Insurance: health insurers; methods of payments and reimbursements for dental benefits; provide for. Amends 1956 PA 218 (MCL 500.100 - 500.8302) by adding sec. 3406ss.
Summary
Senate Bill 105 would amend Michigan’s Insurance Code to require health plans and nonprofit dental care corporations that provide dental benefits to offer at least one payment or reimbursement method that delivers the full amount owed to the dentist without requiring the dentist to pay a fee to access the funds. The bill expressly excludes fees charged by the dentist’s own financial institution. It also allows a dentist to opt out of a payment method, with that choice remaining in effect until the dentist opts back in or a new contract is signed.
The bill applies to dental benefits policies delivered, issued for delivery, or renewed in Michigan after the effective date. In practical terms, it would regulate how dental insurers and dental care corporations disburse claim payments, and it would protect dentists from being forced into payment systems that reduce their reimbursement through access or transaction fees. The measure is limited to dental benefits and does not change coverage requirements for other types of health care services.
Impact
SB 105 would add a new section 3406ss to the Insurance Code of 1956, creating a statutory payment-rights requirement for dental benefit plans and nonprofit dental care corporations operating under Michigan law. It would affect insurers, dental care corporations, and dentists by mandating a fee-free reimbursement option and by preserving a dentist’s opt-out election until changed by the dentist or replaced through a new contract. The bill would apply prospectively to new, issued, or renewed dental benefits policies after enactment.
Sentiment
The available legislative history suggests strong support for the bill. It was reported favorably without amendment in committee and then passed the Senate unanimously, 36-0. The lack of recorded opposition in the votes indicates broad agreement with the bill’s goal of improving dental payment practices and reducing costs imposed on providers.
Contention
No committee transcript is available, and the recorded votes show no formal opposition. Based on the bill text, any potential contention would likely center on insurer and dental plan administration concerns, such as limits on preferred payment platforms, operational costs, and contract flexibility. On the other side, dentists and provider advocates would likely support the measure because it guarantees access to full reimbursement without mandatory access fees and preserves the ability to opt out of unwanted payment methods.