HF3388 extends and clarifies the Minnesota premium security plan’s authority to assess group health carriers for benefit year 2027, with collection and administrative timelines tied to calendar year 2028. The bill authorizes a one-time assessment on group health carriers operating under the plan, requires the association to estimate, notify, collect, and remit the assessment, and allows carriers to seek a deferral if payment would place them in a financially impaired condition. If a deferral is granted, the deferred amount is redistributed among other carriers and the deferring carrier cannot receive reinsurance payments until the deferred assessment is paid.
The bill also updates the reinsurance program’s payment-parameter provisions and reporting requirements. It keeps the attachment point at $50,000, the coinsurance rate between 50 and 80 percent, and the reinsurance cap at $250,000 or less, while directing the board to consider the 2027 assessment when setting parameters. It further requires accounting for 2027 assessments and deferred amounts and expands public reporting on plan operations, including assessment revenue, reinsurance payments, and administrative costs.
Impact
The bill amends Minnesota Statutes sections 62E.23 and 62E.24 governing the Minnesota premium security plan and the Minnesota Comprehensive Health Association’s reinsurance operations. Its main legal effect is to extend assessment authority to fund reinsurance payments for benefit year 2027, establish the process for calculating and collecting those assessments, and add a deferral mechanism for financially impaired carriers. It also reinforces the board’s obligation to set payment parameters within available funding and to report detailed financial and operational information to the legislature and the public.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and caption, the measure appears to be a technical funding and administration bill for an existing reinsurance program rather than a major policy overhaul. The available context shows no recorded committee debate or votes, so there is no documented opposition or support in the provided materials. The bill’s structure suggests a pragmatic approach aimed at preserving program solvency and continuity.
Contention
The most likely point of contention is the carrier assessment itself, since it imposes a one-time charge on group health carriers and can be redistributed to other carriers if one receives a deferral. Carriers may also be concerned about the financial impact of the assessment, the deferral standards, and the prohibition on receiving reinsurance payments until deferred amounts are paid. Another possible issue is whether the assessment and payment-parameter changes are sufficient to keep the premium security plan and MNsure financially stable while maintaining premium relief in the individual market.
Similar To
Reinsurance assessment authority extension provision and commissioner of commerce application for a waiver continuation requirement provision
Prescription Drug Affordability Advisory Council eliminated, nondepository financial institution provisions modified, health plan regulatory alignment provided, duties transferred, premium security plan modified, appropriations reduced, and money appropriated.