Michigan Senate Bill SB0872

Michigan 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/18/26
• Refer: 3/18/26
• Report Pass: 4/21/26
• Refer: 4/21/26

Caption

Appropriations: department of insurance and financial services; appropriations for fiscal year 2026-2027; provide for. Creates appropriation act.

Summary

SB 872 is a fiscal year 2026-2027 appropriations bill for the Michigan Department of Insurance and Financial Services (DIFS). As introduced, it provides a very small gross appropriation of $100 from the state general fund/general purpose for the department and authorizes the expenditure of those funds for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2027. The bill is structured as a standard appropriations act, with a line-item appropriation section and general sections tying the spending to the state budget framework. The bill also includes the usual boilerplate governing appropriations, stating that the spending is subject to the Management and Budget Act and identifying the amount of state spending from state sources as $100.00, with no funds directed to local units of government. In practical terms, the measure is a budget vehicle for DIFS rather than a policy bill, and it does not appear to amend substantive insurance or financial-services statutes beyond authorizing the department’s annual funding.

Impact

SB 872 would affect state law primarily by setting the annual appropriation for the Department of Insurance and Financial Services for fiscal year 2026-2027 and by making that appropriation available for expenditure under existing budget law. It does not create new regulatory powers or change insurance, banking, or financial-services statutes; instead, it operates within the state appropriations framework and the Management and Budget Act to authorize spending for the department’s operations.

Sentiment

The available voting history suggests the bill received generally favorable committee support, as it was reported favorably with a substitute by an 11-5 vote on April 21, 2026. Because there are no committee transcripts provided, there is little direct evidence of debate themes or public testimony. Overall, the sentiment appears to be routine and budget-oriented rather than highly controversial, though the recorded split vote indicates some disagreement among committee members.

Contention

The main point of contention appears to be the appropriations level and the substitute version reported by committee, rather than any substantive policy change. The 11-5 vote indicates that a minority of members opposed the measure or the substitute, but no transcript is available to identify specific objections. Given the bill’s minimal appropriation and lack of policy changes, any disagreement likely centered on budget priorities, process, or the adequacy of funding for DIFS rather than on the department’s mission itself.