A thread in GD made me think of the very few places I've seen 30.06 signs, but also only a few 30.05.  It seems that if a location was posted as 30.06 & 30.07, but not 30.05 that leaving your LTC elsewhere would allow you to carry (unless otherwise banned such as a 50%/51% business or a school).  

I think it will take Case Law to resolve this. To be charged with 06/07, an LTC must:

carries a concealed handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code

It is undefined what Under the Authority means. Legally issued? ID physically on your person?

We do know though you need to be carrying a license and a handgun to have 46.15 Non-Applicability:

(b)  Sections 46.02, 46.03(a)(14), and 46.04(a-1) do not apply to a person who:
(6)  is carrying:
(A)  a license issued under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, to carry a handgun; and
(B)  a handgun:

I wouldn't doubt your comment about case law eventually settling the question.  However, I tend to think that the LTC ID follows the same requirement as a common DL.  TX transportation code 521.025 requires one to physically carry/possess their DL while driving.  

If you read down in the section, however, it describes a "defense to prosecution" if the accused had a valid DL at the time.  Now, defense to prosecution doesn't mean the lack of a citation or in some cases arrest at the time of the contact by an officer, but realistically I doubt the majority of cops exercise that option unless other factors are present to warrant that action.

I'm not Saul Goodman by any means, but I bet the LTC follows the same requirement as the DL, and maybe case law might be required to settle that if it's not already spelled out somewhere.  LE can usually always verify the existence of a valid DL or LTC out in the field, but they usually are not prohibited from taking some form of action even then.

I think their is a misunderstanding here. OP wants to leave LTC at home and be treated like a NON-LTC.

That works for 46.15 and 30.05, as their N/A defenses require a LTC and handgun in your possession.

But 30.06 & 30.07 do not. They just have the Under Authority verbage. So an LTC could still be charged with an 06/07 offense even if if LTC is left at home, unless Case Law says leaving LTC at home means you are not carrying Under Authority.

That's reaching.   The Leo would really have to want to charge you in that situation.  When I was patrol I never wrote fail to display dl to anyone with a valid dl.

I think you are missing it also

1) This has nothing to do with a DL or displaying any ID.

2) Here is issue - OP has LTC and his friend does not. Both are legally armed and concealed. They go to the mall. Mall has 30.06/07 signs only. Friend is not LTC, so those signs are irrelevant to him. He walks right in. OP has LTC, cannot pass signs. OP wants to know if he goes back to car and leaves LTC there, can he then enter as he is no longer in possession of his LTC and is no different than friend who is already legally armed and in mall.

This is one of the known issues since MPA and it has not really been addressed by legislature or AG.

As usual, Texas makes their laws more complicated than it needs to be.  I have a flow-chart diagram at work to try to decipher it at work.  It's a clusterfuck and completely unnecessary.  This state and its stupid 'signage' laws. Now theres three signs.  

Since the person is issued a LTC I'm betting an anti-gun county D.A. will not give them any ways-out of a trespassing 'notice' since as a LTC you know what 3006 3007 is when you walk in and you are a LTC holder.

But that said its usually a class-C misdemeanor offense not withstanding some other 'protected' places.

To cloud the issue a bit further, does the "required warning/notification" issue apply equally to the 30:05 situation?  By that I mean that scenario where in the case of a business/facility having appropriate prohibition signs posted, but someone enters that facility with their concealed weapon.  

Somehow someone with that business happens to see that you are carrying and warns you of their policy of no-carry.  The person carrying claims failure to see or realize their prohibition but leaves without any problem or confrontation which relieves the person carrying from being charged with anything.

Does the "pardon me I didn't know" exception apply to all current prohibition signs and regs?  It also brings up a question about how is the business/facility supposed to know whether the carrier has an LTC or is just doing CC?

No, I have not read nor tried to study and refresh on all the current conditions of concealed or open carry.  My head hurts.