Committee hears homeowners‑insurance data‑privacy bill; insurance industry pushes back and bill is postponed

House Business Affairs and Labor Committee Chairwoman Ricks opened a hearing on House Bill 10‑91, a bill sponsors said would extend data‑privacy protections to homeowners‑insurance transactions and limit insurers’ ability to sell or otherwise monetize policyholder data.

Sponsor remarks: A sponsor told the committee the bill would let homeowners see, correct and request deletion of data; require insurers to review data holdings annually and delete unnecessary data within 90 days; and prohibit insurers from raising rates, denying coverage or otherwise penalizing consumers for exercising privacy rights. The sponsor said the measure was driven by constituent concerns and that the effective date was set to Jan. 1, 2028, to allow industry transition time.

Industry opposition and operational concerns: Witnesses for the property‑casualty and insurance industries urged the committee to oppose the bill. Dan Giblan of the Rocky Mountain Insurance Association said the measure would “upend the way insurance transactions are conducted” and could trigger a wave of litigation and availability problems. Kristen Abbott of the American Property Casualty Insurance Association said federal laws and existing NAIC model rules already regulate many insurer practices and that retroactive opt‑in consent, element‑level annual retention reviews and a 90‑day deletion requirement would be operationally infeasible in legacy systems.

Questions from committee members focused on underwriting, reinsurance and federal preemption. Sponsors pointed to adopted amendments that carve out entities subject to the Gramm‑Leach‑Bliley Act and explicitly exempt underwriting and reinsurance uses so insurers can continue necessary risk‑sharing. The sponsors said the Insurance Commissioner would have an enforcement track and consumers would retain private‑right‑of‑action remedies.

Amendments and outcome: The committee adopted several sponsor amendments that, among other changes, exempt entities subject to GLBA, allow necessary sharing for underwriting and reinsurance, and exempt the FAIR Plan and surplus lines. After amendment votes, a motion to move the bill to Appropriations failed on a recorded committee vote (motion recorded as failing by a 5‑8 count in the transcript). Representative Marshall then moved to postpone the bill indefinitely; the motion passed on a roll call recorded in the transcript (9‑4), and HB 10‑91 was postponed indefinitely.

What happens next: Because the committee postponed the bill indefinitely, HB 10‑91 will not move forward from this committee in its current form. Sponsors and industry representatives said they would continue discussions, and sponsors noted work at the NAIC and other states that they said should inform future policymaking.