An act relating to annual reporting on health care sharing plans and arrangements
H.102 requires any person that is not authorized to sell insurance in Vermont but offers or intends to offer a health care sharing plan or arrangement to Vermont residents to file an annual report with the Commissioner of Financial Regulation. The report must disclose extensive information about participation, employer groups, national enrollment, provider contracts, fees collected and retained, reimbursement requests, denials, unpaid claims, third-party marketers, licensed producers, marketing materials, corporate structure, and contact information, and must be certified by an officer as accurate.
The bill also directs the Commissioner to review submissions for completeness, notify filers of deficiencies, allow time to cure them, and impose escalating enforcement measures for noncompliance, including administrative penalties of up to $5,000 per day and possible cease-and-desist orders. In addition, the Commissioner must publish an annual summary report and consumer information on the Department of Financial Regulation website, including complaint information, and may adopt rules to implement the law.
The bill would add a new reporting and oversight section to Title 8, creating a regulatory framework for health care sharing plans and arrangements that are not licensed as insurance in Vermont. It would not directly ban these arrangements, but it would require detailed disclosure to the Department of Financial Regulation and authorize enforcement against noncompliant entities. The measure would affect out-of-state and in-state organizations offering health care sharing ministries or similar cost-sharing products to Vermont residents, as well as third parties and licensed producers involved in marketing or enrollment.
The available record shows no committee transcript or vote history, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to gauge support or opposition. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears aimed at increasing transparency and consumer awareness rather than restricting access outright, suggesting a regulatory rather than prohibitive approach. The absence of recorded votes or discussion means sentiment cannot be measured from the provided materials.
No specific points of contention are documented in the provided materials. Potential areas of debate, based on the bill text, would likely include the breadth of the reporting requirements, the burden on health care sharing organizations, the inclusion of marketing and compensation information for third parties and producers, and the size of the daily administrative penalty. Consumer advocates may favor the disclosure and complaint-posting provisions, while affected organizations may object to the administrative and compliance costs.