AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 9, Chapter 8; Title 55 and Title 56, relative to insurance for vehicles used by faith-based organizations.
HB2345, titled the “Community Faith Transportation and Service Protection Act,” creates a new insurance framework for motor vehicles owned or leased by faith-based organizations when those vehicles are used for community service purposes. The bill defines community service use broadly to include transportation or delivery related to healthcare access, food security, disability assistance, elder care, and social services. It provides that qualifying faith-based organizations are deemed to have state-backed secondary liability coverage when the vehicle is used for those purposes, including when operated by a partner nonprofit organization.
The bill sets conditions for this coverage: the driver must have a valid license, the activity cannot be for private profit, and the coverage is administered through the state risk management fund. It also establishes minimum coverage limits of $1 million for bodily injury and $250,000 for property damage per occurrence. In addition, the bill limits liability for faith-based organizations, clergy, and board members for injuries or damage arising from covered community service use unless the harm results from gross negligence or willful or reckless misconduct. It also prevents private insurers from denying, canceling, or increasing premiums solely because a faith-based organization uses a vehicle for community service transportation, and voids conflicting policy provisions.
The bill would amend Tennessee law in Titles 9, 55, and 56 by adding a new insurance protection section and directing the Department of Commerce and Insurance to adopt rules implementing the program. Those rules must address coverage requirements, minimum safety standards, driver eligibility, accident reporting, and the application process for coverage. The act would take effect July 1, 2026, and apply to policies issued, renewed, or amended on or after that date.
Because there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes provided, there is no documented legislative debate or formal vote sentiment to assess. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears designed to support charitable transportation and service programs run by churches and other religious nonprofits by reducing insurance barriers and limiting liability exposure. The main policy tension is likely between expanding protections for faith-based service vehicles and concerns about state-backed insurance exposure, insurer mandates, and the scope of liability limits for organizations and their leaders.
HB2345 would add a new statutory insurance protection for faith-based organizations using vehicles in community service, effectively creating state-backed secondary liability coverage through the risk management fund and restricting private insurers from treating such use as a basis for denial, cancellation, or premium increases. It would also limit civil liability for churches, clergy, and board members except in cases of gross negligence or intentional/reckless misconduct, and it would require the Department of Commerce and Insurance to promulgate implementing rules. The bill would affect insurance law, state risk management provisions, and the treatment of nonprofit and religious vehicle use under Tennessee law.
No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded public sentiment to summarize from legislative proceedings. From the bill text, the measure appears supportive of faith-based and charitable transportation programs and framed as a protection for community service delivery. The overall tone is pro-service and pro-religious nonprofit, with an emphasis on reducing insurance obstacles and liability concerns.
The likely points of contention are the bill’s use of state-backed coverage for vehicles owned or leased by faith-based organizations, the requirement that private insurers not deny or surcharge coverage based on community service use, and the liability shield for organizations and their leaders. Opponents might question the fiscal exposure to the risk management fund, the fairness of mandating insurer treatment for a specific class of organizations, and whether the liability protections are too broad. Supporters would likely emphasize the bill’s role in enabling transportation for healthcare access, food security, disability assistance, elder care, and social services without penalizing churches and related nonprofits.