0065) #consumerprotection(i0080) #healthcareproviders(i0387) #hospitals(i0400) #stateagencies #boards&commissions(i0749)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2747

Legislative bill overview

HB 2747 requires certain health care entities in Texas to notify the state attorney general before completing "material change transactions"—typically mergers, acquisitions, or significant ownership changes. The bill empowers the attorney general to study these transactions and impose civil and administrative penalties for non-compliance.

Why is this important

Health care consolidation has accelerated across the country, raising concerns about reduced competition, higher prices, and diminished patient choice. This bill gives Texas regulators advance notice and investigative authority to assess whether proposed transactions harm consumers or competition before they close, rather than after.

Potential points of contention

  • Definition clarity: "Material change transaction" may be vaguely defined, creating uncertainty about which deals require notification and potentially capturing routine business arrangements
  • Business burden vs. public interest: Healthcare entities argue advance notice requirements slow transactions and add compliance costs; consumer advocates counter that transparency is essential for market oversight
  • Attorney general's discretionary power: The bill grants broad authority to study transactions and impose penalties without explicit standards for when the AG can block or condition deals, raising concerns about regulatory overreach or inconsistent enforcement
  • Competitive impact: Hospitals and health systems may argue excessive scrutiny chills beneficial consolidations; critics counter that without oversight, anti-competitive deals proceed unchecked

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.