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

← Back to bills

2025 · Regular session · House bill

HB5061

HB5061, the Texas Integrity in State Contracting and Privacy Protection Act, prohibits state contractors, subcontractors and vendors responding to solicitations from using surveillance, intimidation or confidential information to…

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to prohibiting certain activities by contractors and vendors of state agencies; providing administrative penalties.

Became law without signatureSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists House author(s): Leach, Isaac. 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.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

HB5061, the Texas Integrity in State Contracting and Privacy Protection Act, prohibits state contractors, subcontractors and vendors responding to solicitations from using surveillance, intimidation or confidential information to interfere with state government and contracting. It covers all state-agency procurements, including comptroller purchases, delegated purchasing, transportation contracts and university purchases using local or institutional funds that are excluded from some other Chapter 2261 rules.

Protected people include legislators and legislative staff, their family members, state-agency employees—including independent contractors—and people raising concerns about agency operations or contracting. Prohibited conduct includes unauthorized surveillance; intimidation, coercion, extortion or undue influence intended to influence, silence or retaliate against those people; and using private or confidential information to manipulate contracting decisions. “Surveillance” excludes collecting publicly available information, including information available through a public subscription service, and information-gathering with express or contractual authorization. That exclusion does not authorize intimidation or misuse of confidential information.

The state auditor oversees enforcement, must maintain a confidential hotline and online complaint portal, and must investigate and determine whether a violation occurred within 90 days of receiving a complaint. Anyone who believes prohibited conduct occurred may complain. Suspected crimes go to the Texas Rangers for investigation and, where appropriate, referral to the attorney general for prosecution. The auditor may collaborate with the Ethics Commission.

After a final violation determination, contracts are subject to immediate termination without further obligation. A first violation carries an administrative penalty up to $500,000 and a ten-year ban on bidding for or receiving state contracts; if it involves undue influence or misuse of private or confidential information, the ceiling is $2 million and the ban is fifteen years. A repeat violation brings a permanent ban and a penalty up to $1 million, or $2 million for those aggravated circumstances. Individuals directing violations may also be penalized. The law reaches specified affiliated companies, agents, joint ventures and other connected entities even if they are not direct parties to the state contract. The auditor must notify the comptroller, which informs agencies so they can avoid prohibited awards.

The law also creates a civil retaliation claim for employees and other knowledgeable people who report violations or cooperate in government contracting investigations. Retaliation includes blacklisting, harassment and adverse changes to employment, contracts or state services. Available relief includes damages, punitive damages, costs and reasonable attorney fees, with employment-related damages and reinstatement subject to the statutory conditions. The auditor must provide legal assistance to a person bringing such a suit.

For suspension or termination of employment, the law requires suit or notice to the Texas Workforce Commission within 90 days; someone using the notice option then has 90 days after delivery to file suit. The plaintiff ordinarily bears the burden of proof. The statute also contains a rebuttable presumption for an employment suspension or termination within 120 days of reporting or cooperating; its wording specifically refers to reporting “abuse, neglect, or exploitation,” so it should not be read as an automatic win in every retaliation case. Venue can be the county where the plaintiff lives, worked for the defendant, or where the defendant does business.

The act became law without the governor’s signature on May 29, 2025, and took effect September 1, 2025. Joint auditor/Rangers reports on complaints, outcomes and penalties are due each September 1, beginning in 2026. Enacted text · Official history.

What changed along the way?

The introduced and House committee texts matched. The adopted Leach–Capriglione House amendment added the act’s name, recognized contractual authorization, excluded public and public-subscription information from surveillance, and removed the explicit social-media-monitoring example. It added legislative family members to the protected group and allowed complaints by people other than the direct target.

The amendment also extended enforcement to affiliated entities and directed the comptroller to circulate determinations. It broadened retaliation protections to other knowledgeable people and state-service relationships, added lost-services language, expressly covered testimony and expanded the employment presumption window from 60 to 120 days. The main penalty amounts and contract-ban periods were already in the introduced bill. The House-engrossed, Senate committee and enrolled operative texts match. Text versions · Amendment index and disposition.

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?

Public officials, agency workers, complainants and whistleblowers gain protections against pressure connected with state contracting. Vendors gain a clearer distinction between prohibited surveillance and ordinary collection of public information. Companies and affiliated entities face potentially large penalties, lost contracts and lengthy or permanent exclusion if violations are established; they may incur compliance and investigation costs even though the bill does not estimate those private costs.

The latest fiscal note expects no significant state fiscal impact, assumes agencies can absorb costs with existing resources, and anticipates no local-government fiscal impact. Penalty revenue is uncertain and not expected to be significant. That forecast is not a promise that the new investigations, reporting and legal-assistance duties require no work.

Official sources

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