INSURANCE – Adds to existing law to establish provisions regarding transparency requirements for certain insurers.
House Bill 618 would add a new section to Idaho insurance law requiring fire insurers to provide greater transparency when they use wildfire risk models, catastrophe models, or wildfire risk scoring methods. Before using a rate filing, a fire insurer would have to submit complete filings to the Department of Insurance at least 60 days in advance, including the model used, how it affects rates, actuarial support for rating factors, mitigation discounts, and how the model is used in underwriting decisions.
The bill also requires insurers to make public website information about mitigation discounts, incentives, premium adjustments, and the process for appealing a wildfire risk score. Insurers that use wildfire risk scores or mitigation discounts would have to provide annual written notices to applicants and policyholders explaining the score, the score range, the property’s relative position in that range, the reasons for the score, and how mitigation actions could change it. The bill further requires insurers to provide wildfire risk scores at application, renewal, nonrenewal, and after a qualifying mitigation request, and it directs the Department of Insurance to collect Idaho-specific data on exposures, premiums, and claims, then publish consumer education materials and anonymized, aggregated data online by January 1, 2027.
The bill would amend Chapter 24, Title 41, Idaho Code by creating a new transparency framework for fire insurers and wildfire-related underwriting practices. It would expand the Department of Insurance’s oversight role by requiring advance filing review, annual data collection, and public-facing consumer education, while also protecting non-anonymized, non-aggregated department documents as proprietary information exempt from public records disclosure. Insurers would need to adjust compliance, disclosure, and notice practices for property insurance policies affected by wildfire risk modeling.
The available record shows the bill was introduced by the House Business Committee and referred to that committee, with no recorded floor votes or committee transcript excerpts provided. Based on the bill text, the measure appears aimed at consumer transparency and wildfire-risk accountability rather than restricting insurer use of models outright. The overall framing suggests a policy effort to improve disclosure and consumer understanding of wildfire-related pricing and underwriting.
The main points of potential contention are likely to be the breadth of required disclosures, the administrative burden on insurers, and the extent to which proprietary risk models and underwriting methods must be revealed to regulators and consumers. Insurers may object to requirements to disclose model descriptions, score ranges, reasons for individual scores, and mitigation impacts, while consumer advocates would likely support those disclosures as necessary for fairness and appealability. Another possible issue is the Department of Insurance’s discretion to determine the scope and method of annual data collection, which could raise concerns about regulatory reach and confidentiality.