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 · Senate bill

SB140

SB140 expressly brings text, graphic and image solicitations into the telephone-solicitation definition and expands ways to enforce Texas telemarketing laws.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to certain definitions relating to the regulation of and private rights of action arising from certain solicitation-related communications.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists Senate author(s): Hall. 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.

SB140 expressly brings text, graphic and image solicitations into the telephone-solicitation definition and expands ways to enforce Texas telemarketing laws.
Chapter 302 now uses Chapter 304’s definition of “telephone call.” Its “telephone solicitation” definition expressly includes other transmissions, such as texts and images, initiated by a seller or salesperson to induce someone to purchase, rent, claim or receive an item.
The bill makes violations of Chapters 304 and 305 enforceable through public or private rights and remedies under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the state’s consumer-protection law.
Registration guidance matters: The Secretary of State’s current notice says that, following the state’s position and an agreement in the Ecommerce Marketers Alliance litigation, a business sending texts with the consumer’s prior consent is not required to complete the Chapter 302 Telephone Solicitation Registration Statement.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

SB140 expressly brings text, graphic and image solicitations into the telephone-solicitation definition and expands ways to enforce Texas telemarketing laws. Signed June 20, 2025, it took effect September 1, 2025 and applies only to conduct on or after that date. Official history; final law.

Chapter 302 now uses Chapter 304’s definition of “telephone call.” Its “telephone solicitation” definition expressly includes other transmissions, such as texts and images, initiated by a seller or salesperson to induce someone to purchase, rent, claim or receive an item. This is not a ban on every text message: the communication’s purpose, applicable definitions and existing exemptions matter. Telephone-call definition; Examples of existing exemptions.

The bill makes violations of Chapters 304 and 305 enforceable through public or private rights and remedies under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act, the state’s consumer-protection law. It also says that having recovered more than once in earlier private actions under Chapters 302, 304 or 305 cannot, by itself, limit recovery in a later proceeding. It does not guarantee a payment merely because someone received a message or previously won a case.

Registration guidance matters. The Secretary of State’s current notice says that, following the state’s position and an agreement in the Ecommerce Marketers Alliance litigation, a business sending texts with the consumer’s prior consent is not required to complete the Chapter 302 Telephone Solicitation Registration Statement. The notice relies on the incorporated definition’s exclusion for agreed transmissions through an ad-based telephone service. This is the agency’s registration guidance, not a statement that consent excuses every possible telemarketing or consumer-protection violation. Official registration notice and FAQs.

What changed along the way?

The introduced, Senate committee and engrossed versions were much narrower: they added only the cross-reference defining “telephone call” and the September 1 effective date. The House committee substitute added the express text/graphic/image language, the protections against limiting later recoveries merely because of multiple prior recoveries, the Deceptive Trade Practices Act enforcement provisions, and the prospective-conduct rule. All versions; Senate-passed version; House substitute.

The House committee and enrolled operative texts match. The official amendment index lists no floor amendments; the House substitute was the change the Senate accepted May 30. The additional enforcement provisions are enacted law, not merely language proposed in an earlier draft. Amendment index; Enrolled law.

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?

The latest posted fiscal note, May 16, 2025 for the House substitute, anticipates no significant state or local fiscal impact and assumes costs can be absorbed with existing resources. But it separately says civil-penalty revenue cannot be determined because the number of violations is unknown. Earlier notes addressed the narrower bill. Latest fiscal note.

People subjected to unlawful solicitations gain additional enforcement tools, and covered businesses face potential consumer-protection litigation as well as existing compliance duties. Damages, attorney’s fees, notice requirements and defenses depend on the remedy pursued and the facts; SB140 does not create an automatic fixed-dollar award for every message. The underlying consumer-protection law includes enhanced damages in specified circumstances and fees for certain groundless or bad-faith actions. Consumer-protection remedies and fee rules; Presuit notice provisions.

The law does not guarantee fewer unwanted messages or quantify private litigation costs. Businesses should not infer from the government-budget estimate that compliance or lawsuit exposure is cost-free, nor infer from the registration notice that all consent-based communications are exempt from every other rule. Enacted scope; Registration guidance.

Official sources

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