Texas Senate Bill SB1491

Texas 2017 - 85th Regular

Caption

Relating to domestic surplus lines insurers; authorizing and imposing a tax.

Impact

The bill, if enacted, would enable domestic surplus lines insurers to operate more effectively by setting clear definitions and rules around their tax obligations and operational limitations. These insurers would be required to pay applicable premium taxes and maintenance taxes, similar to those imposed on authorized insurers. However, they would not be able to issue policies in the admitted market or those that satisfy certain financial responsibilities mandated by specific Texas laws. This change could influence the local insurance landscape by providing more options for consumers and businesses in need of specialized insurance coverage.

Summary

SB1491 aims to amend the existing Texas Insurance Code to establish a framework for domestic surplus lines insurers. By doing so, it introduces specific provisions that govern how these insurers operate within the state, designating them as domestic entities eligible to write insurance coverages without needing a typical certificate of authority used by standard insurers. This facilitates a more streamlined process for insurance companies seeking to engage in surplus lines insurance, which often covers niche markets and higher-risk categories that traditional insurers may not handle.

Sentiment

The general sentiment surrounding SB1491 appears to be cautiously optimistic among supporters. Proponents argue that it opens avenues for greater insurance options, potentially driving down costs and increasing availability for consumers in underinsured markets. Critics, however, may express concerns over regulatory oversight and whether allowing more surplus lines insurers could lead to increased risks for policyholders due to a lack of traditional regulatory frameworks. The debate seems to center on balancing market access with adequate consumer protections.

Contention

Notable points of contention could arise regarding the regulatory implications of allowing domestic surplus lines insurers to operate without the extensive oversight typically required for authorized insurers. Some stakeholders might argue that this creates gaps in consumer protections, as these insurers will be exempt from several existing insurance laws. Conversely, proponents may contend that the bill places necessary checks by imposing specific operational conditions and tax obligations on surplus lines insurers. The discussion reflects a broader debate about the trade-offs between regulatory flexibility and consumer safety in the insurance market.