BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó



                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  1





          Date of Hearing:  August 19, 2015


                        ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS


                                 Jimmy Gomez, Chair


          SB 696  
          (Roth) - As Amended July 16, 2015


           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 
          |Policy       |Insurance                      |Vote:|13 - 0       |
          |Committee:   |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |Judiciary                      |     |10 - 0       |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |-------------+-------------------------------+-----+-------------|
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
          |             |                               |     |             |
           ----------------------------------------------------------------- 


          Urgency:  No  State Mandated Local Program:  NoReimbursable:  No


          SUMMARY:


          This bill conforms California law to a national model law by  
          permitting insurers to use a new methodology, known as principle  
          based reserving (PBR), for determining the amount of required  
          reserves for certain life insurance policies.  Specifically,  
          this bill:







                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  2







          1)Stipulates PBR takes effect on January 1 of the year following  
            the first July 1 after PBR is adopted by a specified minimum  
            number of states which must also represent 75% of nationwide  
            premiums for life, health, and accident insurance policies.


          2)Provides that PBR only applies to policies issued on or after  
            its effective date.


          3)Requires all life insurers to annually submit an actuarial  
            analysis of the company's reserves based on the Valuation  
            Manual (VM) adopted by the National Association of Insurance  
            Commissioners (NAIC).  Requires companies to provide an annual  
            certification of the effectiveness of internal controls for  
            PBR valuation and related data to the commissioner.


          4)Provides that if the VM does not address a specific product or  
            does so in a manner in conflict with California law, the  
            insurer must comply with the minimum reserve requirements  
            established by the Insurance Code or by rules issued by the  
            commissioner.


          5)Defines the PBR-related information that is confidential.


          6)Permits the commissioner to develop regulations regarding the  
            actuaries engaged by the commissioner and provides that the  
            initial regulations may be adopted as emergency regulations.


          7)Permits the commissioner to hire staff, as well as a subject  
            matter expert who is exempt from civil service to lead the  
            implementation of PBR. Permits the commissioner to set the  
            salary for the exempt position without approval of the  
            Department of Human Resources.







                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  3







          8)Permits the commissioner to assess life insurers for the cost  
            of implementing PBR.  The initial assessment for each life  
            insurer varies based on the dollar value of life insurance  
            premiums collect by each insurer, and can be modified if there  
            is a change to the VM that necessitates a change to the  
            assessment.  


          9)Permits the commissioner to conduct an actuarial examination,  
            at the insurer's expense, of a life insurer's reserves and  
            reserve methodology.  


          10)Provides that the bill becomes operative on the date the  
            commissioner certifies adequate funding has been appropriated  
            and sufficient staff and resources required to enforce PBR are  
            in place.


          11)Makes numerous technical and clarifying changes to the  
            Insurance Code, and specifies other substantive provisions  
            related to PBR.


          


          FISCAL EFFECT:





          1)Costs to the California Department of Insurance of $550,000 in  
            fiscal year (FY) 2015-16, $1.9 million in FY 2016-17 and $1.4  
            million in FY 2017-18 and ongoing to review and approve all  
            participating companies' detailed modeling and analysis  
            justifying their reserve estimates (Insurance Fund). 







                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  4








          2)Projected revenues of $1.2 million annually, based on an  
            assessment schedule included in the bill for a special  
            assessment on insurers to support PBR-related regulatory  
            activities (Insurance Fund).



          COMMENTS:





          1)Purpose. This bill would apply PBR, a dynamic reserving method  
            for new life insurance policies based on a model law adopted  
            by the NAIC.  PBR is intended to more precisely determine the  
            reserve requirements according to the individual  
            characteristics of each product. This bill is co-sponsored by  
            CDI and the Association of California Life and Health  
            Insurance Companies. 



          2)Background. Existing law requires life insurers to establish  
            reserves for life insurance policies according to statutory  
            formulas that incorporate uniform mortality and interest rate  
            assumptions.  It also requires reserves to be funded with high  
            quality assets, generally low-risk bonds.  PBR is a  
            sophisticated methodology developed by the NAIC.  This new  
            method replaces the current formulaic approach to determining  
            reserves with an approach that more closely reflects the risks  
            of highly complex products. The improved calculation is  
            expected to "right-size reserves," reducing reserves that are  
            too high for some products and increasing reserves that are  
            too low for other products.  









                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  5






            The NAIC attempts to standardize many aspects of insurance  
            industry regulation, and often requires standards to be  
            adopted by a number of states before implementation. When at  
            least 42 states (a supermajority), representing 75% of total  
            U.S. premium, adopt PBR as a standard, it will be implemented  
            over approximately three years and only for new business. As  
            of August 4, 2015, 36 states have adopted the revised model  
            laws.





          3)Comment: Special Assessment and Triggers.  This bill  
            authorizes CDI to collect an annual assessment from  
            participating companies, based on their premium dollar volume,  
            to offset the cost additional oversight duties required of CDI  
            pursuant to the bill.  The assessment is projected to result  
            in slightly less ongoing revenue that CDI projects the bill  
            will cost.  
            Implementation of PBR in the state, according to this bill,  
            only occurs when two trigger conditions are met before  
            implementation.  The first is the adoption of PBR by a  
            sufficient number of states, which will trigger  
            near-nationwide simultaneous adoption. California does not  
            control this; however, given adoption by 29 states and pending  
            legislation in others, it appears highly likely that over the  
            next 2 years, a sufficient number of states will have adopted  
            PBR rules, which would meet the first trigger condition. 


            The second condition embedded in the bill is a provision  
            stating the act shall become operative on the date the  
            commissioner certifies resources are available and sufficient  
            for carrying out the prescribed regulatory duties, prior to  
            implementation. PBR should benefit the insurance industry and  
            consumers from, in most cases, lessening reserve requirements.  
            Given it is a more complicated methodology, however, CDI must  
            have expert staffing and infrastructure in place prior to  







                                                                     SB 696 


                                                                    Page  6





            implementation in order to ensure success and mitigate risk.   
            Although this appears to be a reasonable condition, staff  
            notes it may appear resources are being appropriated  
            prematurely, if the first condition is not yet met.  But if  
            reasonable assurances exist that the first condition will be  
            met, it also seems reasonable to appropriate funds and begin  
            preparation for this complex new initiative prior to the first  
            condition being met.  On the other hand, California must adopt  
            PBR before the first trigger is met (due to its size, inaction  
            by California precludes nationwide adoption).  Thus, the  
            language could create a legal and budgetary chicken-and-egg  
            scenario where PBR is not operative until the commissioner  
            certifies resources are available, but resources are not  
            appropriated until there is an assurance PBR is operative.  It  
            is unclear what NAIC considers "adoption"-is it enough that  
            the law conditionally adopts it?


            If the intent is that the assessment and the build-up of  
            resources should not be contingent on whether PBR is operative  
            nationwide, staff suggests this be clarified.  Budget language  
            related to an appropriation could include an additional  
            trigger if there are concerns about the first condition being  
            met at the time an appropriation is considered.  


            Finally, regardless of the above suggestion, the assessment on  
            insurers is among the provisions of the bill that is  
            contingent on certification of adequate resources being in  
            place.  If the intent is to allow the assessment to fund the  
            build-up of staff resources,the committee may wish to consider  
            a technical correction to specify the assessment be allowable  
            prior to the commissioner's certification that resources are  
            available.  


          Analysis Prepared by:Lisa Murawski / APPR. / (916)  
          319-2081









                                                                     SB 696  


                                                                    Page  7