2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB4281

HB4281 creates a civil claim for fraudulent crowdfunding: collecting donations on behalf of an intended recipient while intending to keep the donations instead of giving them to that recipient.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to a civil cause of action for fraudulent crowdfunding.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): McQueeney, Lalani, Leo Wilson, Lowe. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

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.

HB4281 creates a civil claim for fraudulent crowdfunding: collecting donations on behalf of an intended recipient while intending to keep the donations instead of giving them to that recipient.
If the recipient or estate wins the lawsuit, the court must award 125% of the donations collected through the fraud, plus reasonable and necessary attorney's fees.
The law also preserves the ability to pursue punitive, or exemplary, damages under Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 41.
The new claim applies only to causes of action that accrue on or after September 1, 2025.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB4281 creates a civil claim for fraudulent crowdfunding: collecting donations on behalf of an intended recipient while intending to keep the donations instead of giving them to that recipient. The person who engages in that conduct is liable to the intended recipient—the legal term is “donee”—or that person’s estate.

If the recipient or estate wins the lawsuit, the court must award 125% of the donations collected through the fraud, plus reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees. For example, $10,000 in qualifying donations produces a statutory award of $12,500 before attorney’s fees. The 125% is the stated award, not an additional 125% on top of another automatic refund.

The law also preserves the ability to pursue punitive, or exemplary, damages under Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 41. Those damages are not automatic: Chapter 41 includes heightened proof requirements, limits and exceptions, and a restriction concerning an election of multiplied recovery. HB4281’s permission to pursue a claim should not be read as guaranteeing that every requested recovery can be added together.

The new claim applies only to causes of action that accrue on or after September 1, 2025. It does not create a new criminal offense, provide this particular claim to every donor, or automatically make an online platform liable merely because a campaign used its service. The statutory definition turns on collecting on someone’s behalf with the intent to keep the money, not merely a disappointing result or an accusation of fraud.

What changed along the way?

The introduced bill already proposed the 125% remedy and ability to pursue punitive damages. The House substitute expressly included the recipient’s estate and added attorney’s fees.

The sole House floor amendment, adopted May 13, replaced generic references to a claimant with the recipient or estate and required attorney’s fees to be both reasonable and necessary. The engrossed, Senate committee and enrolled operative texts agree. The official history records Senate passage without further changes and 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?

Intended donation recipients and their estates gain an express legal remedy and fee recovery that may help make a lawsuit feasible. A fraudulent fundraiser faces more than repayment of the collected donations. Successful collection of a judgment still depends on circumstances such as the defendant’s available assets; the law does not guarantee recovery from an insolvent defendant.

The latest listed fiscal note, on the engrossed bill, anticipated no significant state or local fiscal impact and assumed government costs could fit existing resources. It did not quantify private litigation costs or money recoverable by victims.

Review boundary: This describes the new claim and its statutory remedies, not whether a specific campaign was fraudulent or how a court would resolve overlapping damages claims in a particular case.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.