Transcript Highlights:

• Valuing a business means retaining valuation experts, going through the future projections of the company
• Valuing a business means retaining valuation experts, going through the future projections of the company
• :42:18.520><c> having</c><01:42:19.239><c> a</c> imposed um but having a imposed um but having a valuation
• ><c> three</c><01:42:21.679><c> years</c><01:42:21.960><c> and</c><01:42:22.159><c> imposing</c> valuation
• every three years and imposing valuation every three years and imposing upon<01:42:23.000><c> tax</c

Committee: Senate Judiciary

Summary: The Judiciary Committee heard several bills on January 30. SB 286 and SB 287 both concerned supplemental funding for the Honolulu Department of the Prosecuting Attorney: SB 286 for the career criminal prosecution unit and SB 287 for the victim witness assistance program. Testimony from the department explained that these bills are filed each year because the Attorney General’s core budget allocation may not be sufficient, though the department said the core had recently been increased and the supplemental request might no longer be necessary. For SB 287, the department also warned of a possible federal Victims of Crime Act funding freeze that could cut about $1.88 million and severely harm victim services. Both bills drew support from county and community witnesses, and members asked about prior-year funding and why the requests were limited to fiscal 2025-26; no votes were taken in the excerpt. SB 289, from the State Ethics Commission, would create a more uniform administrative fine process under the ethics code and lobbyist law. The commission said the measure would not change substantive enforcement but would let it issue a notice and order of fine first, with the respondent able to request a hearing within 20 days, which would speed up cases that are not factually disputed. Members questioned whether the bill would deny due process or function like an automatic parking ticket, and the commission responded that respondents could still challenge the fine and that the process would apply to violations with fines under $1,000. The committee also heard SB 304, which would add 11 positions for the First Circuit Adult Client Services Branch; Judiciary testimony said probation caseloads are high, with an average of 116 cases per officer, and the added staff would help meet national supervision standards and better serve higher-risk clients. Members asked whether the positions were already in the budget and about current staffing ratios; the witness said the positions were not already funded and that the Judiciary supported the bill with amendments. The committee then heard SB 311, a proposed constitutional amendment to exclude spending money to influence elections from protected free speech. Testimony was strongly divided: supporters argued that Citizens United has distorted elections and empowered special interests, while opponents warned the language was too broad and could affect nonprofit advocacy and grassroots groups. Finally, SB 313 would impose a 1% wealth asset tax on individuals with $20 million or more in assets. The Department of Taxation said it had concerns about the bill’s ambiguity and administration and noted it would require annual valuation and likely additional resources; opponents, including family business representatives and the Tax Foundation of Hawaii, argued the tax would be difficult and costly to administer, would require sensitive business disclosures, and could force family businesses to pay from company cash. Supporters said wealthy residents should pay a fair share. The committee heard testimony and questions on these bills, but the excerpt does not show final committee votes or actions.

Transcript Highlights:

• individual because, you know, if you're somebody who, I mean, the statistics are pretty clear, the actuaries
• It's why the Casualty Actuarial Society says that geography is considered one of the primary drivers
• Pennsylvania study that was done under Democratic Governor Tom Wolf's administration found strong actuarially
• DOI prevents us from going below and making it sort of too small, which also makes sense from an actuarial

Committee: Joint Joint Committee on Financial Services

Summary: The Joint Committee on Financial Services held a public hearing on a wide range of auto insurance and vehicle-related bills. Testimony focused heavily on autonomous vehicle regulation, auto insurance rating by ZIP code, rental car liability coverage, and surcharge thresholds for minor accidents. Representative Polito supported a bill to regulate autonomous vehicle testing and deployment, arguing for school-zone restrictions, slower speeds, a remote kill switch, and minimum insurance requirements to protect the public. Representative Mendez and Senator Payano testified for legislation to reduce racial and socioeconomic inequities in auto insurance pricing by limiting the weight insurers may place on territorial loss costs, while the Mass Insurance Federation and Consumer Federation of America offered opposing and supporting views, respectively, on the fairness and actuarial impact of geographic rating. The committee also heard support for a bill to remove inspection-sticker violations from license-point calculations, and for a bill to raise the damage threshold for insurance surcharges and minor/major accident classifications. A substantial portion of the hearing addressed House Bill 1301 on rental car liability. Enterprise Mobility, the American Car Rental Association, and a small Massachusetts rental company supported the bill, saying personal auto insurers should be primary when their insureds drive rental cars, that Massachusetts is an outlier compared with most other states, and that the change would reduce costs and simplify claims handling. The Mass Insurance Federation opposed the bill, arguing that current Massachusetts law already clearly makes the vehicle owner’s policy primary and that shifting liability would raise costs for private-passenger policyholders. Committee members asked detailed questions about how rental coverage works, whether premiums or rental rates would change, and how other states handle the issue. The committee also heard testimony on a bill to adjust surcharge rules for at-fault accidents, with sponsors arguing that repair costs and vehicle values have risen sharply and that the current thresholds are outdated. Members discussed how the point system affects drivers, whether the proposal should apply cumulatively or per incident, and how Carfax and out-of-pocket repairs factor into consumer costs. At the end of the hearing, the chair noted written testimony could still be submitted and, during a brief personal privilege, recorded support for two underinsurance bills, H. 1109 and S. 748. The committee then moved and seconded a motion to adjourn, and the hearing ended without any votes on the bills themselves.

Transcript Highlights:

• Senator, I'm going to give you one more real-life experience that dramatically, in the if you actuarially
• Senator, I'm going to give you one more real-life experience that dramatically in the, if you actuarially
• Actuarially, that shouldn't vary if that's what they projected on. Now, there could be, I mean.
• months and finally you give them access to where they can get that care, sure, short term, but actuarially

Bills: HB198 , HB325 , HB488 , HB719 , HB749 , HB755 , HB797 , HB823 , HB1028 , HB1194 , HB1222

Committee: Senate Finance

Keywords: TOPS-Tech, scholarship, education, eligibility, college credit, dual enrollment, state funding, HB 488, Belle Chasse Bridge, Belle Chasse Bridge Merit-Based Special Fund, Plaquemines Parish, severance tax, state general fund, special fund, transportation funding, DOTD, Department of Transportation and Development, public-private partnership, P3 contract, toll reduction

Transcript Highlights:

• The fundamental things that have to be true before you do that: number one is you have to have an actuary
• They have an actuary, and it is their job to protect their clients from financial risk, so they happen
• Percy's actuary basically said he would support any rate of return assumption between 6.5 percent and
• So the end that we're asking for would be considered fine with the actuary.

Committee: Senate Commerce and Human Resources

Transcript Highlights:

• THERE ARE A THEY CAN SUBMIT THEIR OWN ACTUARIAL INDICATIONS IN THE OFFICE WHAT THEY WANT THEIR OVER RISK
• BASED ON KNOWN RISKS THAT CAN EVOLVE FROM CATASTROPHIC EVENTS AND IT IS DESIGNED TO MAXIMIZE AND ACTUARIALLY
• SOUND WAY THE OVERALL AMOUNT OF RISK THE PROPERTY IS BRING TO THE POOL MAXIMIZE AND ACTUARIALLY SOUND
• AND HAS TO BE ACTUARIALLY SOUND AND TO BE FRANK A ONE LOOK AT ONE WALL WHEN THE STUDY IS NOT ENOUGH FOR

Transcript Highlights:

• It's an actuarial surplus. It's generated from two sources.
• been working on this for five years, trying to get it done ever since Jay Lark reported about this actuarial

Committee: House Appropriations

Transcript Highlights:

• Those were years in which the board, upon recommendation from our actuary, reduced our expected rate
• The actuary recommended increasing the payroll growth by 0.25% to reflect price inflation growth over
• The actuary four-year experience study.
• The gray line, in contrast, is the actuarial rate of return using a five-year smoothing.
• We just received it last week, but we got our actuary report last night, and that impact would be for

Committee: Senate Finance

Transcript Highlights:

• You know, high solutions for high valuations, historic buildings and churches that are having struggles
• Um you know high solutions<01:25:20.000><c> for</c><01:25:20.239><c> high</c><01:25:20.480><c> valuations
• </c><01:25:21.360><c> historic</c> solutions for high valuations historic solutions for high valuations
• It doesn't— not every one of these needs to be custom actuarially analyzed.

Transcript Highlights:

• This division includes actuaries that review premium rates, compliance analysts that review contract
• But at the same time, when there's a period of uncertainty, those inflated actuarial assumptions were
• But at the same time, when there's a period of uncertainty, those inflated actuarial assumptions were
• So I will just say that our, we don't want to be in the position of setting rates, but our actuaries
• We have internal and external actuaries. We use our own claims experience to set our premiums.

Committee: House Insurance

Transcript Highlights:

• And there has been an actuarial showing very little to no impact on the current actuary.
• And there has been an actuarial showing very little to no impact on the current actuary.
• Uh so with that being current actuary.
• This bill was presented to PPOB and the actuarial analysis showed a negligible impact.
• a and the actuarial analysis showed a negligible<01:34:41.120><c> impact.

Transcript Highlights:

• It sets up a review process by the OIC to look at actuarial reports.
• It sets up a review process by the OIC to look at actuarial reports.
• It sets up a review process by the OIC to look at actuarial reports.
• Representative Schmick said the bill is moving in the right direction but that the actuarial analysis
• Representative Schmick said the bill is moving in the right direction but that the actuarial analysis

Summary: The committee began with a public hearing on Substitute House Bill 1592, which would change how state public defense funds are distributed and, in the substitute version, keep current law on state funding responsibility while revising the allocation formula. Staff explained the bill would shift county and city distributions to a pro rata, caseload-based model, allow very low-density counties to request OPD to provide some or all public defense services, require additional data collection and reporting, and direct OPD to study caseload reductions and retention. Representative Peterson said the bill is meant to create a better structure for future state support of indigent defense without the very large cost of the original proposal. Testimony from counties, cities, OPD, defenders, and local officials was strongly supportive, emphasizing a statewide public defense crisis, rising local costs, staffing shortages, and the need for a fairer funding model. The committee then heard Substitute House Bill 1742 on environmentally sustainable urban design and Substitute House Bill 1906 on water system regulation and water rates. HB 1742 would create a center in Ecology to promote sustainable urban design, fund design competitions and grants, and establish an advisory council; the sponsor said the bill reflects a desire to support a pilot project through alternative funding, and there was no public testimony. HB 1906 would require more planning and notice for Group A water systems, add customer notice and right-of-first-refusal provisions for some ownership changes, and direct the UTC to consider external funding sources, capital planning, and rate smoothing when setting water rates. Water utility and PUD witnesses supported the goal of improving transparency and consolidation of failing small systems, while noting the substitute reduced some fiscal concerns. The committee also heard HB 2248 on Secretary of State corporate and charity filings, HB 2438 creating the SEED scholarship for early childhood education students, and HB 2515 addressing emerging large energy use facilities such as data centers. HB 2248 would redirect part of annual filing fees to the Secretary of State revolving fund, require initial reports from nonprofits and LLPs, and change trademark certificate procedures; the fiscal note showed modest revenue losses, and the division supported restoring the fee split for operational funding. HB 2438 would transfer $10 million annually from the GET account to fund scholarships and wraparound services for early childhood education degree seekers, with testimony from early learning advocates and a student describing workforce shortages and personal financial barriers. HB 2515 drew extensive testimony both for and against: supporters said it would protect ratepayers, water resources, and grid reliability by requiring tariffs, reporting, clean-energy requirements, and a fee on large energy users; opponents argued it singled out data centers, could hurt investment and jobs, and included unrelated labor and procurement provisions. After public testimony, the committee moved into executive-session briefing on several bills and amendments, including HB 1903 on statewide low-income energy assistance, HB 1909 on a court unification task force, HB 1982 on vacating certain convictions tied to treaty Indian rights, HB 2034 on LEOFF Plan 1 retirement changes, HB 2105 on employer notice of federal I-9 audits, HB 2210 on ranked-choice voting, HB 2215 on Climate Commitment Act fuel supplier obligations, and HB 2271 on post-consumer recycled content requirements. Staff summarized proposed substitutes and amendments, with several changes aimed at reducing or shifting fiscal impacts, narrowing agency duties, or striking provisions entirely.

Transcript Highlights:

• These rates were submitted, and with all of these rates I send those to our actuaries for an independent
• analysis to determine if they are excessive or if they are unfairly discriminatory, and our actuaries
• for an independent analysis to actuaries for an independent analysis to determine<00:13:06.160><c> if
• came back that these and our actuaries came back that these were<00:13:15.200><c> the</c><00:13:15.440
• I want you to drill down where actuaries I want you to drill down where I<00:14:36.800><c> have</c><

Summary: The committee met with a quorum, approved the September 16 minutes, and then received an update from Insurance Commissioner Sharon Clark and staff on the Department of Insurance. Clark reviewed department activity, including growth in premium volume and licensing, consumer complaints and recoveries, and a rise in fraud referrals. She said the department has 66 open fraud cases and described common schemes such as staged auto accidents, inflated repair or cleanup charges, and roofing scams. She also said the department’s investigators often prepare strong cases but face reluctance from local prosecutors, especially in Fayette and Jefferson counties, to pursue them. Clark reported favorable workers’ compensation news, saying rates will decrease 9.7% next year for the 20th straight year. She contrasted that with a difficult property insurance market driven by storms, reinsurance costs, inflation, labor shortages, and litigation, but said Kentucky’s market remains relatively stable, citing the Kentucky Fair Plan’s small number of policies. She then warned of significant 2026 health insurance premium increases on the exchange: 16.1% for Molina, 23% for Anthem, and 37% for WCare, after CareSource withdrew. She said the rates were reviewed by actuaries and found fair, but that the biggest pressure point is the scheduled expiration of enhanced premium tax credits, which she said could leave about 90% of exchange enrollees facing a compounded increase. Members questioned Clark about fraud prosecution, the number of people in commercial versus public coverage, and the impact of expiring subsidies. Clark said the prosecution issue is mainly with Commonwealth attorneys and that rural counties are more cooperative than urban ones. She also said the health market is individually rated and that older enrollees would be hit harder, while the loss of tax credits could push some people out of the marketplace. One member asked about the attorney general’s recent opinion on SB 188, the PBM bill; staff said attorneys were still reviewing it. Clark closed by noting that Kentucky’s fraud and towing/storage legislation has become a model for other states.

Transcript Highlights:

• It adds storage to the same valuation method already used for generation, transmission, and distribution
• President, it's a preferential valuation method. I'm sorry, could you repeat that? Sure.
• It's a preferential valuation method. Would you? Valuation method.
• President, there are other parts of the tax code that deal with the valuation of utilities.

Bills: SB273 , SB37 , SB100

Summary: The Senate convened on the 30th day of the 2026 session, established a quorum, heard an invocation from Chaplain Harry Eberts, and received several announcements and House messages. The chamber then took up multiple concurrence and third-reading items, including Senate Bill 273, Senate Bill 37, Senate Bill 100, Senate Bill 41, House Bill 34, House Bill 20, House Bill 43, House Bill 38, and House Bill 256. The body also heard that House Joint Memorial 2 was moved from the President’s table to the calendar, and later received messages from the House on several other Senate and House measures. The most contentious action was concurrence on Senate Bill 273, which concerns correction facility loss of revenue for counties affected by the loss of ICE detainees. Senators debated the economic impact on Torrance, Otero, and Cibola counties, with supporters arguing the bill provided partial relief and critics saying it did not come close to replacing lost jobs and revenue. The Senate ultimately concurred with the House amendments by a vote of 22-18. On Senate Bill 100, which would have expanded burglary-related definitions to include an “extension of a dwelling,” several senators argued the House language was too broad and legally vague, and the Senate voted not to concur, sending the bill back to the House. Senate Bill 41, with a technical correction and addition of second-degree criminal sexual penetration, was concurred with by voice vote. Among the bills passed on third reading, House Bill 34 updated school nurse licensure rules and supervision pathways and passed 38-0. House Bill 43, a PERA cleanup bill, clarified retirement and survivor-benefit provisions, and passed 39-0 after questions about whether it affected PERA’s unfunded liability; sponsors said it did not. House Bill 38 expanded insurance coverage for powered mobility devices and prosthetics, including coverage for batteries and in-state provider requirements, and passed 38-0. House Bill 256 expanded cardiac emergency response planning and AED requirements to athletic activities and schools, including private schools on a phased-in basis, and was debated over cost and scope before passing. House Bill 20, which would allow Native American designation on driver’s licenses and IDs, prompted extended discussion about tribal support, documentation, and possible profiling concerns; the transcript cuts off before final disposition of that bill.

Transcript Highlights:

• because they get special permission because they have so much local support, you know, from the valuations
• From the valuations. My question is, Mr. Chair, you had made a comment about everyone moves to 275.
• It shouldn't—you shouldn't keep going up and then keep getting the increase in valuation because it gets

Committee: House Special Committee on Property Tax Reform

Transcript Highlights:

• This change reduces all permitting fees by 20% across all valuations.
• This change reduces all permitting fees by 20% across all valuations, as well as reducing the installation

Committee: House Business

Transcript Highlights:

• insurer uses non-risk-related factors to set or adjust premiums, resulting in rates that exceed what actuarial
• So it adds actuarial principles into the definition.
• So it adds actuarial principles into the definition. The question is on the Tice amendment.

Transcript Highlights:

• Now there's solid research behind actuarial assessments, making a far more accurate prediction of who's
• the current board has continued to move forward in making informed decisions based on evidence and actuarial
• the current board has continued to move forward in making informed decisions based on evidence and actuarial

Bills: HB2464 , SGA9305

Committee: Senate Human Services

Keywords: detention facilities, law enforcement, reporting requirements, incidents, private detention

Transcript Highlights:

• See, on there is an actuary.
• That position was not an actuary; it was a low-level analyst that got converted into an actuary.

Transcript Highlights:

• He said the bill sets a rate of $5 per $1,000 of equalized property valuation.
• This is a state tax; it is not a local tax, it is not a county tax, it is not a school tax. valuation
• , not on sort of nominal valuation, and I'm not sure that's correct in the bill as is.
• , not on sort of nominal valuation, and I'm not sure that's correct in the bill as is.
• not on sort of nominal valuation not on sort of nominal valuation<03:44:10.279><c> and</c><03:44:10.439

Summary: The committee opened a public hearing on HB 402, a bill dealing with whether Education Freedom Account (EFA) payments should be described in state law as not constituting taxable income. The bill sponsor argued that the current statute is misleading because New Hampshire should not imply a federal tax result, and said the bill would remove that language and could also be amended to clarify that families should consult tax advisors. He emphasized that the measure was not intended to impose a state tax on EFAs, but to avoid giving inaccurate advice about possible federal tax liability. Testimony was divided. A retired representative and a tax preparer both opposed the bill, saying EFA payments are already treated consistently with IRS rules and that the bill would create confusion, administrative burden, and possible tax consequences for low- and moderate-income families. They argued the bill is a solution in search of a problem and warned that requiring 1099s could add costs for the scholarship organization and recipients. A tax attorney supported the bill’s repeal of the state language, saying New Hampshire should not put tax advice into statute and that the current wording is inaccurate because federal law, not state law, controls taxability. He cited IRS Section 117 and Publication 970, explaining that only some scholarship-like payments are tax-free and that many EFA-eligible expenses may not qualify for federal exemption. Members asked questions about what would be misleading, whether the bill was trying to tax EFAs, and the cost of issuing 1099s. The sponsor and witnesses repeatedly said the bill was not a state tax on voucher payments, but a clarification about federal tax treatment. No vote or final committee action was taken in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• It's D, it's on line 14 to determine an actuarially sound premium rate and a future premium rate setting
• Have any actuarial studies been done to determine if this fund will be solvent over time, or is that
• Madam Chair and Representative, the Southwest Women's Law Center did commission an actuarial analysis
• Earlier, you talked about the actuarial being available. I've searched for it online.
• I'm not one to read actuarial theory. That would put me to sleep, though that might be an idea.

Committee: House House Health & Human Services