Author: Admin

SFAA Addresses Changes to Georgia Bond Requirements for Livestock Sales

SFAA Addresses Changes to Georgia Bond Requirements for Livestock Sales SFAA submitted comments to the Georgia Department of Agriculture (Department) to address proposed regulations that implement a new law that permits livestock dealers and auction operators to obtain a letter of credit, certificate of deposit, or “other written instrument” in lieu of the bond.  SFAA promoted the value of bonds in comparison to other forms of security based on the surety?s prequalification of the bond principal and the financial protection offered in the event of a default.  The proposed rules also implement a change in the law that deleted the specified bond amounts for a livestock auction operator and for dealers purchasing livestock at an auction.  Instead, the amount of the bond or other security will be determined through a memorandum of agreement with the Department, which must be sufficient to secure the performance of the dealer or the operator’s obligations.  To ensure that the amount of financial protection is the same, the amount required should be the same regardless of the form of security that is furnished.

Members should visit Advocacy / General Info (Members) for more information.

SFAA Comments on Arkansas Pharmacy Benefit Managers Regulations

SFAA submitted comments to the Arkansas Insurance Department (Department) to address proposed regulations that would require pharmacy benefit managers (PBM) to post a $1 million license bond.  The proposed rules would permit direct actions on the bond.  If the bond amount would cause the PBM significant financial hardship, the Insurance Commissioner could reduce the amount required.  We explained the surety?s underwriting process and noted that the high bond amount could reduce the bond?s availability.  Similarly, we explained that the proposed regulations contain a broad obligation in the bond?s conditions with regard to complying with any statute.  We recommended that the scope of the bond?s conditions be limited to compliance with the applicable laws and regulations for PBMs.  SFAA offered to work with the Department on these issues to improve the bond?s availability.  The proposed rules also provide that a PBM that furnishes a $1 million bond under the PBM regulation need not furnish a $25,000 bond under the TPA regulation.

Members should visit Advocacy / General Info (Members) for more information.

Statutory and Regulatory Provisions Governing Fidelity and Surety Filing Requirements – Rate and Form Filing Status By Jurisdiction  SFAA?s Rate and Form Filing Chart has been updated for recent statutory changes.

For Members only (or navigate to Member Services / Regulatory)

New bonding opportunities enacted in the state legislature that may be of interest to SFAA members has been posted. The report is divided by line of business: contract surety, commercial surety, and fidelity bonds. For your reference, we have included the date of enactment for each bill. SFAA updates this list periodically as new bonding opportunities are enacted.

Access the New Bonding Opportunities now

End of 2018 Legislative Session reports have been added for Oregon and updated for New Mexico for Members only.

Navigate to Government Relations / End of Legislative Session Reports

Federal Agency Withdraws Hard Rock Mining Rule

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) will not adopt final regulations for its proposed financial responsibility requirements for hard rock mining operations for metals and non-metallic fuel minerals that SFAA opposed. Surety bonds would have been accepted to meet the requirement and SFAA noted that the bond requirement could have been duplicative of existing state and federal reclamation bonding requirements. We also opposed provisions that would have permitted direct actions on the bond. Other stakeholders also noted the potential for duplicative financial responsibility requirements and the potential problems with the direct action provisions. The EPA agreed with these concerns and will not move forward with its proposal.

SFAA Submits Recommendations on Oregon Mortgage Servicers License Bond Rules

SFAA made recommendations on the claims provisions to the Oregon Department of Consumer and Business Services concerning proposed rules for bonding mortgage loan servicers. The rules would require the bond to remain in place for five years after the mortgage servicer ceases to be licensed in the State. Direct actions also are permitted on the bond and claims must be filed before the bond expires. SFAA recommended that two or three years for the limitations period for claims would be more workable. SFAA also recommended that the limitations period to take action on the bond should begin when the surety cancels the bond or when the servicer ceases to be licensed, whichever occurs earlier. We recommended that the rules be clarified so that the claimant has a period of time after the bond is cancelled or the license period ends to make a claim, and that the claims period is not long that that it increases uncertainty for the surety, which could impact the availability of the bond.

The bond or letter of credit would have to be in an amount ranging from $50,000 to $200,000, based on the mortgage servicer’s total unpaid principal balance of residential mortgage loans in Oregon. SFAA did not comment on the bond amount specifically, but noted that a higher bond amount would require the bond principal to have greater financial resources based on the surety’s underwriting process.

Members should visit Government Relations / General Info (Members) for more information.

SFAA Objects to Proposed Montana Rules Eliminating Aggregate Liability Provision for Public Adjusters’ Bond

SFAA advised against a proposed rule from the Montana Commissioner of Securities and Insurance that would delete a provision limiting the surety’s aggregate liability to the bond amount for the bond required from public adjusters. SFAA noted that the proposed rules could affect the bond’s availability by increasing the surety’s financial exposure. The proposed rules state that the intent of the changes is to remove superfluous language without changing the meaning of the rule. Our comments noted that eliminating the limit on the surety’s aggregate liability could result in a material, unintended change as the statute does not limit the surety’s aggregate liability.

Members should visit Government Relations / General Info (Members) for more information.

2018 Public Private Partnership (P3) State Legislation

Members should visit Government Relations / General Info (Members) for more information.