Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Insurance Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lobbyist requests bill to change Kansas annuity nonforfeiture rules to match NAIC model
Summary
A lobbyist for Prudential Financial asked the Committee on Insurance to introduce bill request RS 26RS2934 to change Kansas’ standard nonforfeiture law for annuities, aligning state rules with the NAIC model and exempting contingent deferred annuities from certain nonforfeiture requirements. The committee submitted the request with no objections.
Representative: Matt Hickam, HBS lobbyist for Prudential Financial, asked the Committee on Insurance to introduce a bill to change Kansas’ standard nonforfeiture law for annuities.
"My name is Matt Hickam, with the lobbying firm HBS representing Prudential Financial. We have a bill a request for a bill introduction. Their RS number is 26RS2934," Hickam said, explaining the proposal would "align the state with the current NAIC model by exempting contingent deferred annuities from certain non forfeiture requirements." The request was taken up by the committee.
Committee procedure: The committee chair opened the floor for objections following the introduction. No member objected, and the chair directed that the bill request be submitted. The transcript records the chair saying, "If there are no objections... Let it be done," and subsequently confirming the submission.
What the proposal would do: According to the bill request as described in the meeting, RS 26RS2934 would amend Kansas’ nonforfeiture requirements for annuities so that contingent deferred annuities are exempted from specific nonforfeiture rules, bringing state law into closer alignment with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) model cited by the lobbyist.
What the record does not show: The committee did not debate the substance of the changes, provide bill text, or record a vote beyond the lack of objection to submitting the request. Timing, potential fiscal impacts, and implementation details were not provided in the meeting transcript and are not specified in the record.
Next steps: The bill request was submitted to the committee record for further processing; no additional committee action or scheduling was recorded in this meeting.
