Zoning In - Fall 2025

Northeast Zone

District of Columbia

The District of Columbia Department of Insurance, Securities and Banking Bulletin 25-IB-001-08/12, dated August 11, 2025, addresses “the depreciation of labor expenses and other nontangible items in the definition of "actual cash value" (“ACV”) in property insurance policies.” The Bulletin provides the definition of depreciation and notes that labor, unlike physical materials, does not lose value or break down over time. The Department further provides that it “considers the depreciation of labor and other nontangible items in the definition of ACV to be an unfair claims settlement practice pursuant to D.C. Code § 31–2231.17(b)(6). For the purposes of this Bulletin, nontangible items are defined as labor, taxes, fees, and overhead and profit. For the reasons stated above, the Department will not approve any policy form with language that allows for depreciation of labor.”

Maryland

Bulletin 25-14, dated September 16, 2025, advises insurers of the “Office of the Attorney General's People's Insurance Counsel Division's Access to Homeowners and Medical Professional Liability Rate Filings”. Specifically, “pursuant to Maryland State Government Article §§ 6-306 and 6-307, and § 11-307 of the Insurance Article, the Office of the Attorney General People's Insurance Counsel Division (“PICD”) is to have access to the Insurance Commissioner's records, including rate filings and supplementary rate information filed by a medical professional liability insurer or homeowners insurer under Title 11 of the Insurance Article.”  The Bulletin further provides that the MIA and PICD have entered into a Memorandum of Understanding that sets forth the details of PICD's access to these filings using SERFF.

New Hampshire

Bulletin Docket #INS 25-074-AB, dated September 30, 2025, provides information on compensation for incidental services with Medicare Advantage (“MA”) sales. The New Hampshire Insurance Department addresses the uncertainty relating to the availability and sale of MA products for next year in NH and that many “producers selling MA and Medicare Supplement (“MS”) products may seek additional avenues for compensation given the small commissions associated with the sale of these products.” While statutes provide that “producers may not receive additional compensation for services directly related to the sale, solicitation, or negotiation of insurance, they may enter into agreements with consumers for "a reasonable service charge or fee" for services that are incidental or related to the sale, solicitation, or negotiation of insurance.” The Bulletin also includes the following provisions pertaining to such agreements:

• Such contracts may take the form of advisory agreements for services rendered above and beyond those normally required for a MA or MS sale and might include appointments after working hours or on weekends, or assistance with filing claims or appealing denials. Any fees charged to a consumer should be reasonable and commensurate with the services provided.

• All producers entering into a contract for incidental services with a consumer should retain appropriate documentation showing that the consumer was made aware of and agreed to the contract prior to the performance of any services and/or billing of any additional fees, as well as detailed records of the services rendered and related billing.

Pennsylvania

Executive Order 2025-02, dated October 1, 2025, has stated intentions of ensuring access to safe, effective vaccines and protecting public health. Regarding “Guaranteeing Insurance Coverage for Vaccines” the Executive Order states that: “The Pennsylvania Insurance Department (“PID”) shall, to the fullest extent of its regulatory authority, require that all health insurers operating under PID's authority continue to provide coverage for evidence-based vaccine recommendations endorsed by the country's leading national medical associations, including, but not limited to, AAP, AAFP, and ACOG, without imposing cost sharing, prior authorization, or other barriers, consistent with the Department of Health's guidance and the goals of this Executive Order. PID shall monitor compliance and take appropriate action within the scope of its authority to see to it that insurers do not reduce vaccine coverage as a result of changes in federal recommendation status.” Additionally, this Executive Order requires that the Departments of Health and Human Services and PID report to the Governor within sixty days on their efforts to implement this Executive Order.

Midwest Zone

Michigan

Bulletin No. 2025-22-INS, dated October 1, 2025, provides guidance on updated requirements for short-term limited duration (“STLD”) insurance and fixed indemnity excepted benefits coverage. This latest Bulletin supersedes Bulletin 2024-23-INS that had addressed the enforcement of the 2024 federal rule, Short-Term, Limited-Duration Insurance and Independent, Noncoordinated Excepted Benefits Coverage, 89 CFR 23338 (Final Rule). However, “the federal government has indicated that the Final Rule's notice requirement applicable to fixed indemnity excepted benefits coverage will no longer be enforced. Additionally, on August 7, 2025, the federal government issued a statement that it will no longer be prioritizing enforcement of the Final Rule's requirements applicable to STLD insurance. Consequently, issuers will no longer be required to comply with the Final Rule's requirements applicable to STLD insurance and fixed indemnity plans.”

Bulletin No. 2025-22-INS, as stated previously in Bulletin 2024-23-INS, that state law applies regarding the duration of STLD insurance policies being set to 185 days or less out of any 365 day period. STLD insurance policies cannot be renewed to exceed that number of days, and must be issued immediately, without underwriting, upon the receipt of a completed application. 

Missouri

Bulletin 25-10, dated October 13, 2025, addresses policy non-renewals and cancellations in the wake of natural disasters and sets forth the following requirements:

• Effective immediately, insurers in this State shall not issue a cancellation or non-renewal of a policy covering a residential property that was damaged by a storm until otherwise notified by the Department or this Bulletin is rescinded. This directive applies to a residential property located anywhere within the State of Missouri for any storm or weather losses occurring after March 1, 2025, and is specific to those underwriting actions taken on the basis of claims activity and/or the condition of the property.

• To the extent such actions have been processed and/or notices mailed, insurers are directed to take all necessary actions to ensure coverage remains in force and to notify impacted policyholders.

The Department further provides that this “moratorium does not apply to properties not damaged by this years' storms; it does not apply to cancellations due to non-payment of premium and should not be interpreted as a permanent moratorium. At the same time, the Department encourages impacted insureds to repair their property as expeditiously as possible. If, for reasons such as administrative efficiency, an insurer extends the application of this policy on a wider basis, the Director would be supportive of such measures and hereby extends a regulatory safe harbor to those insurers.”

Southeast Zone

Georgia

Bulletin 25-EX-3, dated October 2, 2025, announces that beginning in October 2025, “the Florida Surplus Lines Service Office (“FSLSO”) SLIP+ team will begin conducting compliance reviews of Georgia-licensed surplus lines brokers on behalf of the Georgia Department of Insurance, Office of Insurance and Safety Fire Commissioner (“GA OCI”).” Compliance reviews will verify that:

• All policies, endorsements, and cancellations are properly filed.

• Premium taxes are accurately calculated, reported, and paid.

• Broker records align with Georgia surplus lines laws and regulations.

The Bulletin also provides information on the location/types of reviews, selection process and scheduling. Additional details regarding the process, requirements, and expectations of the Compliance Review Program are included in the Bulletin’s Attachment A.

North Carolina

Effective September 1, 2025, the North Carolina Department of Insurance adopted new rules under Title 11, Chapter 24 (numbered as 11 NCAC 24.0101 through 24.0108) governing Pharmacy Benefits Managers (“PBMs”). The rules address areas including licensing, fees, financial requirements, claims processing, and general administration. The following new sections were adopted:

• 11 NCAC 24 .0101 (License applications): Introduces definitions relevant to PBM licensing and outlines requirements for initial and renewal applications, including documents, financials, and insurance evidence. Applicants must report material modifications within 30 business days and provide insurer contracts for inspection.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0102 (Fees): Sets the PBM licensing fees: $2,000 for initial applications and $1,500 for annual renewals.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0103 (Financial statements): Requires PBMs to submit financial statements for the two most recent fiscal years, prepared by an independent certified public accountant. Parent company statements are acceptable with detailed breakdowns and an opinion letter.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0104 (Determination of financial responsibility): Outlines criteria for assessing PBM financial responsibility, including solvency, liquidity, internal controls, and duty segregation.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0105 (Claim processing by “PBMs”): Clarifies that PBMs and their employees do not need a license to adjust claims for insurers with written agreements.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0106 (Payment of claims): Mandates that PBMs or insurers send claim status reports if claims are unpaid within 30 days of receipt.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0107 (General administration): Requires PBMs to establish a governing body, maintain secure corporate records, use a comprehensive management information system, and implement internal policies for contract management.

• 11 NCAC 24 .0108 (Claims processing): Requires PBMs to support claims processing with written policies, procedures, and performance standards. Internal audits and quality assurance programs must be in place, and PBMs must be reachable by phone for claim inquiries.

Western Zone

California

The Notice of September 30, 2025 addresses the required notification to the California Department of Insurance (“CDI”) of improper personal information disclosures or security breaches affecting California residents. The Notice’s purpose is to remind admitted and non-admitted insurers, insurance producers, insurance support organizations, statistical agents, and other interested parties of their obligations to promptly provide notice to the CDI of any improper disclosure of personal information and/or security breach affecting any California resident. Specifics on the mandatory notice requirements regarding improper disclosures or security breaches are provided in the Notice including references to the “California Insurance Information and Privacy Protection Act ("IIPPA" or "Act", California Insurance Code § 791 et seq.) which establishes standards for the collection, use, and disclosure of information gathered by insurers, insurance producers, and insurance support organizations. Covered persons or entities must adhere to the Act's requirements that restrict the manner in which they may disclose the personal or privileged information of consumers. (Insurance Code § 791.13.)”

The Notice also addresses the importance of notifying CDI of any security data breaches and shares several recent insurance breaches as examples and includes “the Commissioner’s expectation that all insurers, insurance producers, insurance support organizations, and statistical agents will provide the CDI with any notices or information submitted to the California Attorney General's Office in accordance with Civil Code § 1798.82(f), as well as sample copies, excluding personal information, of any security breach notices provided to consumers.” Additionally, this Notice reminds “licensees that they should provide the CDI with information about any affiliate, vendor, or service provider data breach events affecting insurance consumer information of the licensee. Copies of notices and any other pertinent related information should be sent to the following email: DataBreach@insurance.ca.gov.”

Colorado

Bulletin B-5.52, dated August 27, 2025, provides guidance to insurers concerning claims in which a child restraint system was in a vehicle at the time of an automobile accident. As noted in this Bulletin, House Bill 25-1179 requires insurers to pay the cost to replace a child restraint system “if the child restraint system was in a motor vehicle at the time of an automobile accident and to which coverage in the applicable policy is available.” The Bulletin further provides that effective January 1, 2026, “at the time a claim is submitted to the insurer, the insurer shall ask if a child restraint system was in the motor vehicle at the time of the loss. The Division's position is that if there was a child restraint system in the vehicle at the time of loss, regardless of occupancy, the insurer shall pay the cost to replace the child restraint system under any of the following circumstances:

• The claimant has made a claim under his/her collision coverage, which is applicable and payable.

• The claimant has made a claim under his/her comprehensive coverage, which is applicable and payable due to a collision with an animal.

• The claimant has made a claim under the at-fault party's liability property damage coverage and the insurer has accepted liability.

• The claimant has made a claim under his/her Uninsured Motorist Property Damage (“UMPD”) coverage, which is applicable and payable.”

Hawaii

Memorandum 2025-6R, dated August 26, 2025, addresses SB 752 (Act 110) which amends notice requirements under § 431:10-226.5 for the cancellation and nonrenewal of insurance policies covering property used for residential purposes, including single-family homes, multi-family dwellings, and condominium units. Effective January 1, 2026, these amended notice requirements in § 431:10-226.5(b) establish days’ notice requirements which apply to both personal and commercial insurance policies if the covered property is used, in whole or in part, for residential purposes. Specific provisions are as follows: “This subsection shall only apply to policies of insurance on property used for residential purposes, including multi-family residential properties. In the case of cancellation of a policy, the property insurer shall give written notice to the insured not fewer than twenty days before the effective date of cancellation. In the case of cancellation of a policy due to nonpayment of premium or material misrepresentation, the property insurer shall give written notice to the insured not fewer than ten days before the effective date of cancellation. For nonrenewal of a policy, the property insurer shall give written notice to the insured not fewer than thirty days before the effective date of nonrenewal. If under title 24 or a policy, a longer time period is required for a notice of cancellation or nonrenewal for the policy, the longer period shall be applicable; provided that the longer period shall be applicable only to the insurer. Cancellation or nonrenewal shall not be deemed valid unless evidence of mailing the written notice is provided.”

Examples of applicability are provided in Memorandum 2025-6R. For example, “if a condominium building contains both ground-floor retail shops and upper-floor apartments, and the insurance policy covers the entire building, the notice requirements under Act 110 apply. The same is true where a mixed-use tower includes several floors of commercial office space but also contains residential penthouses. Where residential occupancy is included in the property covered by the policy, the amended notice requirements under Act 110 apply. If the covered property is used solely for non-residential purposes, Act 110 does not change the existing notice requirements.”

Nevada

The Nevada Division of Insurance outlines the requirements for agreements between insurers and third-party administrators (TPAs) in Bulletin 25-001, dated September 23, 2025. Specific provisions, including referenced statutes, addressed in the Bulletin are as follows:

NRS 683A.086(1) states:

• No person may act as an administrator unless the person has entered into a written agreement with an insurer, and the written agreement contains provisions to effectuate the requirements contained in NRS 683A.08522 to 683A.08528, inclusive, 683A.087 to 683A.0883, inclusive, and 683A.0892 which apply to the duties of the administrator.

• NRS 683A.086(1) requires an administrator to have entered into a written agreement with an insurer but does not limit the number of signing parties; therefore, acting as an administrator without entering into a written agreement with an insurer is a violation of NRS 683A.086. If a second administrator administers or agrees to administer the plan or policy in Nevada, that second administrator would violate NRS 683A.086(1) if it were not a party to the required agreement.

• Workers' compensation agreements are regulated by NRS 616B.503(2)(b), which sets more specific requirements and states an administrator "shall administer each plan of insurance directly, without subcontracting with another third-party administrator." The administrator is required to have entered into a written agreement with the insurer, and the administrator is prohibited from subcontracting workers' compensation administration.

In addition to the specific agreement requirements, the Bulletin further provides that “NRS 683A.0887 requires each administrator to provide written notice, approved by the insurer, to each insured regarding the identity and relationships between the insurer, administrator, and insured” and that insurers are defined to include carriers, prepaid limited health service organizations, health maintenance organizations, multiple employer welfare arrangements, self-insured employers, and an organization for dental care.

Texas

Bulletin B-0014-25, dated September 29, 2025, addresses compliance with SB 1238 that amends § 544.002 by prohibiting an insurer from treating an individual who is widowed differently than someone who is married by:

1. refusing to continue to insure or provide coverage; or limiting the amount, extent, or kind of coverage available to the widowed person; or

2. charging the widowed person a rate that is different from the rate that would be charged if the person was married.

The Bulletin indicates that an insurance policy that is delivered, issued for delivery, or renewed on or after September 1, 2025, must comply with the requirements. The Texas Department of Insurance expects insurers and carriers to comply with the law, which may require the insurer or carrier to submit updated form, rate, and underwriting guideline filings. 

Utah

Bulletin 2025-8, dated September 8, 2025, addresses a recent amendment to Utah Code 41-12a-301 that changed the financial responsibility requirements for motor vehicles. The recent amendment, effective March 25, 2025, expands the conditions under which a vehicle owner must maintain financial security by adding vehicle registration as a trigger. Specifically, 41-12a-301 (2)(a) now states “every resident owner of a motor vehicle shall maintain owner's or operator's security in effect at any time that the motor vehicle is operated on a highway or on a quasi-public road or parking area or registered within the state.” The Utah Insurance Department provides the following critical points related to the addition of the vehicle registration trigger in that statute as follows:

• Comprehensive-Only Policies are Ineligible for Registered Vehicles: The Utah State Tax Commission has determined that due to the language change, a comprehensive-only insurance policy is no longer sufficient to satisfy the financial responsibility requirement for any vehicle registered in Utah. The new language explicitly links the requirement for owner's or operator's security to the act of a vehicle being "registered within the state." As a comprehensive-only policy does not provide the required liability coverage, it is not considered "owner's or operator's security" under this law.

• Seasonal Vehicles and Financial Responsibility: Owners of seasonal vehicles (e.g., recreational vehicles, motorcycles) must also comply with the financial responsibility requirements for the full duration of the vehicle's registration, regardless of whether the vehicle is actively being operated. The previous practice of suspending liability coverage during non-operational periods for a registered vehicle is no longer permissible under the new law.

The Bulletin further advises that insurers and agents update their systems and procedures to reflect the changes to vehicle financial responsibility requirements. Additionally, steps should be taken to educate all licensed agents about the new requirements and make applicable disclosures to policyholders and customers.

---

Kathy Donovan is Senior Compliance Counsel, Insurance with Wolters Kluwer Financial Services. Kathy has more than two decades of experience in insurance compliance. Her expert commentary on legal and regulatory issues affecting the insurance industry is widely published, and she is a regular presenter at various industry events.