California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Passed Assembly 1 R cosponsors

AB 683 — Business entities: limited liability companies.

Last action — From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Assembly
  4. 4
    Passed Senate
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has passed the Assembly. Introduced February 14, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.

Next likely step: consideration and a floor vote in the Senate.

Prognosis

Advancing 48% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

High

How often bills like it became law.

  • Passed Assembly

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 R).

  • Cleared a recorded vote

    Passed 3 recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

In plain language

The bill allows LLCs to certify their existence and authority to streamline certain transactions.

This bill permits limited liability companies (LLCs) to present a certification of their existence and authority to relevant parties. It aims to clarify the representation of authorized signers and facilitate reliance on these certifications in transactions.

What this means for you
  • Small Business: Small businesses operating as LLCs will benefit from streamlined processes for verifying their existence and authority.

Summary

Existing law, the California Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act, establishes procedures governing the formation and regulation of limited liability companies in this state. Existing law requires a limited liability company (LLC) to file certain information, including its articles of organization and amendments to those articles, with the Secretary of State. This bill would authorize an LLC to present a certification of the LLC's existence and authority to a licensed escrow agent, licensed real estate broker, and person or entity engaged in the business of title insurance to establish the present existence of the LLC and identify those with authority to act on its behalf. The bill would require the certification of LLC existence to confirm specified facts or contain certain information, including that its operating agreement or other governing documents have not been revoked, modified, or amended in a manner that would cause the representations contained in it to be incorrect. The bill would require the certification to be in the form of an acknowledged declaration signed by all authorized signers of the LLC and would permit the certification to be recorded with the county recorder, as specified. This bill would authorize a person whose interest may be affected by the LLC's certification to rely, directly or indirectly, as specified, on the representations in the certification. The bill would further provide that a person who acts in reliance upon a certification without actual knowledge that the representations contained in it are incorrect is not liable to any person for so acting. The bill would provide that any transaction and lien created thereby, entered into by the LLC's authorized signer and a person acting in reliance upon a certification and authority, shall be enforceable against the LLC's assets, except as specified. This bill would also authorize a person to record a certification of LLC existence and authority that relates to an interest in real property in the county recorder in any county in which the real property is located. The bill would require the county recorder to impose a fee prescribed by law for recording that document sufficient to cover its reasonable costs. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a new duty on county recorders, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to committee. Read second time, amended, and re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  2. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  3. In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.

  4. Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 70. Noes 0. Page 3884.)

  5. Read second time. Ordered to Consent Calendar.

  6. From committee: Do pass. To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 15. Noes 0.) (January 22).

  7. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

  8. Read second time and amended.

  9. From committee: Amend, and do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To Consent Calendar. (Ayes 8. Noes 0.) (January 12).

  10. Re-referred to Com. on B. & F.

  11. From committee chair, with author's amendments: Amend, and re-refer to Com. on B. & F. Read second time and amended.

  12. Referred to Com. on B.&F.

  13. From printer. May be heard in committee March 17.

  14. Read first time. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

AB 683 Davies Consent Calendar Second Day

Passed 70 Yea · 0 Nay · 10 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 52007
Republican 17003
Unaffiliated 1000
Total 700010
% of votes cast 88%0%0%13%
How each member voted (80)
Member Party Vote
Ávila Farías — Yea
Addis, Dawn Democratic Yea
Aguiar-Curry, Cecilia M. Democratic Yea
Ahrens, Patrick Democratic Yea
Alvarez, David Democratic Yea
Arambula, Joaquin Democratic Not Voting
Bains, Jasmeet Democratic Yea
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Not Voting
Bennett, Steve Democratic Yea
Berman, Marc Democratic Yea
Boerner, Tasha Democratic Yea
Bonta, Mia Democratic Yea
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Carrillo, Juan Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Elhawary, Sade Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Gabriel, Jesse Democratic Yea
Garcia, Robert Democratic Yea
Gipson, Mike A. Democratic Not Voting
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Haney, Matt Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Hart, Gregg Democratic Yea
Irwin, Jacqui Democratic Yea
Jackson, Corey A. Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Lee, Alex Democratic Not Voting
Lowenthal, Josh Democratic Yea
McKinnor, Tina Democratic Yea
Muratsuchi, Al Democratic Yea
Nguyen, Stephanie Democratic Yea
Ortega, Liz Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Papan, Diane Democratic Yea
Patel, Darshana R. Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Petrie-Norris, Cottie Democratic Yea
Quirk-Silva, Sharon Democratic Yea
Ramos, James C. Democratic Yea
Ransom, Rhodesia Democratic Not Voting
Rivas, Robert Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Celeste Democratic Not Voting
Rodriguez, Michelle Democratic Yea
Rogers, Chris Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Schultz, Nick Democratic Yea
Sharp-Collins, LaShae Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Not Voting
Ward, Christopher M. Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Wilson, Lori D. Democratic Yea
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Yea
Alanis, Juan Republican Yea
Castillo, Leticia Republican Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Not Voting
Davies, Laurie Republican Yea
DeMaio, Carl Republican Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Ellis, Stan Republican Not Voting
Flora, Heath Republican Not Voting
Gallagher, James Republican Yea
Gonzalez, Jeff Republican Yea
Hadwick, Heather Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Johnson, Natasha Republican Yea
Lackey, Tom Republican Yea
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Yea
Patterson, Joe Republican Yea
Sanchez, Kate Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea
Wallis, Greg Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass. To Consent Calendar.

Passed 15 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 4000
Democratic 11000
Total 15000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (15)
Member Party Vote
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Yea
Calderon, Lisa Democratic Yea
Caloza, Jessica Democratic Yea
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
González, Mark Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Yea
Pellerin, Gail Democratic Yea
Solache, Jr., José Luis Democratic Yea
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Yea
Wicks, Buffy Democratic Yea
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea
Hoover, Josh Republican Yea
Ta, Tri Republican Yea
Tangipa, David J. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass as amended, and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations] with recommendation: To Consent Calendar

Passed 8 Yea · 0 Nay · 1 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 7000
Republican 1001
Total 8001
% of votes cast 89%0%0%11%
How each member voted (9)
Member Party Vote
Fong, Mike Democratic Yea
Krell, Maggy Democratic Yea
Rodriguez, Michelle Democratic Yea
Rubio, Blanca E. Democratic Yea
Schiavo, Pilar Democratic Yea
Soria, Esmeralda Democratic Yea
Valencia, Avelino Democratic Yea
Chen, Phillip Republican Not Voting
Dixon, Diane Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

finance housing labor technology
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does AB 683 do?
Existing law, the California Revised Uniform Limited Liability Company Act, establishes procedures governing the formation and regulation of limited liability companies in this state. Existing law requires a limited liability company (LLC) to file certain information, including its articles of organization and amendments to those articles, with the Secretary of State. This bill would authorize an LLC to present a certification of the LLC's existence and authority to a licensed escrow agent, licensed real estate broker, and person or entity engaged in the business of title insurance to establish the present existence of the LLC and identify those with authority to act on its behalf. The bill would require the certification of LLC existence to confirm specified facts or contain certain information, including that its operating agreement or other governing documents have not been revoked, modified, or amended in a manner that would cause the representations contained in it to be incorrect. The bill would require the certification to be in the form of an acknowledged declaration signed by all authorized signers of the LLC and would permit the certification to be recorded with the county recorder, as specified. This bill would authorize a person whose interest may be affected by the LLC's certification to rely, directly or indirectly, as specified, on the representations in the certification. The bill would further provide that a person who acts in reliance upon a certification without actual knowledge that the representations contained in it are incorrect is not liable to any person for so acting. The bill would provide that any transaction and lien created thereby, entered into by the LLC's authorized signer and a person acting in reliance upon a certification and authority, shall be enforceable against the LLC's assets, except as specified. This bill would also authorize a person to record a certification of LLC existence and authority that relates to an interest in real property in the county recorder in any county in which the real property is located. The bill would require the county recorder to impose a fee prescribed by law for recording that document sufficient to cover its reasonable costs. Because the bill would expand the crime of perjury and impose a new duty on county recorders, the bill would create a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for specified reasons.
Who sponsors AB 683?
AB 683 is sponsored by Davies, Laurie (Republican).
What is the current status of AB 683?
This bill has passed the Assembly. Introduced February 14, 2025. It now moves to the second chamber.
Where can I track AB 683?
Track AB 683 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on AB 683

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of AB 683

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →