WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 47

Relating to the authority of a property owner to obtain an injunction restraining the collection of ad valorem taxes by a taxing unit if the taxing unit adopts a tax rate that exceeds the voter-approval tax rate and subsequently takes an action that constitutes a material deviation from the stated purpose of the tax increase.

89th Legislature, 2nd Called Session (2025) Introduced by Stan Lambert and 1 co-sponsor

Allows property owners to sue and block tax collection if a taxing unit exceeds voter-approved rates or materially deviates from promised tax revenue purposes.

Referred to Ways & Means
#citygovernment--finance(i0062) #civilremedies&liabilities(i0065) #countygovernment--finance(i0097) #elections--general(i0310) #taxation--property-assessment&collection(i0798) #taxation--property-taxrate(i0794)
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 47

Legislative bill overview

HB 47 would allow property owners to seek court injunctions to stop a taxing unit from collecting ad valorem (property) taxes if the unit adopts a tax rate exceeding what voters approved and then materially deviates from the stated purpose of the tax increase. This creates a new legal mechanism for taxpayers to challenge tax collection based on how revenues are used.

Why is this important

Texas has strict "voter-approval tax rate" limits that require voter consent for tax increases above a certain threshold. This bill adds enforcement power to those limits by letting property owners sue to halt tax collection if they believe the taxing unit broke its promise about how the tax money would be spent. It could significantly impact how cities, counties, and school districts manage and justify tax increases.

Potential points of contention

  • Definition ambiguity: "Material deviation" is undefined, creating uncertainty about what degree of budget reallocation triggers injunction eligibility and potentially leading to litigation over minor spending changes
  • Litigation burden: Property owners would need to prove in court that a deviation occurred, creating costs and delays that could tie up tax collection and government operations
  • Fiscal impact on services: If tax collection is frozen mid-year through injunctions, schools and critical services could face sudden funding gaps and operational disruption
  • Determining intent: Establishing the "stated purpose" of a tax increase and whether changes constitute deviation versus normal budget adjustment could be highly contentious

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

Sign in to ask a question.