SB 696 — Insurance: principle-based valuation.
Last action — Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 658, Statutes of 2015.
-
✓Introduced
-
✓In Committee
-
✓Passed Senate
-
✓Passed Assembly
-
✓To Executive
-
6Enacted
This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 27, 2015. Enacted.
Prognosis
Where this bill stands today.
Odds of enactment
HighHow often bills like it became law.
-
Enacted
Current position in the legislative process.
-
1 sponsor
1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.
-
Cleared a recorded vote
Passed 10 recorded votes so far.
Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.
Summary
Existing law governs the issuance of life and disability insurance and authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to regulate those insurers. Existing law requires every life and disability insurer doing business in this state to annually submit the opinion of a qualified actuary as to whether the reserves and related actuarial items held in support of the policies and contracts specified by the commissioner by regulation are computed appropriately, are based on assumptions that satisfy contractual provisions, are consistent with prior reported amounts, and comply with applicable state law. Among other things, existing law requires insurers to calculate the minimum standard for the valuation of those policies and contracts using specified mortality tables approved by the commissioner, sets forth the applicable interest rates, and establishes the reserve requirements for various types of life and disability policies and contracts. This bill would explicitly refer to the body of laws imposing those requirements, as specified, as the Standard Valuation Law. The bill would require the commissioner and companies engaging in specified activities relating to the business of life insurance to incorporate the methodology employed by a specified manual of valuation instructions adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in making determinations relating to reserve requirements and the minimum standard of valuation for policies and contracts, as specified. The bill would require a company to establish reserves using a principle-based valuation that meets specified conditions in the valuation manual, including quantifying the benefits, guarantees, and funding associated with the contracts, and would require the company to develop and file with the commissioner, upon request, a principle-based valuation report. The bill would require a company to submit mortality, morbidity, policyholder behavior, or expense experience and other data as prescribed in the valuation manual. This bill would authorize the commissioner to impose an annual assessment on each insurance company, based on the company's gross annual life insurance premium written by the insurer in California during the immediately preceding year, thereby imposing a tax. The bill would exempt certain information submitted by a company to the commissioner from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and would provide that it is not subject to subpoena or discovery or admissible in evidence in any private civil action. The bill would also authorize the commissioner to hire and assign Department of Insurance staff, and retain nondepartmental actuaries and other consultants, to assist the commissioner in implementing principle-based valuation. This bill would provide that the valuation manual would not be operative until the commissioner certifies that adequate funding has been appropriated by the Legislature, and all other necessary resources, including, but not limited to, adequate staff, are available and sufficient to enable the commissioner to carry out the duties required by specified provisions of the bill. The bill would require the commissioner to make that certification by submitting a letter to the Chairs of the Assembly Committee on Insurance and the Senate Committee on Insurance stating that the funding and other necessary resources are available and sufficient to carry out those duties. The bill would also require the commissioner to post a notice on the department's Internet Web site immediately after submitting that certification letter stating that the certification letter has been submitted and that the provisions of the valuation manual are in effect. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.
Bill Text
- Chaptered 10/08/15 - Chaptered Current pdf October 08, 2015
- Enrolled 09/10/15 - Enrolled pdf September 10, 2015
- Amended 08/28/15 - Amended Assembly pdf August 28, 2015
- Amended 07/16/15 - Amended Assembly pdf July 16, 2015
- Amended 07/02/15 - Amended Assembly pdf July 02, 2015
- Amended 06/29/15 - Amended Assembly pdf June 29, 2015
- Amended 05/05/15 - Amended Senate pdf May 05, 2015
- Amended 04/14/15 - Amended Senate pdf April 14, 2015
- Introduced 02/27/15 - Introduced pdf February 27, 2015
- SB696 View text html
Action History
-
Chaptered by Secretary of State. Chapter 658, Statutes of 2015.
-
Approved by the Governor.
-
Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 9:30 a.m.
-
Assembly amendments concurred in. (Ayes 39. Noes 0. Page 2670.) Ordered to engrossing and enrolling.
-
In Senate. Concurrence in Assembly amendments pending.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 2962.) Ordered to the Senate.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
Read second time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (August 27).
-
August 19 set for first hearing. Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 10. Noes 0.) (July 14).
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 13. Noes 0.) (July 8). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on INS.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on INS.
-
Referred to Coms. on INS. and JUD.
-
In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.
-
Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 38. Noes 1. Page 1210.) Ordered to the Assembly.
-
Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
-
From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 1159.) (May 28).
-
Set for hearing May 28.
-
May 18 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.
-
Set for hearing May 18.
-
Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
-
From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. with recommendation: To consent calendar. (Ayes 6. Noes 0. Page 820.) (April 28).
-
Set for hearing April 28.
-
From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 727.) (April 22). Re-referred to Com. on JUD.
-
From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on INS.
-
Set for hearing April 22.
-
Referred to Coms. on INS. and JUD.
-
Read first time.
-
From printer. May be acted upon on or after April 1.
-
Introduced. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.
Sponsors
- Roth · Primary
Sponsorship breakdown
Export CSV (upgrade) →1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 1 voted No
Sponsors (1)
- Roth
Co-sponsors (0)
None.
Not signed on (121)
121 members have not signed on to this bill.
Show all 121 →"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.
Votes
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 3 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 39 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Not Voting |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 69 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| Democratic | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 5 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 78 | 0 | 0 | 2 |
| % of votes cast | 98% | 0% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (80)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Achadjian | — | Yea |
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Brough | — | Yea |
| Brown | — | Yea |
| Jones-Sawyer | — | Yea |
| Levine | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Mathis | — | Yea |
| O'Donnell | — | Yea |
| Perea | — | Yea |
| Ridley-Thomas | — | Yea |
| Steinorth | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Wilk | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Not Voting |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Salas | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Olsen | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Burke | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Harper | — | Yea |
| Campos | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Kim | — | Yea |
| Gray | — | Yea |
| Linder | — | Yea |
| Atkins | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Bonilla | — | Yea |
| Low | — | Yea |
| Lopez | — | Yea |
| McCarty | — | Yea |
| Medina | — | Yea |
| Melendez | — | Yea |
| Mullin | — | Yea |
| Baker | — | Yea |
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Chu | — | Yea |
| Chávez | — | Not Voting |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Dodd | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Obernolte | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Santiago | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Ting | — | Yea |
| Waldron | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Williams | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Gordon | — | Yea |
| Hadley | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Jim Patterson | — | Yea |
| Lorena Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Roger Hernández | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gipson, Mike A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Irwin, Jacqui | Democratic | Yea |
| Dahle, Megan | Republican | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Lackey, Tom | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 17 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (17)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bigelow | — | Yea |
| Bloom | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Eggman | — | Yea |
| Gomez | — | Yea |
| Holden | — | Yea |
| Chang | — | Yea |
| Nazarian | — | Yea |
| Quirk | — | Yea |
| Rendon | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Wood | — | Yea |
| Eduardo Garcia | — | Yea |
| Bonta, Mia | Democratic | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Jones, Brian W. | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 9 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 10 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (10)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Alejo | — | Yea |
| Wagner | — | Yea |
| Weber | — | Yea |
| Chau | — | Yea |
| Maienschein | — | Yea |
| Chiu | — | Yea |
| Thurmond | — | Yea |
| Cristina Garcia | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Gallagher, James | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 11 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Republican | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (13)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Rodriguez | — | Yea |
| Cooley | — | Yea |
| Cooper | — | Yea |
| Frazier | — | Yea |
| Gatto | — | Yea |
| Mayes | — | Yea |
| Dababneh | — | Yea |
| Daly | — | Yea |
| Gonzalez | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Travis Allen | — | Yea |
| Calderon, Lisa | Democratic | Yea |
| Grove, Shannon | Republican | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 36 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Democratic | 2 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 38 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 95% | 3% | 0% | 3% |
How each member voted (40)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Morrell | — | Yea |
| Pan | — | Yea |
| Pavley | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Fuller | — | Yea |
| Galgiani | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Allen | — | Yea |
| Cannella | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| De León | — | Yea |
| Runner | — | Yea |
| Glazer | — | Yea |
| Hancock | — | Yea |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Hueso | — | Not Voting |
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Block | — | Yea |
| Huff | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Vidak | — | Yea |
| Wolk | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
| Mark Stone | — | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| McGuire, Mike | Democratic | Yea |
| Nguyen, Stephanie | Democratic | Nay |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Not Voting |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| % of votes cast | 100% | 0% | 0% | 0% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Bates | — | Yea |
| Hill | — | Yea |
| Lara | — | Yea |
| Nielsen | — | Yea |
| Beall | — | Yea |
| Leyva | — | Yea |
| Mendoza | — | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Democratic | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
| Unaffiliated | 5 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 6 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 86% | 0% | 0% | 14% |
How each member voted (7)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Hertzberg | — | Yea |
| Anderson | — | Yea |
| Leno | — | Yea |
| Monning | — | Yea |
| Moorlach | — | Not Voting |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Jackson, Corey A. | Democratic | Yea |
| Party | Yea | Nay | Present | Not Voting |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Unaffiliated | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| Total | 7 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
| % of votes cast | 88% | 0% | 0% | 13% |
How each member voted (8)
| Member | Party | Vote |
|---|---|---|
| Liu | — | Yea |
| Hall | — | Not Voting |
| Hernandez | — | Yea |
| Mitchell | — | Yea |
| Roth | — | Yea |
| Wieckowski | — | Yea |
| Beth Gaines | — | Yea |
| Bill Berryhill | — | Yea |
Subjects
Frequently asked questions
- What does SB 696 do?
- Existing law governs the issuance of life and disability insurance and authorizes the Insurance Commissioner to regulate those insurers. Existing law requires every life and disability insurer doing business in this state to annually submit the opinion of a qualified actuary as to whether the reserves and related actuarial items held in support of the policies and contracts specified by the commissioner by regulation are computed appropriately, are based on assumptions that satisfy contractual provisions, are consistent with prior reported amounts, and comply with applicable state law. Among other things, existing law requires insurers to calculate the minimum standard for the valuation of those policies and contracts using specified mortality tables approved by the commissioner, sets forth the applicable interest rates, and establishes the reserve requirements for various types of life and disability policies and contracts. This bill would explicitly refer to the body of laws imposing those requirements, as specified, as the Standard Valuation Law. The bill would require the commissioner and companies engaging in specified activities relating to the business of life insurance to incorporate the methodology employed by a specified manual of valuation instructions adopted by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners in making determinations relating to reserve requirements and the minimum standard of valuation for policies and contracts, as specified. The bill would require a company to establish reserves using a principle-based valuation that meets specified conditions in the valuation manual, including quantifying the benefits, guarantees, and funding associated with the contracts, and would require the company to develop and file with the commissioner, upon request, a principle-based valuation report. The bill would require a company to submit mortality, morbidity, policyholder behavior, or expense experience and other data as prescribed in the valuation manual. This bill would authorize the commissioner to impose an annual assessment on each insurance company, based on the company's gross annual life insurance premium written by the insurer in California during the immediately preceding year, thereby imposing a tax. The bill would exempt certain information submitted by a company to the commissioner from disclosure pursuant to the California Public Records Act and would provide that it is not subject to subpoena or discovery or admissible in evidence in any private civil action. The bill would also authorize the commissioner to hire and assign Department of Insurance staff, and retain nondepartmental actuaries and other consultants, to assist the commissioner in implementing principle-based valuation. This bill would provide that the valuation manual would not be operative until the commissioner certifies that adequate funding has been appropriated by the Legislature, and all other necessary resources, including, but not limited to, adequate staff, are available and sufficient to enable the commissioner to carry out the duties required by specified provisions of the bill. The bill would require the commissioner to make that certification by submitting a letter to the Chairs of the Assembly Committee on Insurance and the Senate Committee on Insurance stating that the funding and other necessary resources are available and sufficient to carry out those duties. The bill would also require the commissioner to post a notice on the department's Internet Web site immediately after submitting that certification letter stating that the certification letter has been submitted and that the provisions of the valuation manual are in effect. Existing constitutional provisions require that a statute that limits the right of access to the meetings of public bodies or the writings of public officials and agencies be adopted with findings demonstrating the interest protected by the limitation and the need for protecting that interest. This bill would make legislative findings to that effect. This bill would include a change in state statute that would result in a taxpayer paying a higher tax within the meaning of Section 3 of Article XIIIA of the California Constitution, and thus would require for passage the approval of 23 of the membership of each house of the Legislature.
- Who sponsors SB 696?
- SB 696 is sponsored by Roth.
- What is the current status of SB 696?
- This bill has been enacted into law. Introduced February 27, 2015. Enacted.
- Where can I track SB 696?
- Track SB 696 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.
Make your voice heard on SB 696
Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.
Stay ahead of SB 696
Last checked for changes 2 months ago · updated continuously
One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.
Track this bill →