• 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 REINSURANCE AND CAPTIVE DEVELOPMENTS

STATE REINSURANCE AND CAPTIVE DEVELOPMENTS

March 3, 2011 by Carlton Fields

The following are select State bills relevant to the areas of reinsurance and captive insurance.

Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform: Since our posting of January 18, 2011, the legislatures of Mississippi (HB 785), Vermont (HB 164), and West Virginia (HB 2963) are among other states that have introduced legislation in response to the mandates of the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 of the Dodd-Frank Act. Vermont’s bill appears to be modeled after the surplus lines proposal approved by the National Conference of Insurance Legislators (“NCOIL”). A companion bill (SB 0036) to HB164 was introduced in Vermont’s Senate. West Virginia’s bill contains an express reference to the surplus lines proposal approved by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”). Mississippi’s bill, which passed the House of Representatives on February 2, 2011 and was subsequently transmitted to the Senate, does not appear to follow either the NAIC or the NCOIL surplus lines proposal.

Reinsurance and Taxation: Texas’ House of Representatives introduced legislation (HR 243) expressing its opposition to federal legislation (H.R. 3424) introduced in the U.S. House of Representatives and to any other proposal that would limit the use of reinsurance by non-U.S.-based insurance companies. As previously reported in our post of August 17, 2009, H.R. 3424 seeks to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to disallow the deduction for excess non-taxed reinsurance premiums with respect to the United States risks paid to affiliates.

Captive Insurance: West Virginia introduced legislation (HB 2983) that would, among other things, subject captive insurers organized in the state as risk retention groups to additional provisions of the Insurance Code, including, but not limited to, section fifteen-a, article four (credit for reinsurance; definitions; requirements; trust accounts; reductions from liability; security; effective date). A companion bill (SB 356) to HB 2983 was introduced in West Virginia’s Senate. Additionally, Montana introduced legislation (HB 419) that would establish requirements for the operation of captive insurance companies and for interaction between captive insurance companies and their protected cells. Among other things, the bill revises the qualification for protected cell sponsors and participants.

This post written by Karen Benson.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation

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.