• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Reinsurance Focus

New reinsurance-related and arbitration developments from Carlton Fields

  • About
    • Events
  • Articles
    • Treaty Tips
    • Special Focus
    • Market
  • Contact
  • Exclusive Content
    • Blog Staff Picks
    • Cat Risks
    • Regulatory Modernization
    • Webinars
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Reinsurance Regulation / STATE LAW UPDATE: CAPTIVE REINSURANCE ISSUES DOMINATE

STATE LAW UPDATE: CAPTIVE REINSURANCE ISSUES DOMINATE

July 28, 2008 by Carlton Fields

The end of the state legislative season has been dominated by developments regarding captive insurers, although there have been a few other interesting developments as well.

  • Louisiana has entered the captive insurer arena with a statute, SB 150, providing for the formation and operation of domestic captive insurance companies (effective January 1, 2009).
  • Hawaii has amended its already established captive structure by enacting a bill (S 3023), which we previously reported, to provide for Special Purpose Financial Captive Insurance Companies, effective July 1, 2008.
  • The Utah Insurance Department has proposed an amendment to its captive insurer regulations, proposed regulation R590-238, relating to the financial, reporting, record-keeping and other requirements for captive insurance companies. The comment period for this proposed regulation ends August 14, 2008; no hearing has yet been set.

In the non-captive area, the New York Insurance Department has issued two interesting opinions, one stating that a licensed insurance broker may compensate a non-licensee for referrals made to the broker, and another providing that an insurer may not pay an insurance commission to an entity which is not licensed and appointed as an insurance agent or broker.

The US Congress has entered the reinsurance regulation arena, considering H.R. 6213, which, if enacted, would establish the Reinsurance International Solvency Standards Evaluation Board, which would be charged “to evaluate the reinsurance supervisory systems of the States of the United States and jurisdictions outside the United States to determine, on a uniform basis, whether such systems provide adequate capital and risk management standards and an acceptable level of prudential supervision over their domiciled reinsurers.”

This post written by Rollie Goss.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation, Week's Best Posts

Primary Sidebar

Carlton Fields Logo

A blog focused on reinsurance and arbitration law and practice by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Focused Topics

Hot Topics

Read the results of Artemis’ latest survey of reinsurance market professionals concerning the state of the market and their intentions for 2019.

Recent Updates

Market (1/27/2019)
Articles (1/2/2019)

See our advanced search tips.

Subscribe

If you would like to receive updates to Reinsurance Focus® by email, visit our Subscription page.
© 2008–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · Disclaimers and Conditions of Use

Reinsurance Focus® is a registered service mark of Carlton Fields. All Rights Reserved.

Please send comments and questions to the Reinsurance Focus Administrators

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.