Relating to the confidentiality of certain home address information in property tax appraisal records.
HB 1798 expands the list of people who may keep home address information confidential in property tax appraisal records. The bill amends Section 25.025 of the Tax Code to add several new categories of eligible individuals, including employees and former employees in law enforcement, prosecution, courts, juvenile justice, child and adult protective services, public defense, federal protective services, border protection, emergency services, and certain other public safety and justice-related roles. It also continues protections for victims of family violence, sexual assault, stalking, and trafficking, as well as participants in the address confidentiality program.
Under the bill, qualifying individuals may shield their home address information from disclosure in appraisal records by providing the required proof of status, such as certification, a protective order, or other documentary evidence. The measure is framed as a confidentiality and privacy protection bill rather than a tax policy change, but it affects the administration of local property tax appraisal records and the information available to the public through those records.
The bill would broaden the scope of Tax Code Section 25.025, increasing the number of individuals whose home address information must be kept confidential in property tax appraisal records. This would affect county appraisal districts and other local property tax record systems by requiring them to recognize additional protected categories and process confidentiality requests from more classes of public servants and vulnerable individuals. The bill does not change property tax rates or valuation rules, but it does expand privacy protections and limit public access to certain appraisal record data.
The available context shows no recorded committee testimony or floor votes, so there is no direct evidence of controversy or support levels from debate. Based on the bill’s subject matter and structure, it appears to be a protective measure aimed at privacy and safety for public safety personnel, justice-system workers, and victims of violence or trafficking. The bill’s referral to the Delivery of Government Efficiency committee suggests it was treated as an administrative records issue rather than a partisan policy fight.
The main policy question raised by the bill is how far confidentiality protections should extend in public property tax records. Support would likely come from the affected groups and agencies concerned with safety and privacy, especially law enforcement, prosecutors, judges, child protection workers, public defenders, emergency responders, and victims’ advocates. Potential concerns could come from transparency or records-access interests, or from local appraisal districts that would need to implement and verify a broader set of eligibility categories, but no specific opposition is documented in the provided materials.