To Amend The Law Concerning Standards For Insurance Policies; And To Revise The Notice Requirements Of An Insurer For A Premium Increase.
Summary
SB70 amends Arkansas insurance law to change the advance notice an insurer must give when renewing a policy with a premium increase of 25% or more on a renewal term of 12 months or less. Under current law, the insurer must notify the insured’s agent at least 30 days before the effective date of renewal and the insured at least 10 days before renewal. The bill lengthens both notice periods, requiring notice to the agent at least 60 days in advance and notice to the insured at least 30 days in advance.
The bill is narrowly focused on premium-increase notice requirements and does not change the threshold for when the notice rule applies. It applies to renewal policies with significant rate increases, giving policyholders and their agents more time to review the change, shop for alternatives, or address the increase before coverage renews.
Impact
SB70 amends Arkansas Code § 23-79-307(a)(6)(A), a provision governing insurer notice obligations for substantial premium increases on renewal policies. The practical effect is to impose earlier disclosure deadlines on insurers, increasing consumer lead time before a large renewal-rate hike takes effect. The bill affects insurers, insurance agents, and policyholders in Arkansas, particularly those renewing short-term policies with increases of 25% or more.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests strong bipartisan support and little to no opposition. The bill passed the Senate 35-0 and the House 98-0 on third reading, indicating broad agreement that consumers should receive more advance notice of major premium increases. No committee transcript discussion was provided, and the unanimous votes suggest the measure was viewed as a straightforward consumer-protection update rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
No specific points of contention are reflected in the provided materials. Because the bill only extends notice deadlines without altering the 25% trigger, any debate would likely have centered on whether the longer notice periods are necessary or burdensome for insurers. However, the unanimous votes and lack of recorded committee debate indicate that no significant opposition emerged in the legislative process.