Louisiana Senate Bill SR183

Louisiana 2010 Regular Session

• Introduced: 6/21/10
• Passed: 6/21/10

Caption

Requests all members of the Louisiana Congressional Delegation to oppose a tax on foreign reinsurance.

Impact

If enacted, the tax on foreign reinsurance is likely to destabilize the availability and affordability of property and casualty insurance in Louisiana. As noted in the resolution, the proposed taxation could lead to fewer reinsurance options, thus increasing costs for businesses and families. This could hinder the recovery efforts post-hurricanes and undermine the ongoing initiatives by the Louisiana Legislature and Department of Insurance aimed at improving insurance access and affordability for its residents.

Summary

Senate Resolution No. 183 (SR183) calls on the Louisiana Congressional Delegation to oppose a proposed tax on foreign reinsurance companies. The resolution highlights the significance of affordable and accessible property and casualty insurance in Louisiana, particularly in light of the devastation caused by hurricanes over the last decade. It recognizes that the federal proposed tax would impact reinsurance costs, subsequently affecting the overall insurance market within the state. The resolution advocates for maintaining various reinsurance options to ensure that insurance companies can provide protection against financial loss from disasters.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SR183 appears to be overwhelmingly supportive, particularly among legislators who understand the implications of the proposed tax. It is framed as a proactive measure safeguarding Louisiana's interests in an already vulnerable insurance market. By urging the Congressional Delegation to oppose the foreign reinsurance tax, the resolution reflects a consensus that maintaining a robust reinsurance market is critical for protecting the residents and businesses impacted by natural disasters.

Contention

While the resolution aims to unite support against the proposed tax, notable contention exists regarding the long-term implications of foreign involvement in the reinsurance market. Some may argue for the benefits of limiting foreign influence on domestic insurance costs, while others warn of the adverse effects on competition and reinsurance availability. The balance between regulatory action and ensuring a competitive insurance market remains a contentious issue within discussions surrounding the resolution.