Minnesota House Bill HF3290

Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/5/25
• Refer: 5/5/25

Caption

Premium reductions for accident prevention course completion expanded to all insureds.

Impact

The proposed changes in HF3290 could significantly impact state laws related to automobile insurance regulations. It mandates insurers to provide a premium reduction for completion of approved accident prevention courses, which is expected to incentivize participation in driver safety education. Additionally, the bill imposes a regulatory responsibility on the commissioner of public safety to adopt rules governing course structure, including establishing curriculum requirements and certification processes. As more drivers are likely to undertake these courses, it may lead to an overall decrease in accident rates, positively influencing insurance premiums and helping to enhance road safety in Minnesota.

Summary

House Bill 3290 focuses on expanding premium reductions for automobile insurance for all insured individuals who complete an accident prevention course. The bill amends Minnesota Statutes 2024, specifically section 65B.28, to ensure that insureds aged 55 and older can earn a minimum 10% discount on their private passenger vehicle insurance policies upon successful completion of an approved safety course. By broadening eligibility to all insureds, not just seniors, the intention is to encourage safer driving habits across the insured population, aiming to reduce accidents and, subsequently, insurance costs for everyone involved.

Contention

While the bill presents clear benefits regarding potential reductions in insurance costs and enhanced road safety, there may be contention around the implications of mandatory participation in the courses for insured individuals. Questions may arise about the feasibility of accessible course offerings and whether this could inadvertently create an additional financial burden for those who may not be able to afford the premium increase prior to earning the discount. Moreover, discussions around the effectiveness of mandatory education for all age groups might spark debate regarding targeted measures versus broad requirements intended for a more generalized approach.