Ok, even I have to admit that this is an area where state regulation is NOT working. Perhaps this legislation is the answer, but I would prefer to see the states work this out amongst themselves as they have done with so many issues. It’s not that difficult to determine the tax allocation and primary regulator.
Currently the states make surplus lines compliance virtually impossible for complex (and not so complex) multi state placements. They present a litany of excuses, such as it takes a legislative act to make changes, but the bottom line is protectionism – their own jobs and authority. The regulators talk about protecting the consumer but in this instance they are making it almost impossible for the insured to get the coverage they need with their outdated codes. Often times insureds have to go direct to non-admitted insurers to get the coverage they need because of antiquidated regulations and thinking so tell me, where is the consumer protection for a completely unregulated insurance transaction? Other than a direct procurement tax filing and payment requirement, there is none. Efforts have been made via the NAIC, NAPSLO and state SLA’s to bring uniformity to this subject to no avail. By sitting on their hands they are providing the feds a chance to usurp their authority and get their foot into the door of insurance regulation. I’m not at all fond of the idea of the feds coming in on this but the ongoing state inaction is inviting it. Of course, the way the act is currently worded the states will still have plenty of opportunity to create mischief with it.
Here Here!! I totally agree with Roy. As a wholesale broker often working on large complex multi-state accounts, there will NEVER be agreement at the state level to make the surplus tax filings an efficient and simple process….I doubt if one could get ever 2-3 states to agree.
What have states worked out among themselves before that is as important as this issue? This one is big. If NAPSLO agrees this is a good thing, that is good enough for me.
Well, this may surprise you, but I agree with everything Roy said as well. It’s a nightmare now. I would point to progress in the states with respect to producer licensing, nationwide, electronic through NIPR. As was mentioned, the NAIC is working on this and all it would really take is a model law, through NAIC or NCOIL to agree on tax allocation and primary regulator. As Roy also points out, this federal bill may not be the panacea it’s made out to be because the states are still involved. It’s a state regulatory system and this calls for a state-based solution. NAPSLO is also working very hard at the NAIC and NCOIL to fashion a model based on a compact. Again, the states have shown themselves willing to join compacts to modernize insurance regulation.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
Ok, even I have to admit that this is an area where state regulation is NOT working. Perhaps this legislation is the answer, but I would prefer to see the states work this out amongst themselves as they have done with so many issues. It’s not that difficult to determine the tax allocation and primary regulator.
Currently the states make surplus lines compliance virtually impossible for complex (and not so complex) multi state placements. They present a litany of excuses, such as it takes a legislative act to make changes, but the bottom line is protectionism – their own jobs and authority. The regulators talk about protecting the consumer but in this instance they are making it almost impossible for the insured to get the coverage they need with their outdated codes. Often times insureds have to go direct to non-admitted insurers to get the coverage they need because of antiquidated regulations and thinking so tell me, where is the consumer protection for a completely unregulated insurance transaction? Other than a direct procurement tax filing and payment requirement, there is none. Efforts have been made via the NAIC, NAPSLO and state SLA’s to bring uniformity to this subject to no avail. By sitting on their hands they are providing the feds a chance to usurp their authority and get their foot into the door of insurance regulation. I’m not at all fond of the idea of the feds coming in on this but the ongoing state inaction is inviting it. Of course, the way the act is currently worded the states will still have plenty of opportunity to create mischief with it.
Here Here!! I totally agree with Roy. As a wholesale broker often working on large complex multi-state accounts, there will NEVER be agreement at the state level to make the surplus tax filings an efficient and simple process….I doubt if one could get ever 2-3 states to agree.
What have states worked out among themselves before that is as important as this issue? This one is big. If NAPSLO agrees this is a good thing, that is good enough for me.
Well, this may surprise you, but I agree with everything Roy said as well. It’s a nightmare now. I would point to progress in the states with respect to producer licensing, nationwide, electronic through NIPR. As was mentioned, the NAIC is working on this and all it would really take is a model law, through NAIC or NCOIL to agree on tax allocation and primary regulator. As Roy also points out, this federal bill may not be the panacea it’s made out to be because the states are still involved. It’s a state regulatory system and this calls for a state-based solution. NAPSLO is also working very hard at the NAIC and NCOIL to fashion a model based on a compact. Again, the states have shown themselves willing to join compacts to modernize insurance regulation.
Anytime the Federal government says they are going to do something to help us we need to run away as fast as possible.
Florida has done a great job maybe they will share with other states.