WeVote

Bill

Bill

HB 270

Relating to the revocation of certain licenses of persons found to have engaged in price gouging during a declared disaster.

89th Legislature, 2nd Called Session (2025) Introduced by Lauren Simmons

Texas bill would revoke professional licenses of those found price gouging during declared disasters, creating strong financial penalties beyond existing legal consequences.

Filed
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 270

Legislative bill overview

HB 270 would authorize the revocation of professional licenses for individuals or businesses found to have engaged in price gouging during declared disasters in Texas. The bill creates a direct consequence mechanism linking price gouging violations to loss of licensure, affecting various regulated professions and businesses.

Why is this important

Price gouging during disasters—when consumers are most vulnerable and have limited alternatives—is widely viewed as exploitative. This bill attempts to create a meaningful deterrent beyond existing criminal or civil penalties by threatening loss of livelihood. It reflects growing concern about disaster-related price inflation following major events like hurricanes and winter storms that have affected Texas.

Potential points of contention

  • Definition clarity: The bill's effectiveness depends on how "price gouging" is legally defined; overly broad definitions could penalize legitimate supply-chain responses to scarcity, while narrow ones may not capture exploitative behavior
  • Due process concerns: License revocation is a severe penalty that affects someone's ability to earn a living; critics may argue this requires robust procedural protections and clear evidence standards
  • Scope and enforcement: Determining which licenses qualify and how enforcement agencies identify price gouging across thousands of businesses during chaotic disaster periods presents significant practical challenges
  • Economic impact debate: Businesses argue excessive penalties may discourage disaster-area operations entirely; consumer advocates counter that this is necessary to protect vulnerable populations

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

Sign in to ask a question.