Texas House Bill HB 3078

Texas 2025 - 89th Regular

• Filed: 2/20/25
• Out of House Committee: 4/23/25

Caption

Relating to manufacturer fees for operation of a real-time electronic logging system to track over-the-counter sales of ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or norpseudoephedrine; imposing a fee; authorizing an administrative penalty.

Summary

HB 3078 would require manufacturers of products containing ephedrine, pseudoephedrine, or norpseudoephedrine sold in Texas to pay a monthly fee to the administrator of any real-time electronic logging system used by a business to report over-the-counter sales of those products. The bill defines a “system administrator” as the entity that develops, implements, and maintains the logging system, and it requires the fee to be set at a fair and reasonable amount by each administrator. The bill also authorizes the Texas Department of State Health Services, upon request, to require manufacturers to provide written proof that the required fees have been paid. If a manufacturer fails to pay, the department may impose an administrative penalty under existing law. The fee requirement would apply only to fees imposed on or after the 30th day after the bill’s effective date, and the act would take effect immediately if approved by a two-thirds vote in each chamber, otherwise on September 1, 2025.

Impact

HB 3078 would amend Chapter 486 of the Texas Health and Safety Code by adding a new section governing manufacturer funding for real-time electronic logging systems used to track retail sales of precursor chemicals commonly associated with methamphetamine production. It shifts part of the cost of operating these systems from retailers or system operators to manufacturers of the covered products, and it gives the state an enforcement mechanism through administrative penalties for nonpayment.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and available legislative context, the measure appears to have been treated as a public health and regulatory bill with no recorded committee debate or floor vote history in the provided materials. Its progress to a committee report being sent to Calendars suggests it received enough support to advance, and there is no evidence in the supplied record of organized opposition or amendment-driven controversy.

Contention

The main potential point of contention is the new monthly fee imposed on manufacturers, since the bill requires them to help finance the logging systems used by retailers and leaves the fee amount to be set by system administrators as long as it is “fair and reasonable.” Manufacturers may object to the added cost, the lack of a specific statutory cap, or the administrative burden of proving compliance to the department. Supporters would likely view the fee as a way to sustain monitoring systems that help prevent diversion of precursor chemicals used in illegal drug manufacturing.