Transcript Highlights:

• Hold on a second, I've got it made myself a little zero premiums here.
• Yes, everybody in Medicare pays a $185 premium this year.
• Yes, everybody in Medicare pays a $185 premium this year.
• better you can get than a zero premium better you can get than a zero premium and<00:16:11.360><
• <00:24:28.880> for the Medicare supplement premiums for the Medicare supplement premiums for

Bills: HF2335, HF2400, HF2401, HF2522

Keywords: Medicare, health insurance, supplement policies, preexisting conditions, medical assistance, premium classification, real estate, appraisers, disciplinary actions, sanction matrix, Minnesota Statutes, continuing education, out-of-state, licensing, commerce, fraud prevention, automobile theft, law enforcement, insurance crimes, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• but each new mandate increases premiums but each new mandate increases premiums for<00:03:13.920
• shifted directly onto premium payers. shifted directly onto premium payers.
• their rates and lower premiums. their rates and lower premiums.
• Is it upfront with the premiums?
• Is it upfront with the premiums?

Bills: HF3388, HF400

Keywords: HF3388, Minnesota premium security plan, reinsurance, health insurance, group health carriers, MCHA, MNsure, individual market, premium stabilization, carrier assessment, health insurance assessment, premium security plan account, state innovation waiver, high-risk pool, reinsurance payments, healthcare premiums, insurance carriers, deferral of assessment, financially impaired condition, HF400

Summary: The committee approved the minutes from the prior day and then heard House File 400, a bill described as a defrayal measure for health insurance mandates. Representative Perryman said the bill would not block future mandates, but would require the state to pay the added costs of any new mandated benefits so those costs would not be shifted to premium payers. She and supporters framed the bill as a way to protect affordability for Minnesota employers, workers, and families, especially in the fully insured market. Testimony in support came from the Minnesota Chamber of Commerce and the Minnesota Council of Health Plans. They argued that Minnesota has a high number of mandated benefits, that each new mandate adds cost to premiums, and that businesses—especially small and midsize employers—are already struggling with rising health insurance costs. The health plans representative said the bill would use the existing Commerce defrayal process to reimburse plans for eligible mandate-related claims, allowing those costs to be removed from premium rates. Several members echoed support, saying the bill would improve transparency by showing the fiscal impact of proposed mandates and help prevent people from being priced out of coverage. Members also explored how mandates apply in the market and how premiums are set. Deputy Commissioner Julia Dryer explained that, unless otherwise specified, mandates generally apply to the individual, small group, and fully insured large group markets, while self-insured ERISA plans and other markets are generally outside that scope. Representative Elkins noted that the affected market is relatively small and said small businesses are increasingly moving to self-insured plans because of cost. He and others raised concerns about affordability, while Representative Smith argued that mandates often ensure needed care and that the bill shifts costs to taxpayers rather than insurers. Representative Bacham added a personal example from tribal self-insurance, saying preventive physicals had saved lives and asking whether other factors besides mandates are driving insurer costs. No amendments were offered, and the bill was laid over for possible future consideration.

Bills: HCR112

Keywords: HCR112, House Concurrent Resolution, DHRD, Department of Human Resources Development, civil service, classification system, compensation system, salary study, pay scale, job classification, position classification, state workforce, vacancy rate, hard-to-fill positions, labor shortage, recruitment, retention, public employees, state agencies, labor organizations

Transcript Highlights:

• proposing a premium subsidy or a premium proposing a premium subsidy or a premium write<00:13:47.800
• <00:19:16.919> by the highest at reducing premiums by the highest at reducing premiums by
• doesn't act and Congress does premiums doesn't act and Congress does premiums would<00:25:26.279
• further increases in the premiums further increases in the premiums uh<00:26:59.840> repeat
• having insurance and paying premiums having insurance and paying premiums that<00:31:22.799>

Bills: HF837

Keywords: health insurance, premium security plan, federal funding, state innovation waiver, Minnesota, 1183, house

Transcript Highlights:

• > market<00:15:36.520> would Premiums in the individual market would Premiums in the individual
• <00:21:21.200> Chair as premium goes? Mr. Cotter. Mr. Chair as premium goes? Mr. Cotter.
• onto premium payers. onto premium payers.
• insurance in their premiums. insurance in their premiums.
• advertisements at a higher premium. advertisements at a higher premium.

Bills: HF4502, HF3388, HF4106, HF400, HF4138, HF4118, HF4203

Keywords: trusted contact, financial exploitation, elder abuse, elder financial abuse, fraud prevention, financial institution, banking, credit union, broker-dealer, account security, dormant account, consumer protection, scam, suspicious activity, protective services, law enforcement reporting, Minnesota Statutes chapter 45A, HF3388, Minnesota premium security plan, reinsurance

Bills: HB3783, HB2955, HB3802, HB4488, HB2471, HB3781, HB3127

Keywords: captive insurance, protected cell, sponsored captive, captive insurer, insurance commissioner, premium tax, dormant captive, risk retention group, pure captive, association captive, industrial insured captive, series captive, branch captive, special purpose captive, reciprocal insurer, capital and surplus, letter of credit, change in control, merger, conversion

Transcript Highlights:

• Oklahoma homeowners pay some of the highest insurance premiums in the nation, and this is protections
• Oklahomans pay some of the highest insurance premiums in the nation.
• rate regulation is not really moving the needle, but other states also have had increases in their premiums
• Thank you for that question. ...have had increases in their premiums as well.
• Look at the price of coverage premiums and the deductibles and the cost of health care in general, it's

Bills: HB3048, HB3259, HB3646, HB3696, HB3780, HB3781, HB3802, HB3818, HB4294, HB4488, HB2929

Keywords: insurance, nonadmitted insurers, surplus lines, insurance regulation, Oklahoma, health insurance, contracting entities, medical providers, enrollment, beneficiary rights, property and casualty, rates, filing, Insurance Commissioner, regulation, property, regulations, actuary, rate filing, independent review

Bills: HB258, HB324, HB333, SB270, HB258, HB324, HB333, SB270

Keywords: primary election, election calendar, off-presidential year, May primary, second Tuesday in May, fourth Tuesday in May, runoff primary, special primary, presidential primary, election administration, candidate filing, ballot access, political parties, county election officials, state election law, Alabama elections, sheriffs, term of office, Alabama law, local government

Transcript Highlights:

• Senate Bill 485 by Senator Edmonds provides for the levy of premium tax in the city of St. George.
• This transfers authority over insurance premium tax within the city of St.
• So it clarifies that insurers may only be subject to one local insurance premium tax for the same risk
• It defines insurance premium tax as a municipal license tax imposed on insurers, which is all consistent
• premium taxes, and administer those taxes.

Bills: SB348, SB444, SB485

Keywords: motor vehicles, enforcement, administrative support, law enforcement, private service provider, regulatory compliance, expropriation, public purpose, property rights, compensation, city governance, St. George, insurance premium tax, city of St. George, municipal authority, local taxation, East Baton Rouge Parish, 965, house, all

Bills: HB355, HB437, HB1631

Keywords: juvenile justice, custody, Texas Juvenile Justice Department, detention, legal framework, sex classification, safety, detention facilities, biological sex, juvenile detention, family court, detention orders, Texas juvenile justice, child welfare, court proceedings, detention studies, 1184, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• The classifications don't mean...
• As I understand, this is maybe a 7A classification. We are a 7A classification.
• Now that is not the case with the public schools; they're all in one set classification.
• Going forward with... ...classification.
• for the... ...held into that classification for the next two years.

Bills: HB298, HB342, HB332, HB344

Keywords: athletic classification, public high schools, English language learners, state education policy, athletic associations, religious instruction, elective credit, released time, public education, school policy, educational intervention, State Superintendent, local boards of education, subpoena, accountability, state control, 1136, house, all

Transcript Highlights:

• Rising insurance premiums are not Arizona-specific, but are due to inflation and increased incidence
• Insurance premium tax revenues have seen substantial growth in recent years; from FY24 to FY25, they
• It takes money from the insurance premium tax collection.
• So on each insurance premium written in the state, there is a small percentage that goes to a tax.
• So on each insurance premium written in the state, there is a small percentage that goes to a tax.

Bills: HB2013, HB2292, HB2334, HB2349, HB2350, HB2845, HCM2011

Keywords: air pollution, wildfires, environmental standards, public health, Arizona Revised Statutes, wildfire, wildfire mitigation, wildfire prevention, forest fire, brush removal, defensible space, community hardening, vegetation management, fire-resistant construction, wildland urban interface, WUI, insurance premium tax, property insurance, homeowners insurance, commercial property insurance

Summary: The committee heard three measures. HB 2013 would require the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality to submit an exceptional event demonstration to the EPA when wildfires on federally managed land affect Arizona air quality. Sponsor Rep. Lisa Fink said the bill is intended to prevent Arizona from being penalized for wildfire-driven air quality problems and could help reduce regulatory burdens. Sierra Club opposed the bill, arguing the existing exceptional-event process already requires case-by-case analysis, that automatic filings could be unnecessary or ineffective, and that the bill lacked an appropriation. ADEQ testified neutral. The committee approved HB 2013 on a 5-1 vote. HB 2292 would create the Wildfire Prevention Authority and Fund under the Arizona Department of Forestry and Fire Management; a committee amendment renamed it the Wildfire Mitigation and Risk Reduction Authority and Fund, capped administrative expenses at 8%, and prioritized funding for single-family and multi-family dwellings. Supporters, including Coconino County Vice Chair Geronimo Vasquez and the County Supervisors Association, said the bill would provide a coordinated, data-driven wildfire mitigation program funded by a $20 million annual diversion from insurance premium tax revenues, helping reduce wildfire damage and stabilize insurance costs. Members discussed the funding source as an existing tax diversion rather than a new tax. The committee adopted the amendment and then passed HB 2292 as amended on an 8-0 vote. HCM 2011 urges Congress to pass federal legislation to delist the Mexican wolf, defund the reintroduction program, and transfer management to local authorities. The sponsor said the memorial responds to ranching impacts from wolf predation and supports federal action already moving in Congress. Sierra Club opposed the memorial, saying the species remains insufficiently recovered and that delisting would be premature. After debate, including comments both supporting and opposing delisting, the committee approved HCM 2011 on a 5-2 vote and then adjourned.

Bills: HB1053

Keywords: North Dakota highway system, state roads, road mileage cap, transportation code, Department of Transportation, DOT, highway mileage limit, road classification, county roads, township roads, state highway network, Century Code section 24-01-01.2, infrastructure, public roads, transportation policy, 908, all

Summary: The committee took up House Bill 1298 and first discussed an amendment from Senator Paulson that would add variable electronic speed limit signs to the bill while leaving the 80-mile-an-hour provision unchanged. Members said the signs would be used on interstates I-29 and I-94 in selected problem areas, based on weather or accident conditions, and that the proposal would not require a fiscal note. The discussion then broadened to Senator Rummel’s concerns about related bills, especially 2243, 1250, and 1229. He argued that the House changes were removing municipal authority to double fines, lowering or eliminating points for serious traffic violations, and undoing prior Senate positions. Several members said they were willing to use HB 1298 as the vehicle to restore the earlier fine and point provisions, including the 29 violations previously assigned three points, and to avoid concurring with the House versions. Members did not take final action on the amendments or the bill. Instead, they agreed more work was needed and asked Legislative Council to prepare a combined amendment and options for the next meeting. The committee recessed and scheduled further discussion for the next morning.

Transcript Highlights:

• administrative and benefits administration costs, driving insurer exits, and potentially raising premiums
• exits, and potentially raising premiums exits, and potentially raising premiums for<00:36:58.400
• least<00:37:37.920> 83% spend at least 83% spend at least 83% of<00:37:39.839> premiums
• on patient care and this of premiums on patient care and this bill<00:37:42.000> is<00:37:42.240
• <00:38:04.480> Refund increased premium rates. Refund increased premium rates.

Bills: SB2004, SB2039, SB2042, SB2043, SB2044, SB2132

Keywords: outdoor advertising, billboards, public safety, penalties, community pollution, elections, campaign finance, business entities, political activity, regulation, liability, non-natural persons, insurance, captives, examination, regulations, policyholders, dormant captive, tax exemption, Hawaii revised statutes

Summary: The Senate Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee opened its first hearing of the year with remarks from Chair Jared Kohole outlining hearing procedures, a two-minute testimony limit, rules for remote testimony and decorum, and a revised testimony-publication pilot that keeps 96-hour notice but returns to a standard 24-hour testimony deadline. He then moved through the agenda, beginning with SB 2004 on outdoor advertising, which would increase penalties for violations of billboard and outdoor advertising laws. Testimony on that measure was limited; Henry Curtis of Life of the Land was first up, and written support was noted from Hawaiian Electric and the Outdoor Circle. The committee then heard SB 2039 on election campaign finance, which would prohibit certain business entities from engaging in campaign finance activities. The Attorney General’s office offered comments and did not take a formal position at the hearing. Several proponents testified in support, including Josh Frost, Tom Moore of the Center for American Progress, Hapa/Hawaii Alliance for Progressive Action, and Common Cause Hawaiʻi, all arguing the bill would curb corporate and dark-money influence and return elections to the people. Moore distinguished between regulating corporate “rights” and limiting corporate “powers,” and said the state can redefine the powers it grants corporations. In questions, Senator McKelvey asked whether the bill could be expanded to include unions; the Attorney General said he would need to get back with legal analysis, while Moore said his preferred approach would include all entities and that leaving out nonprofits or unions would create problems. Members also discussed whether the bill would affect PACs, and Moore explained that the proposal would prohibit corporate and dark-money flows into PACs while leaving individual political giving and existing political committees in place. The committee then moved on to the next measure. SB 2042, relating to insurance, was heard next. The bill would reduce the unimpaired minimum capital and surplus required of class 4 sponsored captive insurance companies under certain circumstances. The DCCA Insurance Division said it stood on its written testimony, and the Hawaii Captive Insurance Council testified in support, describing the change as a narrow, risk-based adjustment that would not affect the commissioner’s authority where actual risk resides and would help keep Hawaii competitive. The committee noted additional written support and proceeded without a vote or final action in the portion of the hearing provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• Chair, if I may, I want to make sure, with the delay in this, there's no premiums that would be paid

Bills: HF11

Keywords: Minnesota Paid Leave, paid family and medical leave, family leave, medical leave, implementation delay, premium collection, employer premiums, state payroll tax, workforce, labor, benefits administration, DEED, Department of Employment and Economic Development, employer notice, seasonal employees, private plans, actuarial study, outreach and education, employee rights, reinstatement

Bills: HF11

Keywords: Minnesota Paid Leave, paid family and medical leave, family leave, medical leave, implementation delay, premium collection, employer premiums, state payroll tax, workforce, labor, benefits administration, DEED, Department of Employment and Economic Development, employer notice, seasonal employees, private plans, actuarial study, outreach and education, employee rights, reinstatement

Transcript Highlights:

• They apply a classification rate.
• who have families, who are trying to make an extra $150 a week in order to make their insurance premiums

Bills: HF4621, HF4123, HF4616, HF1183

Keywords: child tax credit, financial assistance, low-income families, state revenue, tax policy, net investment income, taxation, business income, self-employment, tax increase, wealth tax, fairness, public services, high-income earners, economic equity, Internal Revenue Code, employee classification, federal law, Minnesota statutes, 1183

Transcript Highlights:

• Similarly, counties are not able to add classifications to the tax base.
• They're already reporting under the standard retail classification.
• So did we see revenue under the remote sales seller classification? Yes.
• Well, some of my colleagues continue to blame the premiums administration, the impact of the current
• Well, some of my colleagues continue to blame the premiums administration, the impact of the current

Bills: HB2780, HB4029, HB4030, HCR2052

Keywords: judicial foreclosure, tax lien, redemption rights, excess proceeds, property auction, income tax, federal tax conformity, revenue analysis, legislative session, tax reporting, municipal fees, county fees, utility rates, moratorium, tax classification, local government, inflation, economic stability, tax increases, cost-of-living protection

Summary: The committee first heard House Bill 2780, a technical cleanup measure related to Arizona’s judicial tax lien foreclosure and excess proceeds process. The sponsor and a witness said the bill clarifies when a court should order a public sale, standardizes distribution of sale proceeds, and corrects inconsistencies left from prior reforms. No opposition was raised, and the committee approved HB 2780 unanimously on a 9-0 do pass vote. The committee then took up House Bill 4029, which would require the Governor’s Office of Strategic Planning and Budgeting and the Joint Legislative Budget Committee to evaluate the revenue impact of federal tax conformity changes earlier in the process, and would require the Department of Revenue to issue tax forms consistent with statute. An amendment was adopted to have OSPB and JLBC each make the evaluation and to require a governor’s report if the impact is $100 million or more, along with new reporting deadlines for DOR. Supporters argued the bill would force earlier action on conformity and prevent tax forms from diverging from statute; opponents said it added bureaucracy and could delay filing. The committee approved HB 4029 as amended by a 5-4 vote. The committee also heard House Bill 4030 and the related HCR 2052, both aimed at limiting local tax and fee increases. HB 4030 would bar municipalities and counties from adopting, imposing, or collecting increased fees, transaction privilege taxes, and utility rates from July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2030. The sponsor said the measure was intended to protect taxpayers from inflation and rising local costs. Cities, counties, and utility representatives opposed the bills, warning they would hinder infrastructure financing, water and wastewater projects, road improvements, and public safety services, and could force general fund subsidies or delayed maintenance. Supporters argued local governments have seen substantial revenue growth and should be restrained from further increases. The committee did not reach a final vote on HB 4030 or HCR 2052 in the portion provided.

Transcript Highlights:

• renames the article heading of Title 42, Chapter 12, Article 4 to Agricultural Real Property Classification
• The court ruled we can only read the agricultural property classification article in harmony with itself
• university or community college as a deduction from the tax base for the personal property rental classification

Bills: HB2120, HB2173, HB2261, HB2786, HB2792

Keywords: property tax exemption, disability, veterans, widows, income limits, Arizona Revised Statutes, property tax, electronic communication, tax assessment, tax correction, real estate, agriculture, tax classification, land use, nonprofit organizations, transaction privilege tax, tax exemption, textbook rental, education, business leasing

Summary: The House Ways and Means Committee heard and advanced several tax-related bills. HB 2261, by Rep. Griffin, would rename and clarify the agricultural real property classification in statute to align with court rulings on valuing permanent crops such as orchards and vineyards under the income approach. Supporters argued it codifies existing law and avoids unnecessary litigation costs, while county assessors and the Arizona Association of Counties opposed it, asking the committee to wait for the pending Arizona Supreme Court case. After discussion about the court history and valuation methods, the committee passed HB 2261 on a 5-3 vote with one absent. The committee then unanimously or near-unanimously advanced HB 2173, which allows tax officers and taxpayers to use electronic responses for notices of proposed correction and notices of claim unless certified mail is required. County assessors supported the bill as a modernization that could reduce delay, paper, and postage costs, and members discussed whether the statute should require periodic reauthorization of email contact. HB 2120, which adds the Social Security Administration to the definition of competent medical authority for property tax disability exemptions, also passed, though one member voted present and another no while seeking more information about how it would interact with existing disability documentation requirements. Two additional bills were also approved. HB 2786 would extend a tax deduction to gross proceeds from leasing or renting textbooks required by state universities or community colleges, including digital textbook rentals, and was supported as student relief and tax parity for rental versus physical books. HB 2792 would fully exempt from property tax the primary residence of a veteran with a 100% service-connected disability, and would treat a jointly owned primary residence as fully owned by the veteran for exemption purposes; assessors said the bill was a needed cleanup measure to clarify implementation. Both bills received strong support and were returned with do-pass recommendations, and the committee adjourned after completing the agenda.

Transcript Highlights:

• And so your tax bill can go up tenfold or more if you lose your agricultural classification.
• And so your tax bill can go up tenfold or more if you lose your agricultural classification.
• Any other kind of classification, this wouldn't apply to—just to agricultural.
• The recourse shouldn't be to file or to submit a classification with the exact same decision that the
• And then they get notified that their classification is gone.

Bills: HB2016, HB2104, HB2105, HB2288, HB2289

Keywords: tax penalties, filing, tax returns, administration, Arizona Revised Statutes, agricultural property, classification, county assessor, property inspection, appeal process, property tax, agricultural classification, Department of Revenue, property valuation, inspection notice, inspection report, on-site inspection, full cash value, rural land, farm land

Summary: The committee began with member, staff, and page introductions, then heard reminders about public testimony limits. It first considered House Bill 2016, which would eliminate late-filing penalties when a tax return shows zero tax due. The sponsor argued the bill would prevent unnecessary fines on small businesses and individuals with no liability, while staff noted any fiscal impact would likely be minimal. The bill passed on an 8-1 vote, with one member opposing it on the grounds that current waiver procedures already exist and the change could weaken compliance incentives. The committee then took up House Bill 2104, which would bar county assessors from reclassifying agricultural property for four years after an owner prevails on appeal, unless there is a change in use, ownership, or parcel configuration. The sponsor and agricultural groups said the measure would reduce repetitive annual appeals and provide stability for ranchers and farmers, especially in urbanizing areas and in places affected by fallowing. County assessors opposed the bill, arguing that their offices are better qualified than the State Board of Equalization, that the bill could allow inaccurate classifications to persist, and that it relies too heavily on owners to report changes. After extensive testimony from the Maricopa County Assessor and the State Board of Equalization executive director, the committee approved the bill 5-4. Next, House Bill 2105 was heard. It would require advance notice of certain property inspections and provide inspection reports to property owners. The sponsor said the goal was to give owners a chance to be present for inspections and to receive the reasons for any denial of agricultural status. Assessors opposed the bill as an unfunded mandate and said they already communicate with owners through mail, door hangers, and other methods, but that a standardized report form does not currently exist. Supporters from the farm and ranch community said the bill would improve transparency and help avoid disputes. The committee passed the bill 5-4. Finally, the committee heard House Bill 2289, which updates truth-in-taxation and election pamphlet language to reflect higher residential property values, including a new $400,000 example. The sponsor and the Arizona Tax Research Association said the changes would make taxpayer notices more accurate and noted the bill was similar to one that had previously advanced, but without a provision that contributed to a veto. No vote was taken on this bill in the portion provided.