On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed into law the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 (“NRRA”), which prohibits any state, other than the insured’s home state, from requiring a premium tax payment for nonadmitted insurance. The NRRA also subjects the placement of nonadmitted insurance solely to the statutory and regulatory requirements of the insured’s home state, and provides that only an insured’s home state may require an excess line broker to be licensed to sell, solicit, or negotiate nonadmitted insurance with respect to such insured. On March 31, 2011, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed into law Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, Part I of which amended the Insurance Law to implement the provisions of the NRRA.

The sections of Part I of Chapter 61 that amend the Insurance Law to bring New York into conformance with the NRRA took effect on July 21, 2011, which is when the NRRA took effect. The regulation was previously promulgated on an emergency basis on July 22, 2011, October 19, 2011, January 16, 2012, April 16, 2012, July 13, 2012, October 10, 2012, January 7, 2013, April 5, 2013, July 3, 2013, August 30, 2013, October 28, 2013, and December 26, 2013. The regulation was also proposed in June 2013, and was published in the State Register on July 17, 2013.

For the reasons stated above, emergency action is necessary for the general welfare.

In addition, the NRRA provides that an excess line broker seeking to procure or place excess line insurance for an exempt commercial purchaser (“ECP”) need not satisfy any state requirement to make a due diligence search to determine whether the full amount or type of insurance sought by the ECP may be obtained from admitted insurers if: (1) the broker procuring or placing the excess line insurance has disclosed to the ECP that the insurance may be available from the admitted market, which may provide greater protection with more regulatory oversight; and (2) the ECP has subsequently requested in writing that the broker procure the insurance from or place the insurance with an excess line insurer.

On March 31, 2011, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed into law Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, Part I of which amends the Insurance Law to conform to the NRRA.

Insurance Regulation 41 (11 NYCRR Part 27) consists of 24 sections and one appendix addressing the regulation of excess line insurance placements.

The Department of Financial Services (“Department”) amended Section 27.0 to discuss the NRRA and Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011.

The Department amended Section 27.1 to delete language in the definition of “eligible” and to add three new defined terms: “exempt commercial purchaser,” “insured’s home state,” and “United States.”

Section 27.2 is not amended.

The Department amended Section 27.3 to provide an exception for an ECP consistent with Insurance Law Section 2118(b)(3)(F) and to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York.

The Department amended Section 27.4 to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York.

The Department amended Section 27.5 to: (1) clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York; (2) with regard to an ECP, require an excess line broker or the producing broker to affirm in part A or part C of the affidavit that the ECP was specifically advised in writing, prior to placement, that the insurance may or may not be available from the authorized market that may provide greater protection with more regulatory oversight; (3) require an excess line broker to identify the insured’s home state in part A of the affidavit; and (4) clarify that the premium tax is to be allocated in accordance with Section 27.9 of Insurance Regulation 41 for insurance contracts that have an effective date prior to July 21, 2011.

The Department amended Section 27.6 to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York.

The Department amended Section 27.7(b) to revise the address to which reports required by Section 27.7 should be submitted.

The Department amended Section 27.8 to: (1) require a licensed excess line broker to electronically file an annual premium tax statement, unless the Superintendent of Financial Services (the “Superintendent”) grants the broker an exemption pursuant to Section 27.23 of Insurance Regulation 41; (2) acknowledge that payment of the premium tax may be made electronically; and (3) change a reference to “Superintendent of Insurance” to “Superintendent of Financial Services.”

The Department amended Section 27.9 to clarify how an excess line broker must calculate the taxable portion of the premium for: (1) insurance contracts that have an effective date prior to July 21, 2011; and (2) insurance contracts that have an effective date on or after July 21, 2011 and that cover property or risks located both inside and outside the United States.

The Department amended Sections 27.10, 27.11, and 27.12 to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York.

The Department amended Section 27.13 to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York and to require an excess line broker to obtain, review, and retain certain trust fund information if the excess line insurer seeks an exemption from Insurance Law Section 1213. The Department also amended Section 27.13 to require an excess line insurer to file electronically with the Superintendent a current listing that sets forth certain individual policy details.

The Department amended Section 27.14 to state that in order to be exempt from Insurance Law Section 1213 pursuant to Section 27.16 of Insurance Regulation 41, an excess line insurer must establish and maintain a trust fund, and to permit an actuary who is a fellow of the Casualty Actuarial Society (FCAS) or a fellow in the Society of Actuaries (FSA) to make certain audits and certifications (in addition to a certified public accountant), with regard to the trust fund.

Section 27.15 is not amended.

The Department amended Section 27.16 to state that an excess line insurer will be subject to Insurance Law Section 1213 unless the contract of insurance is effectuated in accordance with Insurance Law Section 2105 and Insurance Regulation 41 and the insurer maintains a trust fund in accordance with Sections 27.14 and 27.15 of Insurance Regulation 41, in addition to other current requirements.

The Department amended Sections 27.17, 27.18, 27.19, 27.20, and 27.21 to clarify that the requirements set forth in this section apply when the insured’s home state is New York.

Section 27.22 is not amended.

The Department repealed current Section 27.23 and added a new Section 27.23 titled, “Exemptions from electronic filing and submission requirements.”

Section 27.24 is not amended.

The Department amended the excess line premium tax allocation schedule set forth in appendix four to apply to insurance contracts that have an effective date prior to July 21, 2011.

The Department added a new appendix five, which sets forth an excess line premium tax allocation schedule to apply to insurance contracts that have an effective date on or after July 21, 2011 and that cover property and risks located both inside and outside the United States.

1. Statutory authority: The Superintendent’s authority for the promulgation of the Fourteenth Amendment to Insurance Regulation 41 (11 NYCRR Part 27) derives from Sections 202 and 302 of the Financial Services Law, Sections 301, 316, 1213, 2101, 2104, 2105, 2110, 2116, 2117, 2118, 2121, 2122, 2130, 9102, and Article 21 of the Insurance Law, Chapter 225 of the Laws of 1997, Chapter 587 of the Laws of 2002, and Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011.

The federal Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 (the “NRRA”) significantly changes the paradigm for excess line insurance placements in the United States. Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011 amends the Insurance Law and the Tax Law to conform to the NRRA. The NRRA and Chapter 61 have been impacting excess line placements since their effective date of July 21, 2011.

Section 301 of the Insurance Law and Sections 202 and 302 of the Financial Services Law authorize the Superintendent of Financial Services (the “Superintendent”) to prescribe regulations interpreting the provisions of the Insurance Law, and effectuate any power granted to the Superintendent under the Insurance Law. Section 316 authorizes the Superintendent to promulgate regulations to require an insurer or other person or entity making a filing or submission with the Superintendent to submit the filing or submission to the Superintendent by electronic means, provided that the insurer or other person or entity affected thereby may submit a request to the Superintendent for an exemption from the electronic filing requirement upon a demonstration of undue hardship, impracticability, or good cause, subject to the approval of the Superintendent.

Section 1213 provides the manner by which substituted service on an unauthorized insurer may be made in any proceeding against it on an insurance contract issued in New York. Substituted service may be made on the Superintendent in the manner prescribed in Section 1213.

Article 21 sets forth the duties and obligations of insurance brokers and excess line brokers. Section 2101 sets forth relevant definitions. Section 2104 governs the licensing of insurance brokers. Section 2105 sets forth licensing requirements for excess line brokers. Section 2110 provides grounds for the Superintendent to discipline licensees by revoking or suspending licenses or, pursuant to Section 2127, imposing a monetary penalty in lieu of revocation or suspension. Section 2116 permits payment of commissions to brokers and prohibits compensation to unlicensed persons. Section 2117 prohibits the aiding of an unauthorized insurer, with exceptions. Section 2118 sets forth the duties of excess line brokers, with regard to the placement of insurance with eligible foreign and alien excess line insurers, including the responsibility to ascertain and verify the financial condition of an unauthorized insurer before placing business with that insurer. Section 2121 provides that brokers have an agency relationship with insurers for the collection of premiums. Section 2122 imposes limitations on advertising by producers. Section 2130 establishes the Excess Line Association of New York (“ELANY”).

Section 9102 establishes rules regarding the allocation of direct premiums taxable in New York, where insurance covers risks located both in and out of New York.

2. Legislative objectives: Generally, unauthorized insurers may not do an insurance business in New York. In permitting a limited exception for licensed excess line brokers to procure insurance policies in New York from excess line insurers, the Legislature established statutory requirements to protect persons seeking insurance in New York. The NRRA significantly changes the paradigm for excess (or “surplus”) line insurance placements in the United States. The NRRA prohibits any state, other than the home state of an insured, from requiring a premium tax payment for excess line insurance. Further, the NRRA subjects the placement of excess line insurance solely to the statutory and regulatory requirements of the insured’s home state and declares that only an insured’s home state may require an excess line broker to be licensed to sell, solicit, or negotiate excess line insurance with respect to such insured. In addition, the NRRA establishes uniform eligibility standards for excess line insurers. A state may not impose additional eligibility conditions.

Under the new NRRA paradigm, an excess line broker now must ascertain an insured’s home state before placing any property/casualty excess line business. Thus, if the insured’s home state is not New York, even though the insured goes to the broker’s office in New York, the excess line broker must be licensed in the insured’s home state in order for the broker to procure the excess line coverage for that insured. Conversely, a person who is approached by an insured outside of New York must be licensed as an excess line broker in New York in order to procure excess line coverage for an insured whose home state is New York.

On March 31, 2011, Governor Andrew M. Cuomo signed into law Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, Part I of which amends the Insurance Law to conform to the NRRA. The NRRA and Chapter 61 took effect on July 21, 2011 and have been impacting excess line placements since that date.

3. Needs and benefits: Insurance Regulation 41 governs the placement of excess line insurance. The purpose of the excess line law is to enable consumers who are unable to obtain insurance from authorized insurers to obtain coverage from eligible excess line insurers. This regulation implements the provisions and purposes of Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, which amended the Insurance Law to conform to the NRRA. The NRRA and Chapter 61 took effect on July 21, 2011 and have been impacting excess line placements since that date.

Section 27.14 of Insurance Regulation 41 currently prohibits an excess line broker from placing coverage with an excess line insurer unless the insurer has established and maintained a trust fund. However, the new NRRA eligibility requirements do not include a trust fund with respect to foreign insurers (alien insurers, however, do have to maintain a trust fund that satisfies the International Insurers Department (“IID”) of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”)). As such, New York is no longer requiring a trust fund of foreign insurers for eligibility.

Currently, Insurance Law Section 1213(e) exempts excess line insurers writing excess line insurance in New York from the requirements of Section 1213, such as the requirement that an insurer deposit with the clerk of the court cash or securities or a bond with good and sufficient sureties, in an amount to be fixed by the court sufficient to secure payments of any final judgment that may be rendered by the court, with the clerk of the court before filing any pleading in any proceeding against it, so long as the excess line insurance contract designates the Superintendent for service of process and, in material part, the policy is effectuated in accordance with Section 2105, the section that applies to excess line brokers. In a memorandum to the governor, dated March 30, 1949, recommending favorable executive action on the bill, the Superintendent of Insurance wrote that it was “our understanding that this subsection was inserted as the result of representations made by the representatives of Lloyds of London because the contracts of insurance customarily [written] by the underwriters and placed through licensees of this Department, contain a provision whereby the underwriters consent to be sued in the courts of this state and they maintain a trust fund in New York of a very sizable amount, which is available for the payment of any judgment which may be secured in an action involving one of their contracts of insurance.”

When the Superintendent of Insurance first promulgated Insurance Regulation 41, effective October 1, 1962, pursuant to his broad power to make regulations, he codified in the regulation the longstanding practice regarding the trust fund, and established minimum provisions and requirements, thus providing a reasonable alternative for unauthorized insurers that regularly engage in the sale of insurance through the excess line market. While the specific provisions have been amended a number of times over the years, every iteration of Insurance Regulation 41 has called for a trust fund as a means of providing alternative security that the insurer would have resources to pay judgments against the insurer.

Although the NRRA apparently precludes New York from requiring a foreign insurer to maintain a trust fund to be eligible in New York, or a trust fund for an alien insurer that deviates from the IID requirements, New York policyholders need to be protected when claims arise. As a result, the Department is amending Section 27.16 of Insurance Regulation 41 to provide that an excess line insurer will be subject to Insurance Law Section 1213’s requirements unless the contract of insurance is effectuated in accordance with Insurance Law Section 2105, the Superintendent is designated as agent for service of process, and the insurer maintains a trust fund in accordance with Sections 27.14 and 27.15 of Insurance Regulation 41 (in addition to other requirements currently set forth in Section 27.16). Further, the Department is amending Section 27.14 of Insurance Regulation 41 to state that in order to be exempt from Insurance Law Section 1213 pursuant to Section 27.16 of Insurance Regulation 41, an excess line insurer must establish and maintain a trust fund. Insurance Law Section 316 authorizes the Superintendent to promulgate regulations to require an insurer or other person or entity making a filing or submission with the Superintendent to submit the filing or submission to the Superintendent by electronic means, provided that the insurer or other person or entity affected thereby may submit a request to the Superintendent for an exemption from the electronic filing requirement upon a demonstration of undue hardship, impracticability, or good cause, subject to the approval of the Superintendent.

The Department amended Section 27.8(a) of Insurance Regulation 41 to require excess line brokers to file annual premium tax statements electronically, and amended Section 27.13 to require excess line brokers to file electronically a listing that sets forth certain individual policy details. In addition, the Department added a new Section 27.13 to Insurance Regulation 41 to allow excess line brokers to apply for a “hardship” exception to the electronic filing or submission requirement.

4. Costs: The rule is not expected to impose costs on excess line brokers, and it merely conforms the requirements regarding placement of coverage with excess line insurers to the requirements in Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, which amended the Insurance Law to conform to the NRRA. Although the amended regulation will require excess line brokers to file annual premium tax statements and a listing that sets forth certain individual policy details electronically, most brokers already do business electronically. In fact ELANY already requires documents to be filed electronically. Moreover, the regulation also provides a method whereby excess line brokers may apply for an exemption from the electronic filing or submission requirement.

With regard to the trust fund amendment, on the one hand, excess line insurers may incur costs if they choose to establish and maintain a trust fund in order to be exempt from Insurance Law Section 1213. On the other hand, it should be significantly less expensive to establish and maintain a trust fund rather than comply with Insurance Law Section 1213. This is a business decision that each insurer will need to make. The trust fund, if established and maintained, will be for the purpose of protecting all United States policyholders.

Costs to the Department of Financial Services also should be minimal, as existing personnel are available to review any modified filings necessitated by the regulations. In fact, filing forms electronically may produce a cost savings for the Department of Financial Services. These rules impose no compliance costs on any state or local governments.

5. Local government mandates: These rules do not impose any program, service, duty or responsibility upon a city, town, village, school district or fire district.

6. Paperwork: The regulation imposes no new reporting requirements on regulated parties.

7. Duplication: The regulation will not duplicate any existing state or federal rule, but rather implement and conform to the federal requirements.

8. Alternatives: The Department discussed the changes related to trust funds and Insurance Law Section 1213 with counsel at the NAIC and with ELANY.

9. Federal standards: This regulation will implement the provisions and purposes of Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, which amends the Insurance Law to conform to the NRRA.

10. Compliance schedule: Pursuant to Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, this regulation will impact excess line insurance placements effective on and after July 21, 2011.

This rule is directed at excess line brokers and excess line insurers.

Excess line brokers are considered to be small businesses as defined in section 102(8) of the State Administrative Procedure Act. The rule is not expected to have an adverse impact on these small businesses because it merely conforms the requirements regarding placement of coverage with excess line insurers to Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, which amended the Insurance Law to conform to the federal Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010.

The rule will require excess line brokers to file annual premium tax statements electronically, and to file electronically a listing that sets forth certain individual policy details. However, the excess line broker may submit a request to the Superintendent for an exemption from the electronic filing requirement upon a demonstration of undue hardship, impracticability, or good cause, subject to the approval of the Superintendent.

Further, the Department of Financial Services has monitored Annual Statements of excess line insurers subject to this rule, and believes that none of them fall within the definition of “small business,” because there are none that are both independently owned and have fewer than one hundred employees.

The Department of Financial Services finds that this rule will not impose any adverse economic impact on small businesses and will not impose any reporting, recordkeeping or other compliance requirements on small businesses.

The rule does not impose any impacts, including any adverse impacts, or reporting, recordkeeping, or other compliance requirements on any local governments.

The Department of Financial Services (“Department”) finds that this rule does not impose any additional burden on persons located in rural areas, and the Department finds that it will not have an adverse impact on rural areas. This rule applies uniformly to regulated parties that do business in both rural and non-rural areas of New York State.

The Department of Financial Services finds that this rule should have no impact on jobs and employment opportunities. The rule conforms the requirements regarding placement of coverage with excess line insurers to Chapter 61 of the Laws of 2011, which amended the Insurance Law to conform to the federal Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010. The rule also makes an excess line insurer subject to Insurance Law section 1213, unless it chooses to establish and maintain a trust fund in New York for the benefit of New York policyholders.

The New York State Department of Financial Services (“Department”) received comments from a national trade association representing the excess line industry (“excess line trade organization”), a national property/casualty insurance trade organization (“property/casualty trade organization”), a national insurance trade organization (“insurance trade organization”), the New York stamping office, an excess line insurer, an attorney that represents an insurance trade organization for insurers that comprise the London market (“counsel for the London market”), and an attorney who represents excess line insurers (“counsel for excess line insurers”), in response to the publication of its proposed rule in the New York State Register.

Comments on specific parts of the rule are discussed below.

11 NYCRR 27.1(q) (“Definition of Eligible”)

Comment

The insurance trade organization commented that because the definition of “eligible” references satisfying the requirements of this rule, an unauthorized insurer’s eligibility in New York is squarely implicated, contrary to the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 (“NRRA”). Accordingly, the organization urged the Department to delete this language.

Department’s Response

The Department is considering whether to make any change in the context of adopting the permanent rule.

Proposed Amendment to 11 NYCRR 27.11 (“Prohibited Activities”)

Comment

The property/casualty trade organization and insurance trade organization commented that the inclusion of language in the proposed rule prohibiting an insurer from providing coverage under certain circumstances is unnecessary, given the direction to the excess line brokers, and without authority. The organizations requested that the Department remove the language.

Department’s Response

This comment applies to the proposed rule only, because the emergency rule does not contain this language. However, the Department does not intend to remove the language when it adopts the proposed rule. Unauthorized insurers may engage only in certain limited acts in New York, including in the excess line market, and excess line policies are subject to certain New York laws and regulations. Unauthorized insurers can be and have been held accountable for violations of those laws. The language highlights and makes clear to insurers that they can be held responsible for acting in violation of Insurance Law section 1102 by doing an insurance business in New York without a license or by otherwise violating the Insurance Law.

Proposed Amendments to 11 NYCRR 27.13 (“Duty to Inquire”)

Comment

With regard to the language in section 27.13(a)(1), which requires an excess line broker to obtain, review, and retain the financial statement filed by an alien unauthorized insurer with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”), the excess line insurer commented that this information is available only to state insurance regulators and not excess line brokers. The insurer requested that the Department remove this requirement with respect to alien unauthorized insurers.

With regard to the language in section 27.13(a)(3) and (4), which require excess line brokers to obtain, review, and retain a copy of an unauthorized insurer’s latest available report on examination, if any, issued by its home jurisdiction, and a certification from the insurer’s home jurisdiction verifying that the insurer is authorized to write the kinds of insurance sought to be placed, the excess line insurer commented that non-U.S. regulators do not routinely provide this information to the public and excess line brokers therefore will not be able to fulfill this requirement with respect to alien unauthorized insurers. The insurer requested that the Department remove this requirement with respect to alien unauthorized insurers.

The New York stamping office stated that it will continue to seek the foregoing documents from insurers to relieve excess line brokers of the burden of seeking them and to relieve insurers of the burden of providing them to more than one party.

Counsel for excess line insurers suggested that the foregoing documentation be made available through the Department or an NAIC resource accessible at no charge by excess line brokers, because it would remove the need for and costs to insurers to provide the same information to multiple excess line brokers or to make filings with the New York stamping office as a repository.

Department’s Response

The Department is considering whether to make any change in the context of adopting the permanent rule.

Comment

The property/casualty trade organization, excess line trade organization, and counsel for the London market commented that the duty to “obtain, review and retain” the stipulated list of documents and reports prior to the placement of coverage falls outside the criteria permitted by the NRRA. Counsel for the London market also commented that retaining this language will result in additional compliance and transaction costs, which ultimately will be passed on to consumers.

In addition, the property/casualty trade organization noted that the rule currently provides that, prior to placing business with an unauthorized insurer, an excess line broker must make inquiry sufficient to ascertain the insurer’s financial stability and capacity adequate to its business. The organization commented that this requirement can impose significant challenges for the excess line broker and create a heightened standard of care and liability exposure. The property/casualty trade organization and excess line trade organization also stated that it imposes obligations beyond the NRRA eligibility provisions, while counsel for excess line insurers observed that the requirements appear contrary to the intent of the NRRA that the regulators and consumers of any state may rely on the solvency regulation and other oversight performed by an insurer’s domiciliary regulator.

The organizations requested that the Department delete this language and amend the rule to clarify that the excess line broker may place business with any foreign excess line insurer that is authorized in its domiciliary state and maintains the minimum capital and surplus required by the New York Insurance Law or this rule.

Department’s Response

While the NRRA generally prohibits a state from imposing eligibility requirements on, or establishing eligibility criteria for, a foreign excess line insurer, or prohibiting an excess line broker from placing excess line insurance with an alien excess line insurer listed with the NAIC’s International Insurers Department (“IID”), requiring an excess line broker to obtain, review, and retain certain documents is neither an eligibility criterion imposed on a foreign insurer nor a prohibition against placing insurance with an alien insurer. Rather, these requirements expand upon Insurance Law section 2118(a)(1), which requires an excess line broker to use due care when selecting an excess line insurer from which to procure a policy.

As for resulting in additional compliance and transaction costs and creating a heightened standard of care and liability exposure, these requirements are longstanding and therefore should not impose any additional compliance or transaction costs or create a heightened standard of care or additional liability exposure.

Thus, the Department did not make any changes to the rule in light of this comment.

Comment

The excess line trade organization and counsel for excess line insurers commented that the requirement in section 27.13(g), which provides that an excess line broker must make inquiry sufficient to demonstrate that the insurer has complied with section 27.14 of the rule before placing business with an unauthorized insurer, is an eligibility requirement in New York contrary to the NRRA. The organization asked the Department to remove the language.

Department’s Response

This comment applies to the proposed rule only, because the emergency rule does not contain this language. The Department is considering whether to make any change in the context of adopting the permanent rule.

Comment

The New York stamping office recommended that the Department seek to enhance the financial reporting requirements imposed by the NAIC’s IID and to make the disclosure of the alien insurer financial information transparent to all participants in the marketplace.

Department’s Response

The Department did not make any changes since this comment does not pertain to the rule.

Proposed Amendment to 11 NYCRR 27.14 (“Filings by Unauthorized Insurers”)

Comment

The property/casualty trade organization, insurance trade organization, excess line trade organization, and counsel for the London market commented that the requirement that unauthorized insurers file individual policy details (the “EL-1 report”) is an eligibility requirement in violation of the NRRA. The organizations urged the Department to remove this requirement.

Department’s Response

This requirement is neither an eligibility criterion imposed on a foreign insurer nor a prohibition against placing insurance with an alien insurer, because requiring an insurer to file individual policy details does not prohibit an insurer from being eligible to write excess line insurance in New York or prohibit an excess line broker from placing excess line insurance with the insurer. In addition, this information is necessary because it is the only way for the Department to ensure that excess line brokers are reporting and paying the correct excess line tax.

Comment

The property/casualty trade organization commented that proposed section 27.14(a)(5), which requires an unauthorized insurer to file annually with the Superintendent such other information as the Superintendent may require, is too arbitrary and potentially damaging to the excess line marketplace given the requirements for this unknown information, and asked that the Department remove it.

Department’s Response

The Department is considering whether to make any change in the context of adopting the permanent rule.

Comment

The insurance trade organization commented that the proposed language in section 27.14(b), which applies Insurance Law section 2121 regarding authorizing brokers to receive premium on behalf of insurers, is based on questionable authority. The organization asserts that the statutory authority cited for this language, Insurance Law section 2121, references insurance brokers and insurers and not excess lines brokers or unauthorized insurers. The organization requested that the Department delete this language.

Department’s Response

This comment applies to the proposed rule only, because the emergency rule does not contain this language. This provision is intended to merely highlight and make clear the applicability of section 2121 to excess line transactions. Excess line brokers are merely a subset of insurance brokers. In order to be licensed as an excess line broker, a person must be licensed as an insurance broker first. In addition, Insurance Law section 2121 refers to insurers that deliver in this state an insurance contract to any insurance broker or any insured. This includes both authorized insurers and unauthorized insurers. Therefore, the Department does not intend to make this change in the proposed rule.

Trust Fund

Comment

Counsel for excess line insurers requested that the Department add a provision to the proposed rule expressly authorizing trustee banks to terminate previously existing trust funds and release the monies in the trust funds to the insurer without Department approval or other requirement. Alternatively, counsel suggested that the Department establish and publish a formal process for releasing trust fund deposits as other states have.

Department’s Response

As explained in Supplement No. 1 to Insurance Circular Letter No. 9 (2011), the NRRA does not void the obligations under a trust fund agreement entered into by an unauthorized foreign or alien insurer and a trustee prior to the NRRA’s July 21, 2011 effective date. A trust fund agreement establishes the rights and responsibilities of the parties. It is a private agreement that, once established, provides for the protection of the beneficiary policyholders. While the NRRA prospectively preempts certain state laws as of July 21, 2011, it does not obviate a private agreement between parties entered into prior to that date. This rule cannot obviate a private agreement either. Therefore, the Department does not intend to make any changes to the proposed rule in light of this comment.