Connecticut Senate Bill SB01003

Connecticut 2025 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/22/25
• Refer: 1/22/25

Caption

An Act Establishing A Dental Loss Ratio.

Impact

One of the significant impacts of this bill is the requirement for dental insurers that do not meet the established loss ratio to issue rebates to covered individuals. This provision is designed to protect consumers from excessive administrative costs and ensure that their premiums are being effectively utilized for necessary dental care. Additionally, the bill calls for detailed expenditure reporting by dental insurers, which aims to provide transparency regarding how premiums are allocated between patient care and other expenses.

Summary

SB01003, titled 'An Act Establishing A Dental Loss Ratio', aims to implement a dental loss ratio of at least eighty-three percent for dental insurance policies in the state. This means that any dental insurer must ensure that at least 83% of the premiums collected are used for direct patient care rather than administrative expenses, marketing, and profits. The intent behind this legislation is to promote accountability among dental insurers and ensure that consumers receive fair value for their insurance premiums.

Conclusion

Overall, SB01003 represents an effort to enhance consumer protections in the dental insurance market by ensuring that a significant portion of insurance premiums goes toward patient care. This legislation could have repercussions for both consumers and dental insurers, potentially leading to improved service quality and transparency while also raising questions about implementation and compliance.

Contention

Notable points of contention surrounding SB01003 may emerge from industry stakeholders, particularly dental insurers who might argue that such regulations could lead to increased operational burdens. Insurers may also express concerns about the feasibility of consistently meeting the mandated loss ratio, especially in an unpredictable healthcare environment. Furthermore, the bill could provoke discussions about the balance between regulatory oversight and the autonomy of insurers to manage their operations.