An Act Extending The Sunset Date For Personal Risk Insurance Rate Filings.
Summary
HB 6897 extends the sunset date for Connecticut’s streamlined personal risk insurance rate filing authority from July 1, 2025 to July 1, 2030. The bill applies to personal risk insurance, excluding residual market rates, and allows insurers to file certain rate changes with the Insurance Commissioner that take effect upon filing, so long as the filing stays within specified limits. Those limits remain a maximum overall statewide change of 6% in the aggregate and no more than a 15% change in any individual territory for the coverages included in the filing.
The bill preserves the existing framework that permits only one filing per insurer in any 12-month period unless combined filings still remain within the statutory caps. It does not change the percentage thresholds or the basic filing process; it simply keeps the current expedited rate-filing mechanism in place for an additional five years. In practical terms, the measure continues a regulatory option for insurers writing personal risk lines such as homeowners and related property/casualty coverages.
Impact
The act amends subsection (a) of section 38a-688a of the Connecticut General Statutes by replacing the existing sunset date with July 1, 2030. As a result, insurers may continue using the statute’s alternative rate-filing procedure for personal risk insurance without prior approval, subject to the same statewide and territorial limits and filing frequency restrictions. The bill affects insurers, policyholders in personal risk lines, and the Insurance Commissioner’s oversight process, but it does not alter the underlying rate caps or expand the scope of covered insurance beyond the existing statute.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have enjoyed broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the Insurance and Real Estate Committee 12-1, the House 143-1, and the Senate 36-0, indicating strong consensus that the existing rate-filing authority should be continued. The voting pattern suggests lawmakers generally viewed the extension as a routine reauthorization rather than a controversial policy change.
Contention
The only apparent point of contention was whether the expedited rate-filing authority should continue at all, since the bill extends a mechanism that allows rates to take effect upon filing rather than through a more traditional approval process. Any concerns would likely center on consumer protection, rate oversight, and the potential for premium increases within the allowed caps. However, the near-unanimous votes indicate that such concerns were limited and did not generate significant opposition in the legislative process.