Kansas Senate Bill SB22

Kansas 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Filed/Introduced: 8/8/26
• Introduced: 1/16/25
• Refer: 1/17/25
• Report Pass: 2/4/25
• Engrossed: 2/25/25
• Refer: 2/25/25
• Report Pass: 3/5/25

Caption

Requiring title agents to make their audit reports available for inspection instead of submitting such reports annually, requiring the amount of surety bonds filed with the commissioner of insurance to be $100,000 and eliminating the controlled business exemption in certain counties.

Summary

SB 22 makes several changes to Kansas insurance law focused on title insurance agents and related market conduct rules. First, it changes the audit-report requirement for title insurance agents: instead of automatically submitting annual audit reports to the commissioner of insurance, agents must keep the audit available for inspection upon request. The bill also requires title insurance agents handling escrow, settlement, or closing accounts to maintain a $100,000 surety bond or irrevocable letter of credit, replacing the prior population-based bond schedule that allowed lower bond amounts in smaller counties. The bill also revises title insurance anti-rebate and controlled-business provisions. It eliminates the controlled-business exemption for certain counties, meaning the restrictions on accepting title business tied to controlled business apply more broadly. It adds or clarifies disclosure and reporting requirements for title business referrals involving financial interests, and it preserves the commissioner’s authority to adopt rules and regulations to implement these provisions. In addition, the bill updates the list of unfair insurance practices in Kansas, including provisions related to title insurance inducements, privacy, domestic abuse, living organ donors, and value-added products and services. Overall, the bill’s impact is to tighten oversight of title insurance escrow and closing operations, increase financial security for consumers through a uniform bond requirement, and strengthen restrictions on referral-based or controlled title business arrangements. It also modernizes portions of the unfair-practices statute by incorporating newer insurance-market concepts such as real-time payments, value-added services, and consumer privacy standards. The general sentiment reflected in the voting history appears strongly favorable. The Senate passed the bill unanimously, and the House later passed it by a substantial margin, indicating broad bipartisan support. No committee transcript was provided, so there is no recorded debate to suggest significant opposition in the available materials. The main points of contention likely concern the practical burden on title agents, especially smaller firms and those in rural counties, because the bill removes lower bond thresholds and narrows the controlled-business exemption. Those changes may increase compliance costs and limit business arrangements that had previously been allowed in some counties. At the same time, the bill appears designed to protect consumers and reduce conflicts of interest in title insurance transactions, which likely explains its broad support.

Impact

SB 22 amends K.S.A. 40-1137, 40-1139, and 2024 Supp. 40-2404 and repeals the existing versions of those sections. It changes title agent audit handling, requires a uniform $100,000 surety bond or letter of credit for title agents handling escrow/closing accounts, and expands or clarifies title insurance conduct rules, including controlled-business restrictions and disclosure obligations. The bill affects title insurance agents, title insurers, producers of title business, consumers in real estate closings, and the Kansas commissioner of insurance.

Sentiment

The available voting record shows strong support for the bill. The Senate passed SB 22 unanimously, and the House passed it by a wide margin. With no committee transcript available, there is no documented floor or committee opposition in the provided materials, suggesting the bill was viewed as a technical but consumer-protective insurance measure.

Contention

The likely areas of contention are the increased regulatory burden on title insurance agents and the elimination of the controlled-business exemption in certain counties. Smaller or rural title agents may object to the higher, uniform bond requirement because it replaces a lower tiered structure based on county population. Title industry participants who rely on referral relationships or affiliated business arrangements may also object to the tighter disclosure and anti-inducement rules. Supporters, by contrast, would emphasize consumer protection, escrow security, and reduced conflicts of interest.