2025 · Regular session · House bill
HB4170
HB4170 requires lawsuits brought under the Property Code's private-transfer-fee subchapter to be filed in the county where the real property is located.
Official caption: Relating to venue in certain actions involving private transfer fees for real property.
Official report lists House author(s): Hayes. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.
Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.
Bill highlights
Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.
- HB4170 requires lawsuits brought under the Property Code's private-transfer-fee subchapter to be filed in the county where the real property is located.
- The new venue rule—venue means the geographic place for the lawsuit—applies to actions filed on or after September 1, 2025.
- A private transfer fee generally is money payable when an interest in real property is transferred or for the right to make or accept a transfer.
What does it do?
HB4170 requires lawsuits brought under the Property Code’s private-transfer-fee subchapter to be filed in the county where the real property is located. It expressly overrides other law on this point, but excludes actions brought by the Texas attorney general.
The new venue rule—venue means the geographic place for the lawsuit—applies to actions filed on or after September 1, 2025. Earlier-filed cases remain governed by the earlier law.
A private transfer fee generally is money payable when an interest in real property is transferred or for the right to make or accept a transfer. Property Code Sections 5.201 and 5.202 define the covered obligations and exclude numerous ordinary payments, including specified sale consideration, broker commissions, lender payments and qualifying association fees. HB4170 does not move every real-estate dispute into this rule merely because a fee appears on a closing statement.
What changed along the way?
The bill adds Section 5.208 to existing Subchapter G. It changes where covered actions are brought, not the subchapter’s substantive rules on whether a fee is valid, notice requirements or purchaser protections. The attorney general retains the existing enforcement provisions in Section 5.207, without being bound by this new venue requirement.
The introduced text, House committee report, engrossed text, Senate committee printing and enrolled text have identical operative provisions. The amendment index lists no amendments. The history records the governor’s June 20 signature.
For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.
Official bill versions
Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.
Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?
Property owners and fee claimants gain a clear county-based filing rule for these disputes. It can reduce choices about where to sue and may shift travel or litigation burdens toward parties located away from the property. It does not guarantee either side wins or receives a fee refund.
The latest fiscal note anticipated no significant state or local-government fiscal impact, assuming state costs could be absorbed using existing resources. It did not quantify changes in private litigation costs.
Review boundary: This is a venue change for actions under the specified subchapter, not a new tax, a new statewide transfer fee, or a ruling on a particular property’s obligations.
Official sources
- Bill history and latest recorded action
- Bill versions, analyses and fiscal notes
- Action history and votes
- Amendment index
Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.
