Income Tax - Subtraction Modification - Public Safety Employee Retirement Income (Supporting Our 9-1-1 Specialists Act)
House Bill 13 would create a new rule for residential real estate sales involving individual buyers using a real estate broker. Before a seller accepts a contract of sale for single-family residential property, the contract may not include the individual buyer’s name. The bill is aimed at reducing the possibility that a seller or other decision-maker could infer protected characteristics from a buyer’s name and use that information, intentionally or unintentionally, in the housing decision.
The bill also requires that, before or during preparation of the contract, the individual buyer execute either a buyer-broker agreement or an unrepresented buyer agreement. That agreement must identify the buyer as an individual and include statements that the buyer has not misrepresented their status, has not been convicted of fraud related to a residential real property purchase, and intends to occupy the property as a principal residence. The bill expressly preserves existing requirements for identifying the buyer in deeds, mortgage documents, deeds of trust, initials on the contract, and the final contract at the time of acceptance.
In terms of state law, the bill would add a new section to the Real Property Article, Section 10-715, and would apply only to single-family residential real property transactions involving individual buyers and real estate brokers. It would not apply to corporate buyers, other business entities, or fiduciaries acting for third parties. The bill is prospective only and would take effect October 1, 2026, leaving prior contracts unaffected.
The stated policy goal is to support fair housing by reducing bias in housing decisions. The bill’s preamble emphasizes that names can reveal or be used to infer protected characteristics and that removing the buyer’s name from the contract before acceptance may help prevent discrimination. Because the available context includes no committee transcript or vote record, there is no documented legislative debate or recorded sentiment beyond the bill’s own stated anti-bias purpose.
Notable points of potential contention are the practical effects on real estate transaction procedures and the added compliance steps for brokers and buyers. The bill narrows its scope to individual buyers in brokered single-family home sales, which may limit controversy, but it also introduces a new contract-preparation requirement and a specific buyer certification that could raise questions about implementation, enforcement, and whether the measure meaningfully reduces discrimination without creating administrative burdens.
The bill would add Section 10-715 to the Real Property Article, changing how residential contracts of sale are prepared for single-family homes sold to individual buyers through a broker. It would prohibit inclusion of the buyer’s name in the contract before seller acceptance, while preserving existing identification requirements in deeds, mortgage documents, and the final accepted contract. The measure would not affect corporate or fiduciary purchases and would apply only prospectively to contracts entered on or after its effective date of October 1, 2026.
The bill appears to be framed positively as a fair housing and anti-bias measure, with its stated purpose focused on reducing intentional or unintentional discrimination in housing decisions. No committee transcript or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded opposition or support to assess beyond the bill text itself. Based on the language of the bill, the overall sentiment is supportive of privacy and fair housing protections.
The main areas of possible contention are whether removing a buyer’s name before acceptance will materially reduce bias, and whether the new process adds unnecessary complexity to real estate transactions. Brokers, sellers, and industry stakeholders may scrutinize the required buyer-broker or unrepresented buyer agreement, the fraud-related certification, and the limitation to individual buyers in single-family residential sales. The bill’s supporters would likely emphasize fair housing and privacy, while critics may focus on administrative burden, enforceability, and whether the measure addresses the root causes of housing discrimination.