Handbook

State Licensing
MARKET
REGULATION Handbook
2018
State Licensing Handbook
2018
The NAIC is the authoritative source for insurance industry information. Our expert solutions support
the efforts of regulators, insurers and researchers by providing detailed and comprehensive insurance
information. The NAIC offers a wide range of publications in the following categories:
Accounting & Reporting Special Studies

Information about statutory accounting principles Studies, reports, handbooks and regulatory
and the procedures necessary for fi ling financial research conducted by NAIC members on a variety
annual statements and conducting risk-based of insurance related topics.
capital calculations.
Consumer Information Statistical Reports

Important answers to common questions about Valuable and in-demand insurance industry-wide
auto, home, health and life insurance — as well as statistical data for various lines of business,
buyer’s guides on annuities, long-term care including auto, home, health and life insurance.
insurance and Medicare supplement plans.
Financial Regulation Supplementary Products

Useful handbooks, compliance guides and reports Guidance manuals, handbooks, surveys and
on financial analysis, company licensing, state research on a wide variety of issues.
audit requirements and receiverships.
Legal Capital Markets & Investment Analysis

Comprehensive collection of NAIC model laws, Information regarding portfolio values and
regulations and guidelines; state laws on insurance procedures for complying with NAIC reporting
topics; and other regulatory guidance on antifraud requirements.
and consumer privacy.
Market Regulation White Papers

Regulatory and industry guidance on market- Relevant studies, guidance and NAIC policy
related issues, including antifraud, product fi ling positions on a variety of insurance topics.
requirements, producer licensing and market
analysis.
NAIC Activities
NAIC member directories, in-depth reporting of For more information about NAIC
state regulatory activities and official historical publications, visit us at:
records of NAIC national meetings and other
activities. http://www.naic.org//prod_serv_home.htm
© 2009, 2011, 2013, 2018 National Association of Insurance Commissioners. All rights reserved.
ISBN: 978-1-59917-967-4
Printed in the United States of America
No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or
mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any storage or retrieval system, without written permission from the NAIC.
NAIC Executive Office NAIC Central Office NAIC Capital Markets

444 North Capitol Street, NW 1100 Walnut Street & Investment Analysis Office
Suite 700 Suite 1500 One New York Plaza, Suite 4210
Washington, DC 20001 Kansas City, MO 64106 New York, NY 10004
202.471.3990 816.842.3600 212.398.9000
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
All of the references to the Producer Licensing Working Group and Task Force will show that both have changed
parent committees since the creation of the State Licensing Handbook. The change in parent committees has not
changed the role for the Working Group and the Task Force.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Part I Insurance Producer Licensing
Section A Governing Principles
Chapter 1 Modern Producer Licensing ............................................................................................... 5

Uniformity Provisions of GLBA ........................................................................................ 5
Countersignature Requirements ......................................................................................... 5
National Insurance Producer Registry ................................................................................ 6
Chapter 2 The Producer Licensing Model Act ................................................................................... 7
Other Key Provisions of the PLMA ................................................................................... 7
Commissioner Discretion ................................................................................................... 8
Section-by-Section of the PLMA ....................................................................................... 8
Frequently Asked Questions ............................................................................................ 11
Producer Licensing Model Act Implementation, Frequently Asked Questions ............... 11
Chapter 3 Uniform Licensing Standards ........................................................................................... 15
Initial and Renewal Producer License Applications ......................................................... 15
Chapter 4 Nonresident Licensing...................................................................................................... 17
Reciprocity Examples ...................................................................................................... 18
Section B Licensing Processes
Chapter 5 Activities Requiring Licensure......................................................................................... 23

License Required to Sell, Solicit and Negotiate ............................................................... 23
Commissions .................................................................................................................... 23
Exceptions to Licensing ................................................................................................... 24
Chapter 6 Prelicensing Education ..................................................................................................... 25
Chapter 7 Application Review for Initial Licenses ........................................................................... 27
Individual Application Forms .......................................................................................... 27
Business Entity Application ............................................................................................. 27
Background Checks ......................................................................................................... 27
Fingerprints ...................................................................................................................... 28
1033 Consent Waivers ..................................................................................................... 28
NAIC Databases Relevant to Initial Application Review ................................................ 28
Review of Applications When Criminal History Is Disclosed ......................................... 28
Statutory Obligations and Discretion ............................................................................... 29
Chapter 8 Testing Programs ............................................................................................................. 31
Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 31
PLMA Guidelines on Examinations ................................................................................. 31
Test Development and Review......................................................................................... 32
Developing the Questions ................................................................................................ 33
Passing Score vs. Pass Rate.............................................................................................. 33
Test Development Deliverables ....................................................................................... 35
Candidate Information Bulletin (CIB).............................................................................. 35
Technology Issues ............................................................................................................ 35
Legal Defensibility ........................................................................................................... 36
Vendor Responsibilities ................................................................................................... 36
Test Administration .......................................................................................................... 36
Reporting Examination Results ........................................................................................ 37
Retesting/Notice of Failure .............................................................................................. 37
Chapter 9 Lines of Insurance ............................................................................................................ 39
The Major Lines ............................................................................................................... 39
© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Limited Lines ............................................................................................................ 40

Limited Line of Car Rental Insurance .............................................................................. 41
Limited Line of Credit Insurance ..................................................................................... 41
Limited Line of Crop Insurance ....................................................................................... 42
Limited Line of Surety Insurance ..................................................................................... 43
Limited Line of Travel Insurance ..................................................................................... 43
Non-Core Limited Line .................................................................................................... 43
Chapter 10 Surplus Lines Producer Licenses ..................................................................................... 45
The Non-admitted and Reinsurance Reform Act ............................................................. 45
Surplus Lines Distribution Systems ................................................................................. 45
Diligent Search requirements ........................................................................................... 46
Premium Taxes................................................................................................................. 48
Guaranty Fund Warning ................................................................................................... 48
Stamping Offices .............................................................................................................. 49
Zero Reports ..................................................................................................................... 49
Chapter 11 Appointments ................................................................................................................... 51
Appointment Terminations .............................................................................................. 51
Chapter 12 Business Entities .............................................................................................................. 53
Chapter 13 Temporary Licenses ......................................................................................................... 55
Section C License Continuation
Chapter 14 Continuing Education....................................................................................................... 59

Course Approvals ............................................................................................................. 59
CE Providers .................................................................................................................... 60
Chapter 15 Reporting of Actions and Compensation Disclosure ....................................................... 61
Reporting of Actions ........................................................................................................ 61
Compensation Disclosure ................................................................................................. 61
Chapter 16 License Renewal and Reinstatement ................................................................................ 63
License Renewal .............................................................................................................. 63
Reinstatement ................................................................................................................... 63
Chapter 17 Post Licensing Producer Conduct Reviews ...................................................................... 65
License Reinstatement or Reissuance after Disciplinary Action ...................................... 65
Collaboration and Referrals Among Regulators .............................................................. 66
Part II Miscellaneous Licenses
Chapter 18 Adjusters .......................................................................................................................... 69

Qualifications of an Adjuster ........................................................................................... 70
Fitness and Character Considerations .............................................................................. 70
Reciprocity ....................................................................................................................... 70
Continuing Education....................................................................................................... 71
Emergency/Catastrophic Adjusters .................................................................................. 71
Non-U.S. Adjusters for Limited Lines Portable Electronics Insurance Products ............. 72
Recommended Best Practices for Regulators................................................................... 72
Chapter 19 Bail Bond Agents ............................................................................................................. 73
Bond Forfeiture ................................................................................................................ 73
Prohibited Activities ......................................................................................................... 73
Immigration Bonds........................................................................................................... 74
Chapter 20 Charitable Gift Annuities ................................................................................................. 75
Chapter 21 Fraternal and Small Mutuals ............................................................................................ 77
Fraternal Benefits Societies .............................................................................................. 77
Small Mutual Insurers ...................................................................................................... 77
Chapter 22 Insurance Consultants ...................................................................................................... 79
Chapter 23 Managed Care Providers .................................................................................................. 81
Health Maintenance Organizations .................................................................................. 81
Preferred Provider Organizations (PPO) .......................................................................... 81
Chapter 24 Managing General Agents ................................................................................................ 83

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 25 Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWAS) .................................................... 85

Chapter 26 Reinsurance Intermediaries .............................................................................................. 87
Chapter 27 Risk Retention Groups & Risk Purchasing Groups .......................................................... 89
Risk Retention Groups ..................................................................................................... 89
Risk Purchasing Groups ................................................................................................... 89
Chapter 28 Third-party Administrators .............................................................................................. 91
Chapter 29 Title Insurance Agents ..................................................................................................... 93
Chapter 30 Viatical Settlement Providers and Brokers....................................................................... 95
Part III Appendices
Section One – Documents Adopted by the Producer Licensing Working Group and the NAIC
A. Broker Compensation Frequently Asked Questions ....................................................................... 99

B. Commercial Lines Multi-State Exemption and Commission Sharing Recommendations ........... 103
C. Continuing Education Reciprocity ............................................................................................... 107
D. Continuing Education Standardized Terms and Definitions......................................................... 109
E. Prelicensing Education Standardized Terms and Definitions ........................................................111
F. Continuing Education Recommended Guidelines for Online Courses ..........................................113
G. Continuing Education Recommended Guidelines for Classroom Course .....................................115
H. Continuing Education Reciprocity Uniform Course Filing Form................................................. 117
I. Course Guidelines for Classroom Webinar/Webcast Delivery..................................................... 119
J. Emergency Adjuster Licensing Best Practices Guidelines ........................................................... 121
K. Independent Adjuster Reciprocity Best Practices and Guidelines ................................................ 123
L. Independent Adjuster Licensing Guideline .................................................................................... 127
M. Limited Line Term Life Resolution .............................................................................................. 139
N. Low Compliance Licensing Standards Recommendations ............................................................141
O. Progress Report to Membership on Producer Licensing State Assessments – March 2009. ........ 147
P. Progress Report to Membership on Producer Licensing State Assessments – March 2010. ........ 163
Q. Model Bulletin on Flood Insurance ...............................................................................................175
R. Model Bulletin on Long-term Care Continuing Education .......................................................... 177
S. Producer Licensing Model Act ..................................................................................................... 179
T. Professional Licensing Standards Recommendations ...................................................................191
U. Public Adjuster Model Act ........................................................................................................... 193
V. Report of the NARAB Working Group: Recommendation of States Continuing to Meet
Reciprocity Requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act .........................................................209
W. Uniform Criminal History & Regulatory Action Background Review Guidelines ...................... 237
X. Uniform Appointment Process...................................................................................................... 243
Y. Uniform Licensing Standards. ...................................................................................................... 245
Z. Chart on Licensable and Non-Licensable Acts ..............................................................................255
Section Two – General Reference Materials
A. Sample Continuing Education Program Instructions to Course Providers ....................................259

B. Sample Frequently Asked Questions by Producers Regarding Continuing
Education Requirements ............................................................................................................... 263
C. Sample State Licensing Department Internal Training Manual .....................................................265
Section Three – Glossary

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Introduction
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) is the U.S. standard-setting and regulatory support
organization created and governed by the chief insurance regulators from the 50 states and five U.S. territories. Through the
NAIC, state insurance regulators establish standards and best practices, conduct peer review, and coordinate their regulatory
oversight. NAIC staff support these efforts and represent the collective views of state insurance regulators domestically and
internationally. NAIC members, together with the central resources of the NAIC, form the national system of state-based
insurance regulation in the U.S.
The NAIC has organized its work into various task forces and committees. The Executive (EX) Committee has working
groups and task forces that focus on specific issues. In 2009, the NAIC formed the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force to
coordinate and oversee all NAIC groups addressing producer issues. One of the working groups that formerly reported to the
Market Regulation and Consumer Affairs (D) Committee and now reports to the Producer Licensing Task (EX)Force is the
Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group.
As its name suggests, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group focuses its efforts on the licensing process for individuals
who sell insurance products. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has worked toward the goal of streamlining and
achieving uniformity in the insurance producer licensing process. The purpose of the State Licensing Handbook (Handbook)
is to document current guidelines and recommended best practices.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group strongly encourages all states, districts and territories to adopt, without
deviation, all provisions of the NAIC’s Producer Licensing Model Act PLMA), because true uniformity cannot be achieved
until that happens.
Part I of this Handbook contains background information on these efforts and current information on the implementation of
the PLMA, reciprocity efforts, the Uniform Licensing Standards (ULS) and related topics.
Part II of this Handbook includes information on other types of licenses that some states issue and that a state licensing
director may encounter.
Part III contains Appendices to this Handbook.
The NAIC and the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group worked to achieve reciprocity, as required by the initial
provisions of the federal Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), 15 U.S.C. § 6751 et seq., adopted in 1999, and to create and
implement the ULS and procedures in all states. In 2015, the provisions of the GLBA that prohibited the creation of the
National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers (NARAB) were repealed, and NARAB was established. This
Handbook contains the current recommendations and guidelines from the NAIC’s Executive (EX) Committee, the Producer
Licensing (EX) Task Force and the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group.
© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section A Governing Principles
Chapter 1 Modern Producer Licensing

Chapter 2 Producer Licensing Model Act
Chapter 3 Uniform Licensing Standards
Chapter 4 Nonresident Licensing

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 1
Modern Producer Licensing
The process for licensing insurance producers has had numerous phases. The first NAIC model on this subject was the NAIC
Agent and Broker Model. The next phase was the NAIC Single License Procedure Model. Although development of the
newest model began in the late 1990s, it was Congress’ passage of the GLBA in 1999 that caused the NAIC to speed the
development of the PLMA.
Uniformity Provisions of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act Adopted in 1999
In order to achieve the licensing uniformity standards of GLBA, a majority of states had to satisfy all five of the following
requirements:
1. Adoption of uniform criteria regarding a producer’s integrity, personal qualifications, education, training and
experience, which must include qualification and training on suitability of products for a prospective customer.
2. Adoption of uniform continuing education (CE) requirements.
3. Adoption of uniform ethics course requirements in conjunction with other CE requirements.
4. Adoption of uniform suitability requirements based on financial information submitted by the customer.
5. Elimination of nonresident requirements posing any limitation or condition because of the place of the producer’s
residence or business, except for countersignature requirements.
One of the major provisions of the GLBA was a provision to create NARAB. While much progress was made to improve
uniformity and streamline nonresident producer licensing, the NAIC endorsed the provisions of Terrorism Risk Insurance
Program Reauthorization Act of 2015 (Public Law 107-297), which modified NARAB. These provisions, commonly referred
to as NARAB II, were signed by President Barack Obama on Jan. 12, 2015.
NARAB II is intended to streamline the nonresident producer licensing process while preserving the states’ ability to protect
consumers and regulate producer conduct. NARAB II does not create a federal insurance regulator but establishes a nonprofit
corporation, known as NARAB, controlled by its board of directors. The stated purpose of the legislation is to provide “a
mechanism through which licensing, CE, and other nonresident insurance producer qualification requirements and conditions
may be adopted and applied on a multistate basis without affecting the laws, rules and regulations, and preserving the rights
of a state, pertaining to certain specific producer-related conduct.”
NARAB is to be governed by a 13-member governing board comprised of eight state insurance commissioners and five
insurance industry representatives subject to presidential appointment and Senate confirmation. NARAB, acting through its
board of directors, will establish membership criteria through which producers can obtain nonresident authority to sell, solicit
or negotiate insurance. Satisfaction of membership criteria means a producer can sell, solicit or negotiate insurance (and
perform incidental activities) in any state for which a producer pays that state’s licensing fee for any line(s) of insurance for
which the producer is licensed in the home state. NARAB membership is not mandatory for producers.
The law preserves the rights of a state pertaining to resident licensing and CE, supervision and enforcement of conduct, and
disciplinary actions for nonresident producers, and leaves intact a state’s full range of authorities for resident producers. The
PLMA also includes important disclosures to the states, addresses business entity licensing and protects state revenues.
Through the efforts of the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force and the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group, the NAIC
monitors state compliance with reciprocity guidelines. The NAIC also set a goal to create uniform licensing practices. The
Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted a number of Uniform Licensing Standards and guidelines, and
continues to strive toward a more efficient licensing system among the states.
National Insurance Producer Registry
The NAIC has long advocated for increased use of technology to streamline licensing processes. In 1996, the NAIC
collaborated with industry to create the Insurance Regulatory Information Network (IRIN) as a nonprofit affiliate of the
NAIC. In 1999, the organization changed its name to the National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR). The purpose of the
NIPR is to work with the states and the NAIC to re-engineer, streamline and make more uniform the producer licensing
process for the benefit of insurance regulators, the insurance industry and consumers. The NIPR worked with the NAIC to

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
develop and implement: 1) the Producer Database (PDB), which includes licensing information from 50 states, the District of
Columbia and Puerto Rico, utilized by the industry for licensing and appointment information; and 2) the State Producer
Licensing Database (SPLD) for use by insurance regulators.
States use the NIPR to link state insurance departments with the entities they regulate. Applicants and licensees can transmit
licensing applications, insurers can transmit appointments and terminations, and both can transmit other information to
insurance regulators in multiple states, thereby creating electronic solutions that are easy and efficient to use by the states and
industry.
Additionally, using the subsequent launch of the Attachment Warehouse, an applicant who answers “yes” to any background
question on the NAIC Uniform application can submit the required supporting documentation at the time he or she is
applying for or renewing a license. The submission of a document to the Attachment Warehouse will trigger an email alert to
the appropriate state(s) notifying the state(s) that supporting documentation has been submitted to fulfill document
requirements pertaining to the “yes” answer on the background. The advantage to the producer and the state(s) is that the
documentation can be sent to the Attachment Warehouse once, and all appropriate states will be notified and have the ability
to view, download or print the document. The Attachment Warehouse also allows a producer to meet the requirement from
the states to report and submit documentation related to any regulatory action taken against him/her. This enables the
producer to meet this regulatory obligation quickly in order to comply with the typical state requirement for producers to
report an action within 30 days. Through the use of the Attachment Warehouse, all states in which the producer is licensed
are notified with an email alert and have access to the document.
A complete list of jurisdictions using NIPR products and services is available at www.nipr.com. The website has an updated
list of the states that are making active use of NIPR electronic processing. (Product List by State)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 2
Producer Licensing Model Act

Uniformity Provisions of the Producer Licensing Model Act
Through the PLMA, the NAIC created a system of reciprocity for producer licensing and also established uniform standards
in key areas of producer licensing. The PLMA was initially adopted in January 2000. It was subsequently amended in
October 2000 and in January 2005.
In December 2002, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted a set of Uniform Resident Licensing Standards
(URLS). In December 2008, the standards were revised and updated to incorporate standardization and uniformity for both
resident and nonresident licensing. The standards were, therefore, renamed the ULS. The PLMA and the ULS are designed to
complement each other and assist the states in creating a uniform system of producer licensing. In 2008, the Producer
Licensing (EX) Working Group was charged with reviewing the ULS. Subsequent revisions were made to the ULS in August
2010 (limited lines definitions) and in August 2011 (definitions for certain non-core limited lines). The revised standards are
included in the Appendix, and updates can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page on the
NAIC website.
The key uniformity provisions of the PLMA are:
1. Definitions for “negotiate,” “sell” and “solicit,” and uniform exceptions to licensing requirements.
2. An application process for both resident and nonresident producer license applications that uses the NAIC Uniform
Application for resident and nonresident producers.
3. Definitions for the six major lines of insurance: Life, Accident and Health, Property, Casualty, Personal Lines, and
Variable Life or Annuity Products.
4. Exemptions from completing prelicensing education and examinations for licensed producers who apply for
nonresident licenses.
5. Standards for license denials, non-renewals and revocations.
6. Standards regarding which individual producers and business entities may receive a commission related to the sale
of an insurance policy.
7. Standards for producer appointments for states that have an appointment system.
8. Procedures for insurance regulators, companies and producers to report and administratively resolve “not for cause”
and “for cause” appointment terminations.
9. A definition for limited lines insurance. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted a recommended
list of limited lines licenses, as set forth in the ULS, and has encouraged states to eliminate licensing categories for
other lines of insurance.
Other Key Provisions of the Producer Licensing Model Act
The PLMA also contains a number of provisions that promote simplified licensing procedures.
Home State
The intent of the PLMA is for a producer to have one state of residence. Section 2(B) of the PLMA defines this concept as
the home state:
“Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the United States in which an insurance
producer maintains his or her principal place of residence or principal place of business and is licensed to act as an
insurance producer.”
A producer is permitted to designate either the actual state of residence or the principal place of business as the home state.
The PLMA does not specifically prohibit the existence of two home state licenses. The producer may select either the
resident state or the principal place of business. This option was intended to accommodate a producer who lives in one state
but maintains his/her business in another state. However, it was the intent of the drafters for one state to be designated as the
home state to prevent forum shopping. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has discouraged any state from
adopting a stance that a producer can maintain two home states.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Change of Home State
Under the PLMA, there is now a simplified process for producers who move from state to state and were in good standing
prior to the change of residence.
Section 9 of the PLMA provides a mechanism for licensed producers to maintain an active license when changing the state of
residence. Section 9(A) creates an exemption from prelicensing education or examination for a producer who moves into a
state who was previously licensed for the same lines of authority in another state. In this scenario, the producer receives a
new resident license for the same lines of authority, so long as the producer applies for a resident license within 90 days of
the cancellation of the producer’s previous license and the producer was in good standing in the prior state.
Section 9(B) creates an exemption from prelicensing education or examination for a line of authority held by a former
nonresident producer who moves into a state and becomes a resident of that state. In practice, when a nonresident becomes a
resident, that producer is to be granted the same lines of authority previously held, so long as the producer applies for a
resident license within 90 days of establishing legal residence. States are not to impose prelicensing education or an
examination on a nonresident producer who subsequently moves into another state and declares it to be the home state, unless
“the commissioner has determined otherwise by regulation.”
Under the PLMA, letters of certification were eliminated as a prerequisite to granting a nonresident license. The SPLD
provides verification of good standing in the producer’s home state.
One unresolved issue is the long-established practice of requiring a letter of clearance for producers changing their resident
state. Despite the fact that the PLMA does not contain any reference to a letter of clearance, some states still require the
producer to provide a letter of clearance from the former state before the new state will grant the producer an active resident
status. Other states grant the new nonresident license but continue to monitor the producer’s record to make sure that the
prior resident license changes in status from resident to nonresident. This is done to prevent the producer from holding two
active resident licenses.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group and NIPR have identified this as an issue that could best be resolved by the
establishment of an electronic method for the producer to communicate the desired changes to all affected states in one
transaction. NIPR’s launch of the Contact Change Request (CCR) service allows producers for many states to change their
physical addresses, email addresses, phone numbers and fax numbers. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group will
turn its attention to solving the issues surrounding a change of resident state once all states have fully implemented the CCR
service.
Commissioner Discretion
The PLMA contains language that allows a state to adopt regulations to cover a state-specific situation. States should
carefully consider the impact that deviation from the PLMA might have on NAIC uniformity and reciprocity initiatives.
Section-by-Section Summary of the Producer Licensing Model Act
The full text of the PLMA is in the Appendices.
Section 1: Purpose and Scope
 To promote efficiency and uniformity in producer licensing.
Section 2: Definitions
 Defines the terms “home state,” “limited lines insurance,” “sell,” “solicit,” “negotiate” and other pertinent terms.
Section 3: License Required
Section 4: Exceptions to Licensing
 Lists the persons and entities that do not need licenses, even though they participate in the insurance industry.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section 5: Application for Examination
 Requires that producers must pass an examination in the lines of authority for which application is made.
 Allows use of outside testing services to administer examinations.
Section 6: Application for License
 Sets forth the qualifications for licensure as an individual or business entity.
 Provides that limited line credit insurers must provide instruction to individuals who will sell credit insurance.
Section 7: License
 Sets forth the six major lines of authority, the limited line of credit insurance and any other line of insurance
permitted under state laws or regulations.
 Provides guidelines for license continuation and reinstatement.
 Provides for hardship exemptions for failure to comply with renewal procedures.
 Lists the information the license should contain.
 Requires licensees to notify the insurance commissioner of a legal change of name or address within thirty (30) days
of the change.
Section 8: Nonresident Licensing
 Requires states to grant nonresident licenses to persons from reciprocal states for all lines of authority held,
including limited lines and surplus lines insurance, if those persons are currently licensed and in good standing in
their home states.
 Requires a nonresident licensee who moves from one state to another to file a change of address and certification
from the new resident state within thirty (30) days with no fee or application.
Section 9: Exemption from Examination
 Exempts licensed individuals who change their home state from prelicensing and examination.
 Requires a licensed nonresident who becomes a resident to register in the new home state within ninety (90) days of
establishing legal residence, unless “the commissioner determines otherwise by regulation.”
Section 10: Assumed Names
 Requires a producer to notify the insurance commissioner prior to using an assumed name.
Section 11: Temporary Licensing
 Allows temporary licensure for up to 180 days without requiring an exam when the insurance commissioner deems
that the temporary license is necessary for the servicing of an insurance business in specific cases.
Section 12: License Denial, Non-renewal or Revocation
 Lists 14 grounds for denial, non-renewal or revocation of a producer license.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Provides that a business entity license may be revoked if an individual licensee’s violation was known or should
have been known by one or more of the partners, officers or managers acting on behalf of the partnership or
corporation, and the violation was not reported to the insurance commissioner nor was corrective action taken.
Section 13: Commissions
 Prohibits payment of commissions or other compensation to or acceptance by an unlicensed person for “selling,
soliciting or negotiating” insurance.
 Allows payment of renewal commissions to an unlicensed person if the person was licensed at the time of the sale,
solicitation or negotiation.
 Permits payment or assignment of commissions or other compensation to an insurance agency or to persons who do
not sell, solicit or negotiate, unless the payment would violate rebate provisions.
Section 14: Appointments (optional)
 Prohibits a producer from acting as a producer for an insurer unless appointed. The insurer appoints the producer
either within 15 days from the date the agency contract is executed or within 15 days from the date that the first
insurance application is submitted.
 Sets forth processes for initial and renewal appointments.
Section 15: Notification to the Insurance Commissioner of Termination
 Requires the insurer to notify the insurance commissioner within 30 days following the effective date of termination
of a producer’s appointment, if the termination is for cause. The insurer also has a duty to promptly notify the
insurance commissioner of any new facts learned after the termination. When requested by the insurance
commissioner, the insurer shall provide additional information, documents, records, or other data pertaining to the
termination or activity of the producer.
 If termination of a producer is not for cause, the insurer must notify the insurance commissioner within 30 days
following the effective date of termination.
 Sets forth a detailed process for notifying the producer and for a producer to submit comments to the state.
 Provides that in the absence of actual malice, insurers have immunity from any actions that result from providing
information required by or provided pursuant to this section.
 Contains penalties for insurers who fail to report or who report with actual malice.
 Requires that documents furnished to the insurance commissioner pursuant to this section shall be confidential and
privileged.
Section 16: Reciprocity
 A state cannot impose additional requirements on nonresident license applicants who are licensed in good standing
in their home state other than the requirements imposed by Section 8 of the PLMA, if the applicant’s home state
grants nonresident producer licenses on the same basis.
 A nonresident’s satisfaction of CE in the producer’s home state shall constitute satisfaction of all CE requirements in
the nonresident state, if the home state practices CE reciprocity.
Section 17: Reporting of Actions (By Producers)
 A producer must report any administrative actions taken in another jurisdiction or by another government agency in
the home jurisdiction within thirty (30) days of the final disposition of the matter.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 A producer shall report any criminal prosecution taken in any jurisdiction within 30 days of the initial pretrial
hearing date. The report must include the legal order, relevant court documents and the original complaint.
Section 18: Compensation Disclosure
 In any instance when a producer will receive compensation from a customer for placing an insurance policy and also
will receive compensation from an insurer for that placement, prior to placing that policy, the producer is required to
disclose to the customer the amount and sources of compensation the producer will receive, if the customer makes
an insurance purchase.
Section 19: Regulations
 The insurance commissioner may promulgate reasonable regulations to carry out the purposes of the PLMA.
Section 20: Severability
Section 21: Effective Date
Frequently Asked Questions
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has created several documents that answer frequently asked questions (FAQ)
about reciprocity, uniformity and how to administer the PLMA. The current version of the FAQ as of the publication date
appears below. The latest version of these documents can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web
page on the NAIC website.
PLMA Implementation - FAQ
This document has been prepared by the NAIC’s Producer Licensing (D) Working Group for informational purposes only.
The following questions and answers are based upon the language of the PLMA. This document is not intended as legislative
history or to replace a state insurance department’s independent review and analysis of these questions. The contents of this
document should not be interpreted as representing the views or opinions of the NAIC or of any individual NAIC member or
state insurance department.
Question 1: Is Section 14 of the PLMA regarding appointments, which is labeled “optional,” intended to be optional for
adoption by a state that requires insurer appointments of producers?
Answer 1: No. If a state requires appointments, it should adopt Section 14. It was labeled “optional” only to accommodate
those states that do not require appointments—e.g., Colorado.
Question 2: PLMA Section 14B starts a clock of 15 days for insurer compliance by providing that “the appointing insurer
shall file … within 15 days from the date the agency contract is executed or the first insurance application is submitted”
(emphasis added). When is an application deemed “submitted”?
Answer 2: An application is submitted when it is dated received by the insurer. The use of any other event will undermine
the ability of the states and insurers to achieve uniform national practice for regulatory notifications. This is because any
other temporal event is unknown to the insurer, which has the compliance responsibility. That is, “submitted” should not
mean when a producer mails an application, since different producers might use different means of communicating
applications; different producers will mail applications at different times; mail pick-up and delivery varies among localities,
etc. The one certain time of submission is when the application is dated received by the insurer.
Question 3: If a state adopts PLMA Section 14, is there an option for the state to require an insurer to execute an agency
contract with a producer prior to accepting the first insurance application from a producer that has not yet been appointed?
Answer 3: No. PLMA Section 14B provides that “the appointing insurer shall file, in a format approved by the insurance
commissioner, a notice of appointment within 15 days from the date the agency contract is executed or the first insurance
application is submitted” (emphasis added). The use of the word “or” in the model act clearly allows an insurer to notice

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
appointment upon the earliest of the two events. Pennsylvania has adopted modified language and is not in complete
agreement with this answer.
Question 4: Since the PLMA works toward uniform national procedures by eliminating the traditional distinctions between
agents and brokers for purposes of licensure, is it appropriate to require appointments of producers acting as brokers?
Answer 4: No. PLMA Section 14A makes clear that an insurer need only appoint producers “acting as agents on behalf of
the insurer.” Inasmuch as brokers are not appointed, notification of appointments of brokers is not required.
Question 5: Must a business entity reside in a state to obtain a producer license?
Answer 5: No. Section 8 outlines the requirements that a person must fulfill in order to obtain a nonresident license, and the
definition of “person” (see PLMA §2L) makes clear that this section applies to the licensing of both individuals and business
entities. Section 8 is devoid of any residency requirement, and a nonresident business entity should be able to obtain a
nonresident producer license if business entities are required to be licensed by the insurance department at all. In addition,
states that impose residency requirements on business entities are likely not compliant with National Archives and Records
Administration (NARA) provisions of the GLBA.
Question 6: Should the record of producer qualifications obtainable from the NIPR SPLD satisfy all certification
requirements for state licensing?
Answer 6: Yes. PLMA Section 7G, Section 8B and Section 9 make clear that states should adopt and use the SPLD record
for all regulatory purposes.
Question 7: Should a state require that a resident be licensed as a producer if he or she is entitled to renewal or other deferred
commissions produced in another state?
Answer 7: No. PLMA Section 3 and Section 13C indicate that a producer license is required to sell, solicit or negotiate the
sale of insurance, but do not suggest that a license is needed after such activity has ceased. The person’s receipt of renewal or
other deferred commissions does not result in any licensing requirement.
Question 8: Are insurers alone responsible for educating those persons who sell limited lines credit insurance products?
Answer 8: Yes. PLMA Section 6D requires such insurers to furnish the program of instruction to those who sell limited lines
insurance. The program is filed with the insurance commissioner in most states.
Question 9: Does reciprocity pursuant to Section 8 of the PLMA require recognition of a nonresident line of authority when
the state in which the nonresident license is sought does not recognize a line of authority for resident producers?
Answer 9: Yes. For example, the reciprocity mandates of Section 8E should be respected for a limited line of authority, as is
the case with any other line of authority. Consequently, states should be prepared to recognize the authority on a nonresident
basis.
Question 10: What process is to be followed by a producer in identifying a new “home state” without the loss of his or her
license to do business in the prior home state?
Answer 10: The producer should notify the prior home state of his or her change of address and intent to apply for a resident
license in the new home state. The producer must apply for resident license in his or her new home state. Pursuant to Section
9 of the PLMA, the producer or applicant is not required to complete any prelicensing education or examination in order to
secure the new resident license.
Question 11: What process is to be followed by the new home state insurance regulator with regard to a producer changing
his or her state of residency?
Answer 11: The new home state should process the producer’s application, issue a resident license if warranted and, if
issued, notify the SPLD of the producer’s new status as a resident licensee.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 12: What is the process to be followed by the prior home state insurance regulator?
Answer 12: At the time the producer notifies the prior home state insurance regulator of a change of address, the prior home
state insurance regulator should send to the SPLD a report of “active with notice of transfer of residency to [the new home
state],” identifying the new state of residency. Upon PDB notification of the new resident state licensure, the prior home state
resident license is replaced with a nonresident license for the duration of its term. It is noted that time frames for notice to the
states of a change in address are stated in the PLMA.
Question 13: If a commission is paid to enroll a customer in a group credit insurance policy, must the enroller be licensed?
Answer 13: Yes. An individual who enrolls customers under a group insurance policy must obtain a limited lines license if a
commission is paid. PLMA Section 4B(2) provides an exception from licensing if no commission is paid to the enroller and
the enroller does not engage in selling, soliciting or negotiating.
Question 14: May an individual sell, solicit or negotiate group credit insurance coverage without a license?
Answer 14: No. An individual must have a limited lines license before he or she can sell, solicit or negotiate the purchase of
group insurance. While PLMA Section 4B(2) provides an exception for securing and furnishing information in connection
with group insurance coverage, there is no such exception from licensing for selling, soliciting or negotiating group insurance
coverage.
Question 15: Can a person enrolling someone in a group insurance policy secure and furnish information about the policy to
a customer and still be exempt from licensure?
Answer 15: Yes. As set forth in Section 4B(2) of the PLMA, there is an exception that allows a group enroller to secure and
furnish information about the group insurance policy to a customer, provided no commission is paid or there is no selling,
solicitation or negotiation. However, Section 4B(2) generally recognizes an exception for purposes of enrolling individuals
under plans, issuing certificates under plans, assisting with the administration of plans, and performing administrative
services related to the mass marketing of property/casualty (P/C) insurance.
Note: It is important to note that individual state laws and factual circumstances will control in determining whether an
activity involves selling, solicitation or negotiation. Likewise, the states will have discretion in interpreting what activities
constitute the “securing or furnishing” of information.
Question 16: With regard to products sold by life insurers, does the qualification in the PLMA that a person shall not sell,
solicit or negotiate insurance “in this state” without a license mean that the producer must be licensed in the state(s) where
the: 1) sale, solicitation or negotiation occurs; or 2) policyholder principally resides?
Answer 16: In those states that have adopted the PLMA, licensure should be based upon where a producer “sells, solicits or
negotiates” insurance, as specifically stated in the PLMA. In traditional insurance sales transactions, licensure should be
determined solely by this PLMA standard without reference to the state of residence of the insured. Application of the “sells,
solicits or negotiates” standard where an insurance transaction takes place purely by electronic or telephonic means is more
complex. In such transactions, application of the PLMA licensure standard should turn on the state of residence of the
customer.
Question 17: Section 14B of the PLMA states: “To appoint a producer as its agent, the appointing insurer shall file, in a
format approved by the insurance commissioner, a notice of appointment within 15 days from the date the agency contract is
executed or the first insurance application is submitted.” In a situation where a producer is not currently appointed by an
insurer, but was previously appointed by and submitted an application to that insurer, must that producer now obtain a new
appointment before submitting a new application to that insurer because it would not be the first application the producer
ever submitted to that insurer?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Answer 17: No. Section 14B of the PLMA requires appointment within 15 days of the date an insurer receives the first
application submitted by a producer who is not currently appointed, even if that producer was previously appointed by that
insurer and submitted business in the past. Reference to the agency contract or the first application is based on the current
time period. If a producer’s prior appointment with the insurer was terminated, each jurisdiction would consider the time
period to start again with the new contract execution or the time period when the agent submits his first insurance application
following the prior termination.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 3
Uniform Licensing Standards
In 2002, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted the Uniform Resident Licensing Standards (URLS). The
standards were revised and updated to incorporate standardization and uniformity for both resident and nonresident licensing.
The standards were renamed to the ULS in 2008. These standards will be referenced throughout this Handbook. The full text
of the ULS is in the Appendices. The latest information can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web
page on the NAIC website.
These standards establish an important baseline to assure insurance regulators that all states are applying the same standards
to resident applicants. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group monitors compliance with the uniform standards. Since
the adoption of the ULS, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted interpretative guidelines and
clarifications to further explain the proper implementation of the ULS.
The ULS contain guidelines in the following categories:
1. Licensing qualifications.
2. Prelicensing education training.
3. Producer licensing test.
4. Integrity/personal qualifications/background checks.
5. Application for licensure/license structure.
6. Appointment process.
7. CE Requirements.
8. Limited lines uniformity.
9. Surplus lines standards.
10. Commercial line multistate exemption standard.
11. Commission sharing.
Initial and Renewal Producer License Applications
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted initial and renewal NAIC Uniform Applications for resident and
nonresident individuals and business entities. Under the ULS, states are directed to use the Uniform Applications rather than
state-specific applications. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has established a schedule for review and update of
the applications. States are encouraged to use the most current form of the Uniform Applications. The forms are available on
the NAIC website. All NIPR online applications use the most recent approved uniform initial and renewal application forms.
Recommended Best Practices for Insurance Regulators
 Conduct a regular review of state business rules, as well as any state-specific requirements for paper and electronic
applications that are posted on NIPR’s website, with the NIPR or other vendor to maintain compliance with reciprocity
and the ULS.
 Consider whether existing business rules are statutorily required. To the extent they are not statutorily required, they
should be removed. To the extent they are statutorily required, the state licensing director should consider whether they
are necessary. To the extent they are not necessary for consumer protection, the insurance commissioner should take
steps to attempt to have such statutory requirements repealed (e.g., sponsor legislation).
 Carefully consider whether licensing staff should be given authority to change internal business rules or to give direction
to a vendor without the licensing director’s approval. A change in procedure that may seem to be appropriate could cause
problems with reciprocity or the ULS.
 If a state uses an outside vendor to receive and process license applications, monitor the vendor to ensure that applicants
are provided only the most current NAIC uniform application, whether the applicant applies or renews online or via
paper application.
 Adapt the department website to direct applicants to a single electronic location to obtain the most current version of the
NAIC uniform forms, or specifically to the link for the electronic process.
 Departments should encourage the use of electronic processes, when available, rather than paper processes to expedite
the licensing process.
 Eliminate all state-specific application forms, and use only the most recent version of the NAIC uniform forms.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Develop a procedure manual, and cross-train staff so that several personnel can perform all licensing tasks.
 Provide adequate notice of changes to licensing and appointment fee structures, as well as changes to applications and
other forms required to be submitted by applicants. With regard to the transition from an old application form to a new
form, states should continue to accept original, signed applications up to a reasonable transition period beyond the
inception date for the new form. Prior to the effective revision date, the state should provide adequate notice by way of
email, website updates and any other appropriate communication device to interested parties.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 4
Nonresident Licensing
The previous reciprocity provisions of the GLBA adopted in 1999 required that barriers to nonresident producer licensing be
eliminated. The PLMA contains specific guidance on this issue. A producer licensed in good standing in the home state must
be granted a nonresident license unless good cause for denial exists under Section 12 of the PLMA.
There are four key components to licensing reciprocity:
1. Administrative procedures.
2. CE requirements.
3. Elimination of any limitations on nonresident.
4. Reciprocal reciprocity.
Administrative Procedures
Under the previous administrative procedures for reciprocal licensing mandated by the GLBA, a nonresident person received
a nonresident producer license if:
1. The person was currently licensed as a resident and is in good standing in the person’s home state.
2. The person submitted the proper request for licensure and paid the fees required by the nonresident state’s law or
regulation.
3. The person submitted or transmitted to the insurance commissioner the application for licensure that the person
submitted to the person’s home state or, in lieu of that, a completed NAIC Uniform Application.
4. The person’s home state awarded nonresident producer licenses on the same basis to residents of the state in which
the applicant is seeking a nonresident license.
States were required to license nonresident applicants for at least the line of authority held in the home state. This was true
even if the line of authority held in the applicant’s home state may not have precisely aligned with the major or limited lines
of authority in the other state. States were not allowed to charge a licensing fee to a nonresident that was so different from the
fee charged a resident so as to be considered a barrier to nonresident licensure. States also were not allowed to collect
fingerprints from nonresident applicants.
Section 8(C) of the PLMA makes it clear that a licensed nonresident producer who changes residency is not required to
surrender the license and submit a new application. All that is required is a change of address within thirty (30) days of the
change of legal residence. The model provides that a state should not charge a fee for processing this change of address.
The reciprocity provisions of the PLMA also extend to surplus lines producers. A majority of states treat surplus lines as a
distinct license type. Persons holding surplus lines producer licenses in their home states shall receive nonresident surplus
lines producer licenses, unless some other reason for disqualification exists.
A producer holding a limited line of insurance is eligible for a nonresident limited lines producer license for the same scope of
authority as granted under the license issued by the producer’s home state. The nonresident state may require only what is
permitted under Section 8 of the PLMA for limited lines applicants. A limited line is any authority that restricts the authority of
the licensee to less than the total authority prescribed in the associated major line.
Continuing Education Requirements
Pursuant to the PLMA, a nonresident state must accept the producer’s proof of the completion of the home state’s CE
requirements as satisfaction of the nonresident state’s CE requirements, if the nonresident producer’s home state recognizes
the satisfaction of its CE requirements imposed upon producers from the nonresident state on the same basis.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Limitations on Nonresidents
States had to eliminate licensing restrictions that required a nonresident producer to maintain a residence or office in the
nonresident state so long as the nonresident’s license was from one of the U.S., the District of Columbia or the U.S.
territories. The NARAB Working Group stated it was not a violation of GLBA reciprocity requirements if a state required
nonresidents to provide proof of citizenship; however, under the ULS, it is the responsibility of the resident state to verify an
applicant’s citizenship status.
Reciprocal Reciprocity
To comply with the reciprocal reciprocity provisions of the GLBA, a majority of the states had to meet all three of the above
components and grant reciprocity to all residents of the other states who have met those components.
Reciprocity Examples
The PLMA contains specific guidance on the proper reciprocal treatment that a state licensing director should grant. This
chapter contains illustrative examples of these provisions. Unless otherwise specified, these examples assume that the
applicant is in good standing in the home state and has not requested a change in line of authority (LOA). There are some
states that did not adopt all the reciprocity standards previously required by the GLBA in 1999 and currently reflected in the
PLMA. The answers to the following examples will vary when a nonreciprocal state is involved. Examples also can be found
in the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group Frequently Asked Questions contained in Chapter 1.
 Example A
A producer whose home state is State A has a nonresident license from State B and State C and moves to State D as the
producer’s new home state.
What should happen: The producer timely files a change of address in State A, State B and State C. State A changes the
license from resident to nonresident. State B and State C record a change of address. The producer should apply for a license
with State D within 90 days. State D should issue the license and may not require the producer to complete either an
examination or prelicensing education; State D should verify that the license was in good standing in State A via the SPLD.
 Example B
A producer who holds a line of authority for surety in the home state, State A, applies for a nonresident license in State B,
which does not have a separate surety line of authority.
What should happen: State B issues a license that has multiple LOAs, including surety LOA, that the producer holds in the
home state, but the producer is limited to the surety LOA held in his or her home state.
 Example C
A producer’s home state, State A, does not have a prelicensing education requirement for any LOA, and the producer holds a
life insurance LOA. The producer applies for a nonresident license in a state that has a prelicensing education requirement.
What should happen: State B issues a nonresident license with the life LOA and does not require any prelicensing education
before issuance.
 Example D
A producer’s home state, State A, does not have a prelicensing education requirement for any LOA, and the producer holds a
life insurance LOA. The producer holds a nonresident license from State B that has a prelicensing education requirement.
The producer moves into that state.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
What should happen: State B should issue a resident license to the producer with a life LOA and does not require
prelicensing education or completion of an examination before issuance, “except where the commissioner determined
otherwise by regulation.” (See PLMA Section 9B.)
 Example E
A producer’s home state, State A, has a prelicensing education requirement and a CE requirement that is less than the ULS,
and the producer holds a life insurance LOA. The producer applies for a nonresident license in State B, which has a
prelicensing requirement that matches or exceeds the ULS and a CE requirement that matches the ULS.
What should happen: State B issues the nonresident license with the life LOA and does not require the completion of either
additional prelicensing education or additional CE.
 Example F
A nonresident producer applies for the variable products LOA in State A. A check of the SPLD reveals that the applicant is
not licensed for variable products in the home state, State B. Upon investigation, it is learned that State B either issues life or
variable as a combined LOA or has a requirement for variable products licensing, but it is not specifically tracked by the
Department of Insurance (DOI).
What should happen: This is a challenge, as State B has failed to adopt the variable products line of authority as defined in
the PLMA. A second challenge is that the records on the SPLD and/or the NIPR may not accurately reflect the home state
business rule. In this example, the nonresident state will have to pend the application and contact the home state to verify if
the applicant is in compliance with the home state law on variable products. The nonresident state must then decide if the
applicant should be granted a license.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section B Licensing Processes
Chapter 5 Activities Requiring Licensure

Chapter 6 Prelicensing Education
Chapter 7 Application Review for Initial Licenses
Chapter 8 Testing Programs
Chapter 9 Lines of Insurance
Chapter 10 Surplus Lines Producer Licenses
Chapter 11 Appointments
Chapter 12 Business Entities
Chapter 13 Temporary Licenses

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 5
Activities Requiring Licensure
License Required to Sell, Solicit and Negotiate
The PLMA uses three key words to determine when a person is required to have an insurance producer license:
“Sell” means to exchange a contract of insurance by any means, for money or its equivalent, on behalf of an insurance
company.
“Solicit” means attempting to sell insurance, or asking or urging a person to apply for a particular kind of insurance,
from a particular company.
“Negotiate” means the act of conferring directly with, or offering advice directly to, a purchaser or prospective purchaser
of a particular contract of insurance concerning any of the substantive benefits, terms or conditions of the contract,
provided that the person engaged in that act either sells insurance or obtains insurance from insurers for purchasers.
The specific requirement to hold a license is found in Section 3 of the PLMA and reads as follows:
A person shall not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance in this state for any class or classes of insurance, unless the
person is licensed for that line of authority in accordance with this Act.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group clarified in 2006 that in traditional life insurance sales transactions, licensure
should be determined solely by the PLMA’s “sells, solicits or negotiates” standard, without reference to the insured’s state of
residence. The key is to determine if the producer was properly licensed in the state in which the activity requiring a license
took place. See also FAQ Number 16 in Chapter 2.
During the drafting of the PLMA, there was considerable discussion about who should be required to hold an insurance
producer license. Prior to the adoption of the PLMA, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group discussed guidelines for
“licensable” and “non-licensable” activities. The main thrust of that effort was to distinguish acts that constitute the sale,
solicitation or negotiation of insurance from administrative or clerical acts. The guidelines document gives numerous
examples of “Agent” activities that do require an insurance producer license and “Clerical” activities that do not. The
document is included in the Appendices. Check the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page for any updates.
Commissions
Section 13 of the PLMA provides guidance regarding the relationship between being licensed and receiving commissions.
Section 13(A) prohibits the payment of commission to a person who is required to be licensed. Section 13(B) prohibits a
person from receiving a commission if that person was unlicensed and was required to hold a license under the Act.
Section 13(C) of the PLMA states that it is not necessary nor should any state require a producer to maintain an active license
solely to continue to receive renewal or deferred commissions.
Section 13(D) of the PLMA provides that an insurer or a producer licensed in a state may assign commissions, services fees,
brokerages or similar compensation to an insurance agency (business entity) or to persons (individuals) who are not selling,
soliciting or negotiating in that state and who are not licensed in that state. For example, if a regional manager in State A is,
by contract with an insurer, to receive an override commission on all sales activities from subagents located in States B and
State C, but the manager does not engage in any activity that would require licensure under Section 3 of the PLMA, no
license should be required by State B or State C in order for the manager to receive commission payments.
Another example: A trade association with members in all states is headquartered in State A. An insurer pays a fee to the
association for each member who purchases insurance from that insurer through an affinity marketing program. The
association does not have to be licensed in any state because the association does not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
In 2008, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group provided guidance on uniform interpretation of the commission
sharing provision in PLMA and recommended that adoption of Section 13 be included in the ULS. The Commission Sharing
guidance document is included in the Appendix of this Handbook.
Exceptions to Licensing
The PLMA contains two key sections that clarify when a license is not required. When considering whether to require a
license, states should carefully review Section 4 and Section 13 of the PLMA.
Section 4 of the PLMA contains a specific list of exceptions from the licensing requirement. States should take special note
of Section 4(B)(6), which provides an exception for producers placing commercial insurance for a multistate risk with an
incidental exposure in several states. As the section provides, in this situation a license is only required in the state where the
insured maintains its principal place of business and the contract of insurance insures risks located in that state.
The following is a summary of types of persons and entities that are exempted from licensing:
1. An officer, director or employee of an insurer or insurance producer, provided that the officer, director or employee
does not receive any commission on policies written or sold to insure risks residing, located or to be performed in
the state.
2. A person who secures and furnishes information for, or enrolls individuals in, group life insurance, group P/C
insurance, group annuities or group, or blanket accident and health insurance.
3. An employer or association; its officers, directors, employees; or the trustees of an employee trust plan.
4. Employees of insurers or organizations employed by insurers who are engaging in the inspection, rating or
classification of risks.
5. A person whose activities in a state are limited to advertising without the intent to solicit insurance in that state.
6. A person who is not a resident of a state who sells, solicits or negotiates a contract of insurance for commercial P/C
risks to an insured with risks located in more than one state insured under that contract.
7. A salaried, full-time employee who counsels or advises the employer relative to the insurance interests of the
employer.
Recommended Best Practice for Insurance Regulators
 For uniformity purposes, states that still use a “transaction-based licensure” approach should eliminate that standard and
change to the PLMA standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 6
Prelicensing Education
Prelicensing education is required in some states as a condition of licensure for resident insurance producers. Neither the
PLMA nor the ULS suggests that a state must have a requirement for prelicensing education. States that have a prelicensing
education requirement should follow the uniform standards as adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group.
The ULS set a minimum credit hour requirement for prelicensing education. In 2010, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working
Group was charged with reviewing this standard. Updated information, if there are any changes to this standard, can be found
on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page.
States that require prelicensing education shall require 20 credit hours of prelicensing education per major line of authority.
States must accept both classroom study and verifiable self-study, which includes both text and online courses. The ULS does
not have a limit on the number of credits that can be obtained by self-study. States shall independently determine the content
requirements for prelicensing education. The ULS require that a state have a method to verify completion of prelicensing
education, but they do not prescribe a method.
The ULS provide that a person who has completed a college degree in insurance shall be granted a waiver from all
prelicensing education requirements. The ULS also provide that individuals holding certain professional designations
approved by the insurance department should be granted a waiver from the prelicensing education requirement. In 2008, the
ULS were updated to indicate the following list of designations be provided as guidance for designations that would waive
prelicensing education, but the list is not exhaustive:
Life: CEBS, ChFC, CIC, CFP, CLU, FLMI, LUTCF
Health: RHU, CEBS, REBC, HIA
P/C: AAI, ARM, CIC, CPCU
Under both reciprocity standards and the ULS, no state shall require prelicensing education for nonresident applicants or
nonresident producers who change their state of residency.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 7
Application Review for Initial Licenses
Individual Application Forms
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted a uniform application, and the ULS require its use for all producer
applicants. Section 6 of the PLMA outlines the process a state is to follow in reviewing the application and in making the
determination as to whether to grant a resident producer license.
Before issuing a resident producer license to an applicant, the state must find that an applicant for a resident license:
1. Is at least 18 years of age.

2. Has not committed any act that is a ground for denial, suspension or revocation set forth in the PLMA Section 12.
3. Where required by the insurance commissioner, has completed a prelicensing course of study for the lines of
authority for which the person has applied.
4. Has paid the appropriate fees.
5. Has successfully passed the examinations for the lines of authority for which the person has applied. Note that the
ULS provide that examinations are not generally required for limited lines, but that it is acceptable for examinations
for areas such as crop and surety.
Business Entity Applications
The following requirements are optional and would apply only to those states that have a business entity license requirement.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted a uniform application form for business entities, and the ULS require
its use. Section 6 of the PLMA requires that before approving an application for a resident business entity, the state shall find
that:
1. The business entity has paid the appropriate fees.

2. The business entity has designated a licensed producer responsible for the business entity’s compliance with the
insurance laws, rules and regulations of the state.
Section 6 also gives the insurance commissioner authority to require any documents necessary to verify the information
contained in an application. In 2010, the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force considered methods to expedite and streamline
business entity licensing. Updated proposals can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group Producer
Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page.
Background Checks
The GLBA allows states to perform criminal background checks on resident applicants. The ULS contain guidelines on how
to perform background checks, including the following three-step process for background checks:
A. States will ask and review the answers to the standard background questions contained on the
Uniform Applications;
B. States will run a check against the NAIC Regulatory Information Retrieval System (RIRS)/SPLD and 1033 State
Decision Repository (SDR) – Data Entry Tool; and
C(1) States will fingerprint their resident producer applicants and conduct state and federal criminal
background checks on new resident producer applicants; or
C(2) If a state lacks the authority or resources to accept and receive data from the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI),
it shall conduct a statewide criminal history background check through the appropriate governmental agency for new
resident producer applicants until such time as it obtains the appropriate authority.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Fingerprints
Under the ULS, the goal is that all states will electronically fingerprint their resident producers as part of the initial resident
producer licensing process. States that lack the authority to run criminal history background checks through the FBI are
encouraged to at least run a statewide background check until such time that state and national fingerprinting is implemented.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted model language that will allow a state to access federal databases.
(See the Authorization for Criminal History Record Check Model [#222].) States are encouraged to adopt this language.
1033 Consent Waivers
The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, 18 U.S.C. §§ 1033 and 1034, commonly referred to as
“1033,” establishes a ban on individuals who have been convicted of certain felony crimes involving dishonesty or breach of
trust from working in the insurance business. The law provides that a banned person can apply to the state insurance
commissioner for a written consent to work in the insurance business. If an individual with a felony involving dishonesty or
breach of trust obtains a 1033 consent waiver from that person’s resident state, the person cannot be prosecuted for engaging
in the business of insurance in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§1033 and 1034.
When one state grants a written consent waiver to an individual pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1033, the consensus of legal opinion
is that this written consent waiver is effective nationwide.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group determined that the resident state bears responsibility for consideration of
applications for consent waivers. Nonresident applicants should not be subject to additional procedures, nor should producers
seeking nonresident licenses have to go through the 1033 process in all states after the producer’s resident state has issued a
waiver. However, producers who have received waivers are required to attach them to applications for nonresident licenses.
To assist these applicants, states should include a specific reference to 18 U.S.C §1033 within the text of the document that
grants a waiver. States may exercise their discretion to deny licenses based on the types of criminal convictions disclosed in
consent waivers. The NAIC Antifraud (D) Task Force adopted guidelines for review and granting of these consent waivers.
Under the guidelines, states are to report all activity on these consent waivers to the (1033 SDR – Data Entry Tool). The full
text of the guidelines is available through I-Site.
NAIC Databases Relevant to Initial Application Review
The NAIC maintains three databases that should be consulted as part of application review.
1. The Complaint Database System (CDS) contains information on closed complaints as reported by the states.
2. The RIRS contains any action taken by a state insurance department where the action is against an entity and where
the disposition is public information. All final adjudicated actions taken and submitted by a state insurance
department are reflected in the RIRS. The information typically includes: administrative complaints, cease and
desist orders, settlement agreements and consent orders, receiverships, license suspensions or revocations, corrective
action plans, restitutions, closing letters, and letter agreements. The RIRS does not include exam report adoption
orders without regulatory actions.
3. A record of 1033 actions is maintained in 1033 SDR – Data Entry Tool. The 1033 State Decision Repository (SDR)
application allows regulators to enter and search for 1033 decisions (approved or denied), which state regulators
have made for individuals who requested to work in the business of insurance but who have been prohibited to do so
by section 1033 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994.
Review of Applications When Criminal History is Disclosed
As part of the 2009 charges for the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group, the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force asked
the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group to develop uniform guidelines for background check reviews of producers. For
all jurisdictions to have a comfort level with licensing determinations made by a resident state when the applicant has a
criminal history, a uniform process of review is warranted. If all jurisdictions implement these guidelines, in most situations,
nonresident states will be able to defer to the resident state’s licensing decision. A copy of the Uniform Criminal History and
Regulatory Actions Background Review Guidelines is included in the Appendix of this Handbook.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
When an application contains a disclosure with a “yes” answer to a criminal history question, in determining whether to issue
a license, states should consider the following factors:
 Resident vs. Nonresident
If the application is for a resident producer license, it is incumbent upon the resident state to scrutinize all “yes” answers on
the application and to request and obtain documentation and a detailed explanation for all criminal charges. Nonresident
applicants’ criminal histories also should be documented and explained with consideration given the fact that the resident
state already has issued a license to the applicant.
 Severity and Nature of the Offense
Felony convictions should always be considered in determining whether to issue a license to an individual and may require
the applicant to apply for a 1033 consent waiver prior to application. (See the section on 1033 consent waivers.)
A criminal conviction is only relevant to the licensing decision if the crime is related to the qualifications, functions or duties
of an insurance producer. Examples include theft; burglary; robbery; dishonesty; fraud; breach of trust or breach of fiduciary
duties; any conviction arising out of acts performed in the business of insurance; or any actions not consistent with public
health, safety and welfare. Special scrutiny should be given to financial and violent crimes.
 Frequency of Offenses
While a producer’s past criminal history is a red flag and may be a predictor of future behavior, the frequency of offenses
should be considered, with more weight given to a pattern of illegal behavior than to a one-time minor indiscretion.
 Date of the Offense
The application form requires the applicant to disclose all criminal charges, except minor traffic offenses. A reviewer should
consider when the offenses occurred and the age of the applicant at the time of the offense.
 Completion of Terms of Sentencing
Applicants should provide evidence that they have completed all the terms of their sentences, including paying restitution, or
completing any probationary periods or community service.
 Evidence of Rehabilitation
The applicant should be required to provide evidence of rehabilitation. Completion of the terms of sentencing alone does not
demonstrate rehabilitation. A state may request a statement from the applicant’s probation officer or other appropriate
official.
Statutory Obligations and Discretion
Insurance regulators should review state law to determine guidelines for approval or denial of the application. After
consideration of the above factors, the insurance regulator has several options:
1. Request additional information or documentation.

2. If the producer failed to report an action, contact the producer and request an explanation from the producer.
(Technical violations, such as bad address or failure to timely report, generally do not merit formal action. However,
the failure to report an action in itself can be cause for administrative penalty or a warning letter, depending on the
particular state’s law).
3. Approve the application with no conditions.
4. Approve the application with conditions.
5. Deny the application.
In some cases, it may be appropriate to grant a conditional license. This option may not be available in all states and may be
limited by state law or regulation. Some options include:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Issue a probationary license that will expire after six months or a year, or that will coincide with the applicant’s
criminal probationary period. At the end of the probationary period, and prior to consideration of full licensure, the
insurance regulator should confirm that the applicant successfully completed all terms of the sentence and probation.
This option also can be used for a producer with a record of prior administrative action.
2. Enter into a supervisory agreement, whereby another established licensed producer agrees to be responsible for the
applicant during a certain period of time of the applicant’s license term. This is a good option for producers who
have criminal records in another state or some other evidence of past bad conduct. The supervisory agreement
should include a requirement that the supervising producer report to the insurance regulator any inappropriate
behavior that is relevant to the agreement and to the applicant’s license status.
3. Issue only a limited or restricted license for a particular product, such as credit life insurance. The theory of this
option is that some types of products present individuals with less opportunity to commit bad acts.
4. Issue the license along with a requirement that the producer must report all complaints received against the producer
and under the condition that there will be an immediate suspension for any bad act.
 Work with state officials to adopt a fingerprint program that allows your state criminal justice agency to receive
electronic prints, as well as electronically submit the reports back to the state DOI.
 If no fingerprint program is in place, inquire of the state criminal investigation department to determine if an alternative
system for meaningful state background checks can be arranged.
 Allow pre-exam and post-exam fingerprinting.
 Make electronic fingerprinting available at test sites.
 Allow re-fingerprinting, if necessary, on a walk-in basis with no additional cost.
 Include registration for fingerprinting with registration for the exam, or link the online websites to allow for electronic
registration.
 Streamline the background check process to avoid delay in the overall licensing process such as allowing for a temporary
work authority pending receipt of the background check results.
 Check with other state agencies to determine what vendor(s) are used for the submission of electronic fingerprints
(agencies that oversee programs such as teachers, bus drivers, social workers, foster parents, etc.)
 Adopt the NAIC’s Authorization for Criminal History Record Check Model Act (#222) for all license classes. (Allow
some lag time before the effective date to provide sufficient time to establish procedures.) Note that ULS 14 has since
been updated to fingerprint new resident producers and that fingerprints are no longer required for additional lines of
authority under an existing home state license.
 The PLMA allows a producer to reinstate a lapsed license within 12 months of expiration, so only resident producers
who are reinstating a license lapsed over 12 months should be required to submit fingerprints.
 Work with your state district attorney official to coordinate review and approval of the enabling statute, which must be
approved by the U.S. attorney general to access the Criminal Justice Information Services (CJIS) division of the FBI
criminal history record information.
 Establish a set number of times an applicant should be re-fingerprinted. (At times, fingerprints are rejected.) If re-
fingerprinting is required, and the fingerprints are still rejected, establish a process to perform a state and federal NAME
check.
 If your state is unable to use a vendor to electronically collect the cost of the criminal history background check from
applicants, work with NIPR to collect this fee from new resident producer applicants during the electronic resident
licensing application.
 Work with state officials to establish a reimbursement services agreement (RSA) for the payment of fingerprint or
background checks.
 If your jurisdiction is just implementing fingerprinting, reach out to other jurisdictions for suggestions and best practices.
 Develop a system for review of 1033 consent waiver applications and post relevant information on the department
website.
 Post all information regarding 1033 consent waiver requests, approvals and denials on the 1033 SDR – Data Entry Tool.
 Accommodate applicants to the greatest extent possible with flexible hours of operation.
 Allow payment by check, credit card or debit card.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 8
Testing Programs
Introduction
The states have a responsibility to ensure that licensing examinations are fair, sound, valid and secure. Directors must
consider how an exam is developed, who is involved in the development process, how the exam is offered and how security
is maintained. Nearly every state has contracted with an outside vendor to assist in examination development and
administration. These testing vendors employ test development experts and psychometricians to construct and evaluate
examinations.
The primary purpose of a state examination and licensing program is to protect consumers. Examinations should be
consistent across the states in difficulty level, content and subject matter. They should be uniformly administered and scored.
Examinations should be psychometrically sound, using methods for setting and maintaining passing standards (i.e., cut
scores) that are in accordance with testing industry best practices. They should use resources such as: 1) the Standards for
Educational and Psychological Testing, developed jointly by the American Educational Research Association (AERA),
American Psychological Association (APA) and National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME); and 2) the U.S.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s (EEOC) Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (29 CFR
1607). Through valid, reliable and legally defensible test development practices, candidates will have a fair and equitable
opportunity to pass an exam, regardless of which state exam they take. Ideally, pass rates should be consistent throughout the
states; however, statistics from national examination administration have shown that the pass rates for examinations for the
same line of insurance vary significantly among the states. Other variables may contribute to pass rates, such as state
education systems, demographics, the existence of a prelicensing education requirement and the quality of such prelicensing
education, but the states should work with their test vendors to be sure that they eliminate any practices that do not measure
the entry-level knowledge, duties and responsibilities of an insurance producer.
Different states take different approaches to the development and administration of producer license examinations. Some of
the states exercise significant control over test development and review. Other states rely almost entirely on outside experts.
In most of the states, the state does not pay any fee to a testing vendor, and the cost of test development and administration is
passed through to the test-takers. Most of the states reserve the right to preapprove any fees charged by testing vendors.
With the state licensing system increasingly built on reciprocity, it is in the best interest of consumers, insurance regulators,
industry, producers and prospective producers for state licensing directors to establish guidelines that promote efficiency and
consistency throughout the licensing process. Directors also should reduce or eliminate artificial barriers that impede
qualified applicants from obtaining a license.
The purpose of this chapter is to recommend best practices for states in testing administration in the following areas:
1. Test development and review.

2. Test administration.
3. Test results.
4. Expectations for test vendors.
This chapter was developed with assistance from insurance test vendors, industry representatives, education providers and
insurance regulators.
PLMA Guidelines on Examinations
Section 5 of the PLMA contains guidance for administering licensing examinations. Under Section 5, all residents are
expected to complete a written examination, which should include the following:
1. The entry-level knowledge required for an individual concerning the lines of authority for which the
application is made.
2. The duties and responsibilities of an insurance producer.
3. The applicable insurance laws and regulations of the state.
Section 5 grants the insurance commissioner authority to hire an outside testing service to administer examinations and
impose nonrefundable examination fees.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The PLMA contains several exemptions from prelicensing education and examination requirements. An individual who is
licensed as a nonresident in a state and who moves into that state, or an individual who moves from his or her home state to
another state and seeks a resident license, is not required to complete an examination for the line(s) of authority previously
actively held in the prior resident state as long as application is made within 90 days of the change in residence and the prior
resident state indicates the producer was licensed in good standing. In this situation, a nonresident state should never impose
prelicensing education or examination requirements.
The ULS provide that examinations are not generally required for limited lines, but that it is acceptable to require
examinations for areas such as crop and surety.
The PLMA leaves test development and administration to the discretion of the individual states. Section 5(A) of the PLMA
requires that “[a] resident individual applying for an insurance producer license shall pass a written examination” and
requires that the examination must test the knowledge of the individual in three areas:
1. The specific lines of authority for which the application is made.

2. The entry-level duties and responsibilities of an insurance producer.
3. The applicable insurance laws and regulations of the state.
Beyond these broad subject matter categories, Section 5 states that tests “shall be developed and conducted under rules and
regulations prescribed by the insurance commissioner.”
In order to provide more uniformity in state licensing practices, the 2012 revised ULS for Exam Content or Subject Area and
Testing Administration Standards establishes implementation of the “Exam Content and Testing Administration
Recommended Best Practices found in Chapter 8 of the NAIC State Licensing Handbook” as the uniform standard.
Test Development and Review
Test development experts believe that licensing examinations should measure the minimum competency required for a
candidate to perform at an entry level. Therefore, test content and curriculum development should be focused on assessing
whether a candidate demonstrates sufficient knowledge to pass an examination that is appropriately targeted to an entry-level
producer.
The examination should not dictate the curriculum that an entry-level insurance producer should master. Instead, the test
content should be developed using the steps outlined below. Examinations and curriculums should be updated to reflect any
changes in insurance laws, regulations or industry practice. An online candidate guide should be available and should provide
detailed testing and licensing procedures, as well as content outlines with cross-references to the curriculum.
Input from trainers who conduct test preparation courses may assist in the development of the curriculum and the exam
content outline; however, some insurance regulators believe it is not appropriate to invite these trainers to participate in
reviewing final examination questions. Education providers who do not offer prelicensing education courses (such as CE
providers) sometimes are used during test development. There are generally two approaches to examination construction. A
bank-based test generates individual examinations from a large bank of items. A form-based examination will consist of a
specified set of predesigned test forms that are rotated. The states use both methods, and both are psychometrically
acceptable. Although contracted outside experts play a major role in test development in most jurisdictions, the state should
have a regular process and procedures for developing and reviewing licensing examinations to ensure that those examinations
are properly focused on the minimum competencies required of an entry-level producer. Some items that should be included
in the plan include:
1. Procedures to ensure that a job analysis survey that includes input from insurance regulators and the industry is
conducted at regular intervals to determine the requirements and work performed by an entry-level insurance
producer.
2. Regular, ongoing review and assessment of producer licensing examinations in the event of legislative or regulatory
changes that could affect the accuracy of exam content.
3. An annual review of the examination development process conducted with the state and the testing vendor.
4. Depending on test volume, test performance and the need for content changes, either an annual (or at least biannual)
substantive review of the examination and the psychometric properties of the test. These efforts should include the
involvement of content or test development professionals, department personnel and industry representatives,
including recent, entry-level producers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
5. A fair and valid state-based test should incorporate knowledge, skills and abilities that measure state-specific and
national expertise. This balance will shift depending on the subject matter. For example, life insurance laws and
regulations tend to be more similar among the states, while health insurance standards can vary widely.
6. If the state collects demographic data, it should be reviewed annually.
Developing the Questions
Developing a valid and sound bank of test questions, often called “items,” is perhaps the most critical piece of any testing
program. The items need to be at the appropriate level of difficulty. Items should be relevant to the profession and should be
effective in evaluating whether the person taking the exam possesses the knowledge, skills and abilities critical to
competently performing the job and safely practicing in the profession. To create this balance, most of the states use a
combination of local subject-matter experts (SMEs) and content or test development professionals. The local panel should
include new and experienced producers to help establish such a balance.
Using multiple item writers to develop test content is a common practice, but it can lead to variation in test item style, format
and difficulty. Developing a style guide with templates, development standards and rules can go a long way in improving
item consistency, format and variety. Content development training can ensure that writers have the tools they need to
develop credible, legally defensible items and templates that can be leveraged to create multiple variations of the same
question.
Passing Score vs. Pass Rate
A passing score, sometimes called a “cut score,” is the minimum score one needs to achieve in order to pass the exam. The
“pass rate” is the percentage of candidates who actually pass the exam. The test development process will consider data from
actual tests and data from reviewers rating the items and exams in evaluating the cut score.
In some of the states, the cut scores are arbitrarily established by rule or regulation. This is not a valid testing practice. Cut
scores should be based on data collected through the test-development process. Regulatory licensing exams typically target a
level referred to as “minimum” competency rather than “average” competency. Licensing examinations try to determine who
has the minimum competency to safely practice in a profession without compromising the health and safety of the public. An
arbitrary cut score, which is the practice in some of the states, tends to focus on the average, rather than minimum,
competency. Thus, qualified candidates could be cut because they fall below the average, not because their competency is
unacceptable.
Exam Scoring
Some of the states administer a one-part or one-score exam, while others administer two-part exams. In the one-part exam,
general product knowledge and state-specific content are scored together. In the states with a two-part exam, the candidate
must separately pass both the general product knowledge exam and the state-specific exam in order to be eligible to apply for
a license for the line of authority requested. A third variation is to require the first-time test-taker to pass an exam on state-
specific insurance laws and regulations once. All additional lines of authority are tested on general product knowledge only.
Preliminary review of pass rates indicates a tendency for more candidates to fail in the states that require two-part exams.
There is no evidence that two-part exams increase consumer protections or that the states that administer one-part exams
license producers who do not know applicable state law. The states are encouraged to move to one-part exams to allow for
more success among candidates without jeopardizing consumer protections.
Exam Content
As of May 2013, the states have no standard exam curriculum. The NAIC is encouraging more uniform approaches by
considering the best practices for testing programs listed at the end of this chapter to be standards for all jurisdictions to work
toward. The Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force formed a subgroup of five states to develop a draft national content outline
using the life and annuity line of authority as a pilot. The national content outline provides guidance for entry-level subject
matter that the states should test for, as well as information that will assist candidates in identifying relevant knowledge to
study in preparation for the exam.
Some experts have recommended that examinations should be constructed with the following considerations in mind:
1. The states should not target examinations to an artificially set passing score. A state should determine whether its
test is focused on assessing the knowledge needed by potential new producers, and only applicants who lack that

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
level of knowledge should fail. The states should use legally defensible, recognized methodology when establishing
a cut score.
2. Prior to releasing items into an exam form, the editing and review process employed is critical. This editing process
should include the psychometric evaluation of the cognitive level of the items and the reading level of the items, as
well as such editorial issues as grammar, sensitivity and style. Psychometric editing is best performed by test
development professionals, not state SMEs or item writers. Individuals trained in the complexity of psychometric
editing evaluate items in a different, critical light than SMEs or item writers. It is critical, however, to have all final
items reviewed and approved by state and national SMEs in the given field for accuracy and relevancy.
3. Each examination should consist of pre-test questions that are being evaluated for performance and questions that
previously have been evaluated (pre-tested) and determined to be statistically effective. Each candidate’s score
should be based only on the previously pre-tested and approved questions. Any time used to respond to pre-test
items should not be counted against the test-takers, and responses to pre-test items should not be calculated in the
test-taker’s score. Pre-test items should not be used as scored items until they have been statistically proven to be
effective. The test questions for any new examination should be chosen from the pool of test questions to properly
represent the subject-matter outline of the examination.
4. Reports regarding exam pass rates, candidate demographics when collected and number of exams administered
should be made available to the public. Reports should include first-time pass success by subject area. Whenever
possible, this information should be tracked by, and be made available to, each education provider so they may
evaluate their programs and instructors, and be provided with data needed for course development. The states may
ask for, but generally cannot require, information on candidate population, gender, ethnicity, education level and
income level. When candidate demographics are collected, reports should include the percentage and number of
examinees who passed the examination by race, ethnicity, gender, education level and native language. This
information is necessary for the selection of future test questions, and will aid in making testing transparent and
assessing whether differences in test scores are correlated with relevant demographic factors.
5. A state advisory committee consisting of insurance regulators and the industry—including, where possible, recently
licensed producers—should annually (or, if changes are not needed every year, at least biannually) work with the
testing vendor to review the questions on each examination form or bank of items for substantive and psychometric
requirements. Adjustments should be made to the examination to eliminate any questions that might be inaccurate or
unclear, that might test subject matter that is beyond what a new producer should know or that exhibit unsatisfactory
psychometric properties.
6. Licensing examinations should be reviewed at least annually, but if, during any rolling 12-month period, a licensing
examination exhibits uncharacteristically high or low pass rates (such as less than 60% or more than 80%),
unexplained fluctuations in testing volume or other significant deviations, that examination should be reviewed
immediately.
A state testing program should include statistical analysis of test items in the field and gather feedback on the candidate
performance on the individual items. The most obvious and critical use of this information is to ensure that exams are
equivalent, and to evaluate the accuracy with which items differentiate between candidates who are minimally qualified and
candidates who are not. The psychometric review can result in the continued use of items, the modification of items or the
deletion of items from the bank.
A professional test vendor should use a comprehensive strategy for developing test items and ensuring measurement of the
knowledge, skills and abilities necessary for initial insurance licensees to perform their jobs effectively. The steps may
include:
1. Conducting a committee-based job analysis.

2. Developing content specifications and weightings.
3. Developing items.
4. Editing and reviewing items with SMEs to ensure items meet the required criteria.
5. Obtaining item difficulty (e.g., Angoff method) estimates to establish a passing score.
6. Developing item sampling groups to structure each examination.
7. Creating equivalent forms.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Test Development Deliverables
A state licensing director should expect to receive the following items to ensure that the testing vendor has provided all items
necessary to administer a successful testing program:
1. Finalized task and knowledge statements reflecting the requirements of each licensed insurance position.
2. Content specifications for each licensing examination.
3. A set of approved, relevant and important items for use on each licensing examination.
4. A list of references used to develop the test items.
5. Candidate Information Bulletins (CIBs).
6. A technical report describing the procedures used and results obtained from the test development process for each
licensing examination.
Candidate Information Bulletin
A CIB should describe the examinations, examination policies and procedures, and the consequences of violating security
procedures. A testing vendor should be capable of making changes to the information contained within the CIB during any
contract year at the state’s request.
The CIB should be available at no charge to candidates, trainers and insurers in hard copy or in electronic format via the
Internet. The state licensing director should consider including the following topics in the CIB:
1. How to contact the testing vendor.

2. Requirements for taking an examination.
3. How to apply for an examination, including receiving authorization of eligibility from the state, prelicensing
education and background checks.
4. Links to current application forms.
5. How to obtain current forms in hard copy (if available in hard copy).
6. Examination fees.
7. Scheduling procedures.
8. The content outline and format of the examination.
9. Supplies provided at the test center.
10. The time limit for the examination.
11. The scoring system.
12. Security procedures.
13. Examination process and procedures.
14. Appropriate examination-taking strategies (e.g., “There is no penalty for incorrect answers, so be sure to answer
every question.”).
15. Appropriate use of scratch paper, calculators and/or other support material.
16. Sample questions.
17. Specific information about taking the test on the computer.
18. List of approved reference materials.
19. List of test centers, alternative test centers and driving directions to each.
20. Procedures for requesting special accommodation.
21. Examination registration forms.
22. Licensing requirements and procedures.
23. Refund policies.
24. Holiday or weather-related test center closures.
25. Instructions about how to contact the state insurance department.
A state should approve each CIB before it is published. The licensing director should work with the vendor to set a timeline
that will allow for final publication of an updated CIB in advance of the expiration of the prior edition of the CIB. The new
edition should be provided to test preparation trainers at least six weeks in advance of implementation so that training
materials can be updated.
Technology Issues
A licensing director should consult with the state’s information technology (IT) staff to ensure that the testing vendor can
deliver data to the state insurance department. This is critical when a state changes testing vendors. This also is critical if the

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
state directs a vendor to send data to a different location than the state insurance department. Any transition should include a
testing phase for hardware, software and state insurance department staff.
The state and the testing vendor should jointly agree on a timeline for introducing new or updated examinations. State IT
staff also should be consulted.
Legal Defensibility
Items developed also must be legally defensible to protect the state in the event of a legal challenge. To protect the state from
liability, each exam should be critically reviewed from a content and psychometric perspective to ensure that the exam was
developed according to recognized standards. Validation procedures for licensing examinations should be designed to
comply with content validation requirements of the EEOC’s Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures (29 CFR
1607).
The states should require testing vendors to follow and document standardized methods. This should include appropriate test
development personnel in the process. Using the appropriate, credentialed professionals is critical, as there are multiple steps
involved in the test development process and various methodologies that can be used for each step. State licensing directors
should discuss all options with qualified professionals.
Vendor Responsibilities
Test vendors should be able to meet minimum guidelines for sufficient availability, facilities, personnel and openness in
terms of providing information related to their operations.
The states, and not the test vendors, must be responsible for all examination content and content outlines. The vendor should
provide accessible information regarding the registration system through the Internet, toll-free telephone numbers, interactive
voice response, fax and other available technologies. The available information should include permitting candidates to view
exam test dates and to access forms and content guidelines without requiring prior payment and scheduling of an exam.
The vendor should promptly provide the state with all pertinent information, including prompt notification of any candidate
complaints, changes to test administration, conflicts at examination test sites or other information requested or required by
the state.
The vendor should provide quality, accessible facilities, with an established system of examination site supervision that
ensures that competent site administrators consistently provide accurate information to applicants.
Where a vendor operates test sites in multiple states, the vendor should permit any applicant to take a state’s examination in
another state, under the same conditions that would apply if the exam were taken at an in-state location.
Vendors should be required, on an ongoing basis, to collect the data on customer satisfaction and, if directed by the state, to
make those data available to insurance regulators, the industry and the public.
Test Administration
The testing process should be fair and accessible for all candidates. A state should consider including the following elements
below in its licensing process to ensure applicants have equal access to examinations.
Secure Administration
The security of the test center network is important in maintaining the integrity of a test. A vendor should be equipped with
adequate security features and qualified test center administrators. Each proctor should be trained and tested on his or her
ability to supervise exams. A vendor should have systems in place to ensure the fair, consistent and even administration of
the exam in every location. A vendor also should have a method to detect attempts to record questions. For example, a vendor
should track multiple examination attempts by individuals to assess if the candidate is intentionally failing the exam so it can
be repeated. A vendor should be required to notify the state immediately if the vendor suspects that the integrity of an
examination has been compromised.
Test Locations and Registration
Test locations should be set up to provide flexibility and convenience. Realizing that the states have different geographic
challenges and diverse population density, a state should consider, where possible, requiring the following elements:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Testing should be made available at locations convenient to residents of all areas of the state.
2. Test locations should provide enough testing capacity so a candidate can test at the desired location within two to
five business days of registration.
3. Exam site hours should include evening and weekend hours.
4. Test vendors should provide regular reports as required by the state detailing site usage and availability data.
5. Test registration should be available online or by telephone and allow for next day testing when space is available. A
state should consider tracking telephone hold and wait times to monitor how long callers wait.
6. State guidelines should provide for flexible means for payment of fees for testing, fingerprinting and other licensing.
The states should consider methods which facilitate payment by companies.
Disabilities
A state should require a vendor to develop a system that accommodates the physically impaired that is not related to a testing
candidate’s knowledge of insurance. Visually impaired and hearing-impaired persons should be accommodated through all
steps of the licensing process, pursuant to national standards set by the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
Examinations in Languages Other Than English
Some industry experts suggest caution about using translated or interpreted exams. The material may not directly translate
into equivalent terms or meaning. Cultural biases might cause incorrect interpretation of a meaning. Some experts
recommend that tests should be developed and administered in English, especially if other materials necessary to perform job
duties for the profession (such as contracts) are in English. State licensing directors should review state law and consult with
legal counsel about the appropriateness of offering examinations in a foreign language.
Reporting Examination Results
State licensing procedures should include guidelines that facilitate the prompt issuance of licenses once an applicant passes a
test. Elements might include:
1. Pass/fail notices should be issued at exam sites upon completion of the exam. If an applicant has not achieved a
passing score, the applicant should receive immediate notification of failure. The states vary as to whether
successful completion is reported with a precise score or merely an indication that the candidate passed the exam.
When a candidate does not pass the exam, the state should provide the precise score and the percentage of questions
in each subject area that the applicant answered incorrectly.
2. If a state issues a paper license, and if it has been predetermined that an applicant has met all requirements necessary
for licensure, including any required fingerprint report, a license should be issued at the exam site, or within 48
hours of completing all necessary requirements.
3. The state should send an email or other timely communication to a candidate to whom a license has been issued
outside the test site or provide information to applicants as to how to check online.
4. Within 24 hours of license issuance, the new licensee’s information should be added to the state’s database, and the
updated status should be sent to NIPR.
5. The states should work with their vendors to report aggregate results in a way that is more uniform with other states.
6. First-time pass rates should be maintained and made available to the public. First-time pass rates are defined as the
percentage of candidates who pass the whole test the first time.
7. In performing background checks, the use of an electronic process should be required whenever possible.
8. In those states requiring fingerprints, where possible, exam sites should have the capability to collect electronic
fingerprints.
Retesting or Notice of Failure
A state licensing plan should include a method to facilitate prompt retesting of applicants who have failed a test. The “non-
passing” notice should break scores out by each subject area. If the candidate requests to make another attempt, an
examination should be made available within a reasonable time period.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Producer Exam Content and Testing Administration Recommended Best Practices for Insurance Regulators
 The states should use accepted psychometric methods including job analysis to determine if the examination content
falls within the content domain that a minimally competent candidate of that specific line of authority tested would
be expected to know.
 The states should set passing scores (cut scores) and difficulty level using psychometric methods and appropriate
SMEs based on what an entry-level producer needs to know.
 The states are encouraged to move to one-part exams to allow for more success among candidates without
jeopardizing consumer protections.
 The states should require the test vendor (or other entity responsible for test development) to document the process
for ensuring quality control and validity of the examination, including psychometric review and editing and analysis
of item bias or cultural and gender sensitivity.
 To allow for meaningful comparison, all jurisdictions should define first-time pass rate as the percentage of
candidates who pass the whole test the first time.
 At least annually, reports regarding exam pass rates, candidate demographics when collected and number of exams
administered should be made available to the public. Reports should include first-time pass success and average
scoring by subject area. Whenever possible, the reports should be available by education provider and provided to
them.
 A state advisory committee consisting of insurance regulators and the industry—including, where possible, recently
licensed producers—should annually work with the testing vendor to review the questions on each examination form
for substantive and psychometric requirements. If, during any other time, any examination results exhibit significant
unexplained deviations, the examination should be reviewed.
 The states should work with testing vendors and approve CIBs that describe the examinations and examination
policies and procedures, and provide sufficient examination content outline and study references for the candidate to
prepare for the examination. Updated editions of the CIB/content outline should be provided to prelicensing
education providers at least six (6) weeks in advance of implementation so that training materials can be updated.
 Testing should be made available at locations reasonably convenient to residents of all areas of the state, with
registration available online or by telephone and the ability for a candidate to schedule testing within two to five
business days of registration.
 Pass/fail notices should be issued at exam sites upon completion of the exam. The fail notice should break out scores
by subject area. The state should provide a method to facilitate prompt retesting, while allowing a reasonable time
for candidates to review and prepare for retest.
 The states should deliver exams in a secure test center network that employs qualified test proctors.
 The states should set clear performance standards for test vendors and require accountability.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 9
Lines of Insurance
The Major Lines
A line of authority is a general subject area of insurance that a producer can be licensed to sell. The PLMA identifies and
defines seven lines of authority; however, the ULS set forth six lines that are considered major lines of authority, as well as
certain core limited lines. Additionally, the ULS set forth standards for non-core limited lines. The states should review all
other lines of insurance and consider eliminating them in an effort to become compliant with the ULS.1Uniform adoption of
the major lines is essential to fully implement NAIC licensing reforms.
The six major lines of authority are defined in the PLMA as follows:
1. Life – insurance coverage on human lives including benefits of endowment and annuities, and may include benefits
in the event of death or dismemberment by accident and benefits for disability income.
2. Accident and health or sickness – insurance coverage for sickness, bodily injury or accidental death and may
include benefits for disability income.
3. Property – insurance coverage for the direct or consequential loss or damage to property of every kind.
4. Casualty – insurance coverage against legal liability, including that for death, injury or disability, or damage to real
or personal property.
5. Variable life and variable annuity – insurance coverage provided under variable life insurance contracts and variable
annuities.
6. Personal lines – P/C insurance coverage sold to individuals and families for primarily noncommercial purposes.
Because the ULS also require that each major line be available individually, the states should provide individual
examinations for each of the major lines except variable life and variable annuity. It is acceptable for a state also to offer
combined exams. The ULS contemplate that each state will require an examination for residents to qualify for all major lines.
The states should give examinations only to residents, not nonresidents.
While the ULS do not specifically prohibit an examination for variable life and variable annuity products, most states do not
require an examination. This line of authority is usually granted if the applicant holds a life line of authority and has
successfully completed the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA), formerly known as the National Association
of Securities Dealers (NASD), examinations necessary to obtain a state securities license in that state. In most cases, this
means successful completion of the FINRA Series 6 and/or Series 7 (according to the specific state’s requirements) and/or
Series 63 exams.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has not specifically stated that states should not require an active state
securities license of residents or nonresidents as a condition of granting the variable life and variable annuity products line of
authority. The ULS do contemplate that no such requirement shall be imposed. For nonresident applicants, it is not
appropriate to pend a request for the variable life/annuity products line of authority to verify existence of the underlying life
line of authority in the home state. If a proper request for licensure is received and the applicant is in good standing in the
home state with the variable life and variable annuity line of authority, the nonresident license should be granted. If a state
cannot verify through the SPLD that the applicant holds a variable authority, it is permissible to pend the application and
contact the applicant’s home state to verify the variable authority.
Information regarding an applicant’s status as to securities registration and securities examinations passed currently are
easily accessible on FINRA’s public Web site (under “Check Out Brokers & Advisors” at
www.finra.org/InvestorInformation/index.htm). Information available includes: employment history; states where the
individual is securities licensed; securities examinations passed; and formal and final disciplinary history. To obtain Central
Registry Depository (CRD) information regarding pending complaints and unresolved cases, a state insurance department
must contact its state’s securities regulator.
1
The PLMA does not address title insurance, which is considered a major line by some of the states and a limited line by
others.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Recommended Best Practices for Regulators
 Adopt the major lines and the definitions exactly as stated in the PLMA and provide separate testing for each line,
except variable
 Allow combined examinations, as appropriate
Limited Lines
A limited line of insurance is a line of insurance that covers only a specific subject matter. Limited line licenses generally
have simpler licensing requirements than required by the major lines. Some states require an examination for credit
insurance. For the other limited lines, some states require an examination, while some require only a simplified application
process. In some states, a business entity is permitted to maintain a limited lines license on behalf of individuals who make
the limited line of insurance available to its customers. Often, a limited line is adopted by regulation and not by statute.
The PLMA contains a specific definition for credit insurance and allows states to define other limited lines. The Producer
Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted definitions for specific “core” limited lines of insurance for producers, which have
become part of the ULS. States are encouraged to adopt the definitions of those limited lines and to review and eliminate as
many non-uniform limited lines as possible. The PLMA requires states to grant to a nonresident a nonresident limited line
producer license with the same limited line of authority as the license issued by the home state. Many states have adopted a
special licensing category to accommodate this type of situation.
The core limited lines are:
1. Car rental insurance.

2. Credit insurance.
3. Crop insurance.
4. Travel insurance.
The ULS provide that examinations are not generally required for limited lines, but that it is acceptable for examinations for
areas such as crop and surety. The states should give examinations only to residents, not nonresidents. The ULS specifically
state that CE is required for only the major lines of insurance. (See specifics for crop insurance.)
In 2009, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group was charged with reviewing limited line licensing issues, with
particular focus on: 1) the establishment of a limited lines that encompasses several insurance products where the business of
insurance is ancillary to the business of the person offering the product; 2) the licensing requirements of individuals selling
limited line products; and 3) the fingerprinting of individuals selling limited line insurance products. Throughout the year,
the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group had discussions; however, no consensus was achieved. As a result, the
Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group reported to the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force and requested further
guidance on its charge. For 2010, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group was asked to:
Finalize the review of limited-line licensing issues, with particular focus on the following: 1) individually review the
licensing requirements for each core limited line; 2) review other limited lines, and determine what licensing requirements
should apply to them; and 3) determine if another “catch all” limited line was needed to address licensing requirements for
insurance products not already encompassed within the list of limited lines. Updates to the limited line charge may be
obtained on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page on the NAIC website.
The NAIC has adopted a specific resolution rejecting a prior request by industry to adopt a new limited line for term life
insurance. The full text of the resolution is in the Appendices.
As part of its 2010 charges, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group conducted a review of the ULS and adopted several
amendments. Specifically related to this chapter, revisions were made to Standard 16 (Lines of Authority), Standard 33
(Definition of Core Limited Lines), Standard 34 (Travel) and Standard 37 (Non-Core Limited Lines).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Allow resident and nonresident limited lines license applications to be filed electronically.
 Eliminate state-specific applications.
 To further reciprocity, report all limited lines licensees to the SPLD.
 Adopt the applicable revisions to the ULS related to limited lines.
A. Limited Line of Car Rental Insurance
Under the ULS, car rental insurance is defined as:
[I]nsurance offered, sold or solicited in connection with and incidental to the rental of rental cars for a period of [per
state law], whether at the rental office or by pre-selection of coverage in master, corporate, group or individual
agreements that (i) is non-transferable; (ii) applies only to the rental car that is the subject of the rental agreement;
and (iii) is limited to the following kinds of insurance:
(a) personal accident insurance for renters and other rental car occupants, for accidental death or dismemberment,
and for medical expenses resulting from an accident that occurs with the rental car during the rental period;
(b) liability insurance that provides protection to the renters and other authorized drivers of a rental car for liability
arising from the operation or use of the rental car during the rental period;
(c) personal effects insurance that provides coverage to renters and other vehicle occupants for loss of, or damage
to, personal effects in the rental car during the rental period;
(d) roadside assistance and emergency sickness protection insurance; or
(e) any other coverage designated by the insurance commissioner.
The states vary in their methods of supervising the sale of car rental insurance. In the states that require a license, there are
generally three methods in use. The first is a registration requirement through submission of an application. The second is the
successful completion of an exam and submission of an application. The states should give examinations only to residents,
not nonresidents. Under the third method, a car rental company registers with the state insurance department. The company
holds the license and is responsible for supervising the training and testing of its counter agents. The company reports to the
department and pays all fees.
B. Limited Line of Credit Insurance
The PLMA defines limited lines credit insurance as:
Credit life, credit disability, credit property, credit unemployment, involuntary unemployment, mortgage life,
mortgage guaranty, mortgage disability, guaranteed automobile protection insurance or any other form of insurance
offered in connection with an extension of credit that is limited to partially or wholly extinguishing that credit
obligation and that is designated by the insurance commissioner as limited line credit insurance.
Credit insurance products are designed to protect the borrower against the risk of not being able to pay a debt. Credit life,
disability and involuntary unemployment insurance are typical lines of coverage. These products are generally made
available by the creditor at the time the loan transaction occurs. Because the insurance is purchased at the time the borrower
completes the loan, policy and certificate forms, premium structures and underwriting conditions are generally simpler than
other limited lines of insurance.
Credit insurance is issued under individual and group policies. This allows market flexibility for different distribution
systems and variations in product design to insure the different types of credit risks. If an individual enrolls customers under
a group insurance policy, the individual must obtain a limited lines license, if a commission is paid. Section 4(B)(2) of the
PLMA provides an exception from licensing if no commission is paid to the enroller and the enroller does not engage in

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
selling, soliciting or negotiating.
Section 6(D) of the PLMA provides that each insurer that sells, solicits or negotiates any form of limited line credit insurance
shall provide its producers a program of instruction that may be approved by the insurance commissioner.
 A state should establish a method to verify that each credit insurer has established a program of instruction.
C. Limited Line of Crop Insurance
Under the ULS, crop insurance is defined as:
Insurance providing protection against damage to crops from unfavorable weather conditions, fire or lightning,
flood, hail, insect infestation, disease, or other yield-reducing conditions or perils provided by the private insurance
market, or that is subsidized by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC), including multi-peril crop
insurance.
There are two types of crop insurance: multiple peril crop insurance (MPCI) and crop hail insurance.
The federal government is involved with crop insurance because a single event (such as drought) often results in multiple
losses. Automobile accidents or health problems generally are independent, random events that do not trigger multiple
insurance losses. For crop insurance, multiple losses are the norm rather than the exception. For many years, capital
requirements to maintain adequate reserves to cover widespread losses were so high that commercial development of MPCI
policies by companies was unrealistic. As a result, the federal government created a federally subsidized risk management
program.
Multiple Peril Crop Insurance
An MPCI policy provides protection against crop losses from nearly all natural disasters, including: adverse weather
conditions; fire; insects, but not damage due to insufficient or improper application of pest control measures; plant disease,
but not damage due to insufficient or improper application of disease control measures; wildlife; earthquake; volcanic
eruption; or failure of the irrigation water supply if due to an unavoidable cause of loss occurring within the insurance
period.
MPCI is subsidized by the federal government and delivered by private insurance companies. The insurer’s functions include
hiring and training producers; paying for marketing and advertising; hiring and training loss adjusters; and carrying out loss
adjustment activity, billing and collecting premiums, processing and verifying applications, conducting actual production
history reviews, processing and verifying acreage reports, paying claims, auditing and verifying claims data, paying
uncollected premiums, and maintaining the necessary automated data processing infrastructure to communicate data with the
Risk Management Agency (RMA) on a routine basis for all MPCI policies.
The MPCI policy is a contract between the producer and the insurance company and not with the federal government.
However, a farmer cannot receive the federal subsidy attached to the program unless the insurance policy followed the
federal standards and rates. Like many insurance companies, crop insurance companies have reinsurance agreements to
transfer risk to other private companies known as reinsurers. Unlike most other insurance lines, the private insurance
companies also transfer some of the risk associated with the crop insurance program directly to the federal government.
There are many MPCI plan options available: yield-based, revenue-based or a combination of both. The basic policy
provisions for all these plans, as well as the rates, are set by the FCIC. A combination of commodity markets results and the
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) establish the maximum price for each crop each year for insurance purposes (i.e.,
the value of each bushel in the event of loss).
While the RMA controls pricing and policy forms, producer licensing and enforcement of proper sales practices are left to
the states.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Crop/Hail Insurance
Crop/hail insurance is offered through companies licensed by state insurance departments. A private market has existed for
crop/hail insurance for more than a century. Companies have developed stand-alone full coverage and deductible crop hail
policies, as well as companion policies that function very well in conjunction with the different MPCI plans that are offered
at varying coverage levels. The premium rates for these crop/hail policies are determined by historical loss experience and
are set by the companies.
Continuing Education
Subsequent to the adoption of the ULS, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group considered and agreed that a CE
requirement for crop insurance shall not be a violation of the uniform standards. Under federal law, insurance producers
selling MPCI are required to attend CE classes each year.
D. Limited Line of Surety
As part of the discussion of limited lines, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group made the determination to remove
surety as a limited line. Although this determination was made, it is understood that surety is considered a major line by some
of the states and a limited line by others.
E. Limited Line of Travel Insurance
Under the ULS (as revised Aug. 6, 2010), travel insurance is defined as:
Insurance coverage for personal risks incidental to planned travel, including, but not limited to,:
1. Interruption or cancellation of trip or event.

2. Loss of baggage or personal effects.
3. Damages to accommodations or rental vehicles.
4. Sickness, accident, disability or death occurring during travel.
Travel insurance does not include major medical plans, which provide comprehensive medical protection for travelers with
trips lasting six months or longer, including, for example, those working overseas as an ex-patriot or military personnel being
deployed.
Standard 34 recognizes and sets the guidelines for the creation of an additional business entity licensing model under the
travel limited line licensing structure. This structure creates the concept of a “travel retailer” in which the entity and a certain
number of its employees may disseminate travel insurance under the direction of a responsible licensed producer. Said
producer maintains responsibility for the training and conduct of any and all associated travel retailer(s).
 A state adding the travel limited line should do so in accordance with applicable ULS.
F. Non-Core Limited Lines
After much discussion about the concept of “auxiliary” or “miscellaneous” lines, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working
Group formally adopted Standard 37 as a basis for any future addition of other non-core limited line. The standard states, in
part, that:
A state is not required to implement any non-core limited line of authority for which a state does not already require a license
or which is already encompassed within a major line of authority; however, the states should consider products where the
nature of the insurance offered is incidental to the product being sold to be limited line insurance products. If a state offers
non-core limited lines (such as pet insurance or legal expense insurance), it shall do so in accordance with the following
licensing requirements. Individuals who sell, solicit or negotiate insurance, or who receive commission or compensation that

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
is dependent on the placement of the insurance product, must obtain a limited line insurance producer license. The individual
applicant must: 1) obtain the limited lines insurance producer license by submitting the appropriate application form and
paying all applicable fees as set forth in applicable state law; and 2) receive a program of instruction or training subject to
review by the insurance department
No prelicensing or testing shall be required for the identified non-core limited lines insurance.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 10
Surplus Lines Producer Licenses
In order to operate in a state, P/C insurance companies are generally categorized in one of two ways. An admitted company
obtains a certificate of authority to operate in a given state and is fully subject to and regulated by the laws of the state. Its
policyholders are protected, at least to some extent, by the state’s guaranty fund.
A nonadmitted company, otherwise known as a surplus lines company, has limited authority to operate in a state. These
companies may be required to be eligible in a state but are subject to significantly less regulation. States allow surplus lines
companies to operate because they recognize that certain types of insurance, or insurance at certain amounts, are not available
from admitted companies. Generally, surplus lines companies are not subject to rate and policy form regulation, and their
policyholders are not covered by state guaranty funds.
Under the ULS, a producer who wishes to engage in the sale of surplus lines insurance (SLI) must first obtain a surplus lines
producer license. Under the ULS, this is considered a license type and not a line of authority; however, in some of the states,
it is treated as a line of authority. The ULS require that a resident producer hold both property and casualty lines of authority
before an SLI producer license can be issued. Under the previous reciprocity provisions of the GLBA, surplus lines producers
were entitled to reciprocal licensing if they were licensed for surplus lines and in good standing in the producer’s home state.
The NAIC uniform application is to be used for application as a surplus lines producer.
Some of the states also require a resident producer placing SLI to complete an examination or post a bond. However, to
comply with the reciprocity provisions of Section 8 of the PLMA, these requirements cannot be imposed on nonresidents.
States cannot impose an additional CE requirement on nonresident SLI producers.
The Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act
The federal Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act (NRRA) was signed into law by President Barack Obama on July 21,
2010, as part of the federal Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, 12 U.S.C. § 5301. The NRRA set
federal standards for the collection of surplus lines premium taxes, insurer eligibility, producer licensing and commercial
purchaser exemptions. Most of the provisions of the NRRA went into effect on July 21, 2011.
For licensing of surplus lines brokers, the most significant change was to limit the licensing requirements to only the home
state of the insured. Specifically, to place a surplus lines multistate risk policy, the broker needs only to be licensed as a
surplus line broker in the insured’s home state, not in all of the states where the policy risk is located. The NRRA defines the
home state of the insured as “(i) the state in which an insured maintains its principal place of business or, in the case of an
individual, the individual’s principal residence; or (ii) if 100% of the premium of the insured risk is located out of the state
referred to in clause (i), the state to which the greatest percentage of the insured’s taxable premium for that insurance contract
is located.” The definition goes on to clarify that, with respect to affiliated groups, “[i]f more than one insured from an
affiliated group are named insureds on a single non-admitted insurance contract, the term ‘home state’ means the home state,
as determined pursuant to [clauses (i) and (ii) above], of the member of the affiliated group that has the largest percentage of
premium attributed to it under such insurance contract.”
The NRRA also prohibits a state from collecting fees relating to the licensing of a surplus lines broker unless the state
participates in the NAIC’s national insurance producer database for surplus lines broker licensure by July 21, 2012.
Currently, all states accept applications and renewals for surplus lines broker licenses for individuals through the NIPR and
all but one state accept applications and renewals for surplus lines broker licenses for business entities.
Surplus Lines Distribution Systems
Surplus lines insurance is generally produced through one of two distribution systems. One, generally referred to as a retail
distribution system, involves a single broker accessing the surplus lines company directly to place insurance. The second,
generally referred to as a wholesale distribution system, involves a surplus lines broker that operates as an intermediary
between a “retail agent” and a surplus lines company. In the retail distribution system, there is only one producer in a
transaction, so that producer would need to conduct the diligent search of the admitted markets prior to accessing the surplus
lines markets (unless there is some exception such as a large commercial purchaser or an export list). In the wholesale

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
distribution system, the diligent search is often conducted by the retail broker, who determines there is no admitted market
prior to contacting the surplus lines wholesale broker; however, some of the states have different requirements.
The vast majority of the states take the position that a broker conducting a diligent search would need a P/C agent’s license
because it is necessary to solicit insurance, take an application and make a submission to an admitted company. Many states
do not require a retail producer to obtain a surplus lines broker’s license unless the broker is going to access the surplus lines
companies directly. There are a couple of states that require a retailer to have a surplus lines license before using the services
of a surplus lines wholesale broker.
Diligent Search Requirements
The vast majority of the states require a “diligent search” of the admitted market to determine if there is an admitted carrier
willing to write the risk, prior to accessing the surplus lines markets. A couple of states have abolished the diligent search
requirement. Many of the states require that brokers search those admitted companies that are actually writing the coverages
sought. If there is no admitted carrier willing to write the risk, the risk can be placed in the surplus lines markets. Many of the
states require an affidavit to be completed documenting that the diligent effort was completed. Recently, a number of the
states have replaced the affidavit, which was sworn under penalty of perjury, with a report from the surplus lines licensee that
the diligent search was conducted. Some of the states also have replaced the requirement that the affidavit (or report) be filed
with the insurance department or Surplus Line Association (SLA) with a requirement that the report of the diligent search be
maintained in the office of the broker and available for audit by the insurance department.
Many of the states specify that the diligent search can be conducted by the retail broker (commonly called producing broker),
when a surplus lines wholesaler accesses the surplus lines markets. The retail broker has access to admitted markets. The
retailer uses the services of a surplus lines wholesale broker only after the retail broker has determined that the admitted
markets are not willing to underwrite the risk.
The most common diligent search standard requires declinations from three admitted carriers, but as many as five are
required. Other states simply require the producing broker to make an effort, a reasonable effort or a good faith effort to place
the coverage in the admitted markets. A couple of states require that the insurance not be procurable after a diligent effort has
been made to place the coverage among a majority of insurers, but this standard has been called into question as unclear and
impractical. A number of exceptions to the diligent search requirement exists in state law, and the NRRA implemented a
national exception to the diligent search rules for insureds that qualify as exempt commercial purchasers. Twenty-two states
have laws authorizing an “export list” of coverages that the insurance commissioner has determined are not generally
available in the admitted markets. Coverages on the export list can be placed in the surplus lines market without a diligent
search. In some of the states, the state insurance department is required to conduct an annual public hearing regarding the
export list. The purpose of the hearing is to take testimony on the export list to determine whether any items should be added
or removed.
The former NARAB (EX) Working Group updated the NAIC’s standard for determining compliance with the GLBA’s
previous reciprocity provisions. In a report that was adopted by the NAIC in September 2009, the Working Group refined its
approach to reciprocity relating to any underlying P/C licensing requirements for nonresident surplus lines producers. The
Working Group determined that if a state requires the surplus lines producer to perform the diligent search of the admitted
market, then the state may require the nonresident surplus lines producer to obtain an underlying nonresident P/C license in
addition to a nonresident surplus lines license. However, the Working Group determined that a state may not require a
nonresident surplus lines producer also to obtain a nonresident P/C license if they do not perform the diligent search. Many
surplus lines producers do not perform diligent searches because the retailer has already conducted the diligent search, and
the law does not require a second diligent search. In such instances, the surplus lines producer is not accessing the admitted
market. Consequently, the Working Group determined that it was inconsistent with the previous GLBA reciprocity
requirements to require an underlying P/C license for a surplus lines wholesale broker unless they are required by law to
conduct a diligent search or conduct diligent searches in their agency.
The NRRA established a single “exempt commercial purchaser” exemption from state diligent search requirements that is
applicable in every state. As of July 21, 2011, a diligent search in the admitted market is not required to place a policy for an
exempt commercial purchaser if: 1) the broker has disclosed to the exempt commercial purchaser that coverage may be
available from the admitted market, which may provide greater protection with more regulatory oversight; and 2) the exempt
commercial purchaser has requested in writing that the broker procure/place such coverage with a surplus lines insurer.
An “exempt commercial purchaser” is defined in the NRRA as a purchaser of commercial insurance that:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1) employs or retains a qualified risk manager to negotiate insurance coverage; 2) has paid aggregate
nationwide commercial P/C insurance premiums in excess of $100,000 in the immediately preceding 12
months; and 3) meets at least one of the following criteria: (i) possesses a net worth in excess of $20
million (as adjusted for inflation); (ii) generates annual revenues in excess of $50 million (as adjusted for
inflation); (iii) employs more than 500 full-time employees per individual insured or is a member of an
affiliated group employing more than 1,000 employees in the aggregate; (iv) is a not-for-profit organization
or public entity generating annual budgeted expenditures of at least $30 million (as adjusted for inflation);
or (v) is a municipality with a population of more than 50,000.
A number of the states elected to maintain their statutory exemptions from diligent search requirements, which were
sometimes known as industrial insured exemptions. If the state’s industrial insured exemption was more liberal than the
NRRA exempt commercial purchaser (ECP) exemption, then the state’s requirements were not in conflict with the NRRA,
and the exemption in the NRRA would not apply.
SLI producers are routinely subject to additional state administrative requirements that are considered to be outside the scope
of licensing reciprocity considerations or the ULS. The regulations regarding the administration of surplus lines are different
from other types of insurance because the states typically require the licensed surplus lines producers to perform certain
compliance activities that would usually be the responsibility of the licensed insurance company in a transaction in the
admitted market. In a surplus lines transaction, the compliance obligations are imposed upon the producer because the
producer is the licensed party. The surplus lines insurer is unlicensed and often referred to as a “nonadmitted insurer” in some
of the states or “unauthorized insurers” in other states.
There are additional administrative requirements in some of the states for licensed surplus lines producers that apply once the
coverage is placed. These may include:
1. Filing reports with state insurance departments or state stamping offices of placements made.
2. Collecting and paying surplus lines premium taxes.
3. Maintaining a record of all surplus lines placements made.
4. Providing the insured with a disclosure stating that the policy he or she has purchased is being issued by an insurer
that is not licensed in the state, is not subject to the financial solvency regulation and enforcement that apply to the
state’s licensed insurers, and does not participate in any of the insurance guarantee funds created by the state’s law.
5. Using a designated stamping office.
6. Including declaration or binder pages with the surplus lines tax filings.
7. Filing a report stating that no policies were written that are known as “zero reports” (as discussed later in this
section).
In order for a producer to place business in the surplus lines market, the producer must first determine that the company is an
eligible surplus lines company in a given state. Most of the states require that a surplus lines company be deemed “eligible”
by meeting certain financial criteria or by having been designated as “eligible” on a state-maintained list. Prior to the
enactment of the NRRA, state eligibility standards varied widely from state to state.
As of July 21, 2011, a surplus lines transaction is subject only to the eligibility requirements of the NRRA. The NRRA
eligibility requirements are based on two provisions from the Nonadmitted Insurance Model Act (#870).
Specifically, the NRRA requires surplus lines carriers to comply with Section 5A(2) and Section 5C(2)(a) from Model #870,
which require an insurer to be authorized in its domiciliary state to write the type of insurance that it writes as surplus lines
coverage in the state where it is eligible and to have capital and surplus, or its equivalent, under the laws of its domiciliary
jurisdiction, equaling the greater of: 1) the minimum capital and surplus requirements under the law of the home state of the
insured; or 2) $15 million. The insurance commissioner in the insured’s home state may reduce or waive the capital and
surplus requirements (down to a minimum of $4.5 million) after the insurance commissioner makes a finding of eligibility
based on several factors set out in Model #870, such as the quality of management, the surplus of a parent company and
reputation within the industry.
In addition to eligibility requirements for U.S. domiciled insurers, the NRRA requires the states to permit the placement of
surplus lines coverage with surplus lines companies organized in a foreign country (alien insurers) that are listed on the
NAIC Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers. The states cannot prohibit a broker from making a placement with an NAIC-listed

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
alien insurer. A state also may allow placement of coverage with alien insurers not on the NAIC list. A number of the states
have authority to individually approve an alien carrier that is not listed on the Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers.
The Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers is available for reference and download on the NAIC Products – AVS, Data &
Publications website at http://www.naic.org/prod_serv_alpha_listing.htm# (Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers)
Premium Taxes
Surplus lines premium tax generally is the obligation of either the policyholder or the surplus lines producer, depending on
the applicable state law. In all states, the producer or the insured, rather than the insurance company, remits the surplus lines
tax. If the policy covers risks that are located entirely in one state, the tax is assessed at that state’s tax rate.
Under the NRRA, the home state of the insured has sole regulatory authority over the collection of surplus lines premium
taxes. The NRRA prohibits any state other than the home state of the insured from requiring any premium tax payment for
surplus lines insurance.
The NRRA permitted, but did not require, allocation of the surplus lines taxes among the states where the exposure was
located. The states initially pursued three different approaches to allocation of taxes following the adoption of the NRRA: 1)
the Nonadmitted Insurance Multi-State Agreement (NIMA); 2) the Surplus Lines Insurance Multi-State Compliance
Compact (SLIMPACT); and 3) taxing and keeping 100% of surplus lines premium tax on policies in the home state of
insureds. NIMA is no longer operational and SLIMPACT never became operational. The prevailing rule is that states are
taxing and keeping 100% of the premium. The NRRA requires surplus lines brokers to adhere to the law of the home state of
the insured to determine the amount of premium tax owed on a surplus lines transaction and for any other regulatory
requirements the state may require in connection with the payment of the premium tax, such as the timing of tax payments
and whether the state requires the submission of risk allocation information for multi-state transactions. The NRRA requires
surplus lines brokers to submit the premium tax payment on a surplus lines transaction only to the insured’s home state. In
the case of a state that has joined NIMA, the payment will be made to the clearinghouse in accordance with the home state’s
law. Should SLIMPACT become operational, it also could elect to require multistate payments to be made to the
clearinghouse.
Many of the states require brokers to submit documentation regarding allocation by state of the risks covered by a surplus
lines transaction. If the home state of the insured is a state that has joined NIMA, the broker will be required to use the NIMA
risk-allocation formula. If the home state is a state that has joined SLIMPACT, the broker will be required to use the
SLIMPACT risk-allocation formula. As of May 2013, both NIMA and SLIMPACT have adopted the same allocation
formula. Other states require the broker to submit allocation data in accordance with individual state laws and regulations, but
the vast majority of states do not require allocation data because there are very few states allocating premium at this time. In
some of the states, taxes are paid to a state agency other than the insurance department, such as the department of revenue.
Guaranty Fund Warning
Nearly all of the states require a disclosure regarding the unavailability of guaranty fund coverage for a surplus lines
policyholder, even if the state represents a small portion of the risk. Prior to the NRRA, when a multistate risk was involved,
the company would be required to include several pages of guaranty fund notices, many of which had nearly the same
language with minor variations. Brokers may choose to continue to use this approach following the enactment of the NRRA,
but the NRRA initiated a compliance system that requires compliance only with laws of the home state of the insured.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
As an example, a typical disclosure statement is as follows:
NOTICE TO POLICYHOLDER
This contract is issued, pursuant to Section ___ of the (State) Insurance Code, by a company not
authorized and licensed to transact business in (State), and as such, is not covered by the (State)
Insurance Guaranty Fund.
After review of this and other issues by a special NAIC subgroup in 2006, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group
adopted its recommendation that, on a multistate risk, the home state’s disclosure should fulfill all other states’ disclosure
requirements.
Stamping Offices
Stamping offices are entities that are not governmental agencies but whose existence is authorized by law. These offices act
as the liaison between the surplus lines producer and the state insurance departments. The stamping offices have varied
responsibilities, which may include evaluation of insurance companies for inclusion on a white list, review of surplus lines
policies and education. Stamping offices also provide reports of premiums and taxes to the state insurance department.
Stamping offices are nonprofit and are funded by stamping fees assessed on each policy of surplus lines insurance written in
the state. As of April 2017, there are stamping offices in 14 states.
Zero Reports
In some of the states, a producer is required to file a report, known as a “zero report,” stating that the producer has not placed
any SLI business during a specified time period.
In 2006, a special NAIC study group documented that five states require this report monthly, 12 quarterly, seven semi-
annually and 27 annually. The states also use the reports for different recording purposes, so it was not determined if it would
be possible to eliminate these reports altogether. However, the study group concluded and recommended to the Producer
Licensing (EX) Working Group that zero reports be eliminated. The group also recommended further study to determine
feasibility of any other use of a zero report. As of January 2017, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has not taken
any formal action on this issue.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 11
Appointments
An appointment is a registration with the state insurance department that a producer is acting on behalf of an insurer. The
PLMA contains several sections related to appointments. Section 14 of the PLMA establishes the requirement that a producer
acting as an agent of an insurer must have an appointment. This is an optional provision and applies only in those states that
require appointments. Section 15 of the PLMA establishes a procedure for the reporting of appointment terminations. The
GLBA, as modified in 2015, prohibits any state other than a producer’s home state from imposing any appointment
requirements upon a member of NARAB.
In 2002, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group adopted a uniform appointment process. The full text is included in the
Appendices and is available on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group’s web page. This process is referred to in the
ULS. The key elements include:
1. States should allow electronic filing of appointments and appointment terminations. Paper filings are discouraged.
2. States should establish a billing system for payment by insurers of initial appointments.
3. States shall allow insurers to select the effective date of the initial appointment.
4. States shall require insurers to follow a prescribed timeline to file appointments.
5. States shall require only one appointment or termination form or transaction per producer per company. (At this
writing, appointments by company group are not available.)
6. States shall require insurance companies to submit terminations to the insurance department in accordance with the
requirements of Section 15 of the PLMA.
7. States shall require that, if a producer is terminated for cause, the insurer must submit supporting documentation.
Any information received by the insurance department must remain confidential in accordance with Section 15 of
the PLMA.
In states that renew appointments, the key elements include:
1. States shall provide or publish a pre-renewal notice to insurers informing them that appointment renewals are
imminent.
2. At the time for renewal, a state will deliver an invoice. The invoice may not be altered, amended or used for
appointing or terminating producers.
3. Insurers shall return the invoice and the payment to the department or its designee.
4. States shall establish a dispute resolution process to accommodate errors after the fact.
Appointment Terminations
Section 15 of the PLMA imposes a requirement on insurers to report terminations of producer appointments. Section 15
requires that the insurer report a termination within 30 days of its occurrence. If a termination is for any of the reasons listed
in Section 12 (License Denial, Nonrenewal or Revocation) of the PLMA, insurers are required to submit a detailed report to
the state and a copy of the report to the producer. Section 15 (E) grants immunity from civil liability for good-faith reporting
to insurers and insurance regulators. Reports filed under Section 15 are considered confidential.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Automatically terminate appointments if a license goes inactive for any reason.

 Eliminate fees for appointment terminations and instead assess all charges at the time of an appointment. This will
eliminate delays in cancellations.
 Do not require an appointment as a condition of licensure. The PLMA and the ULS provide that a producer can hold a
license without holding an active appointment.
 Require only one appointment or termination form or transaction for each company for each producer per state.
 Sub-appointments and Business Entity appointments are discouraged.
 Immediately accept terminations for cause and refer them for investigation. States should follow the procedures as
outlined in the PLMA. No advance notice should be required to the producer or the state insurance department.
 Use electronic filing for appointments, terminations and renewals, to the extent possible, to eliminate delays and increase
efficiency.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 12
Business Entities
Prior to the PLMA, most states used the term “insurance agency” to refer to the business structure used by insurance
producers. Under the PLMA, the term “business entity” (BE) is used. This term is intended to cover a broad range of legal
business operating structures. BEs are considered to be producers under the PLMA.
Section 2(A) of the PLMA defines a BE as a corporation, association, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability
partnership or other legal entity.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted a uniform application form that is the standard for all states for
resident and nonresident BE applications. Section 6(B) of the PLMA provides further guidance about the licensing of BEs:
A BE acting as an insurance producer is required to obtain an insurance producer license. Application shall be made
using the Uniform Business Entity Application. Before approving the application, the insurance commissioner shall find
that:
1. The BE has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law]; and
2. The BE has designated a licensed producer responsible for the BE’s compliance with the insurance laws, rules
and regulations of this state.
Since BEs are considered producers, the reciprocity issues discussed in other sections also apply to BEs. States should not
require additional attachments to the application that might interfere with reciprocity.
A common issue that arises with resident and nonresident BE licensing is the role of the secretary of state (SOS) and the state
corporation statutory requirements. Most states have adopted a Model Corporation Law that requires resident and nonresident
businesses to register with the state corporation department. The issue for state licensing directors is whether the state
insurance department should require some proof of registration with the SOS as a pre-condition to licensing. The NAIC legal
department has studied this issue extensively and advised the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group that states should not
require items such as articles of incorporation or proof of registration with the SOS as a pre-condition to licensing for
nonresident BEs.
The PLMA does require that all producers, including BEs, notify the insurance commissioner prior to using an assumed
name. Section 10 of the PLMA states:
An insurance producer doing business under any name other than the producer’s legal name is required to notify the
insurance commissioner prior to using the assumed name.
The uniform appointment process as adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group does not specifically address
BEs. Section 14 of the PLMA states that a producer acting as an agent of an insurance company must be appointed. States
vary in the interpretation of these guidelines. This issue is one that the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force considered in
2010 as part of its efforts to streamline BE licensing. In the absence of specific guidance from the Producer Licensing (EX)
Working Group, the guidelines discussed in the paragraphs below are suggested.
Insurance regulators should balance the cost of a regulatory requirement with the benefit that requirement adds to consumer
protection. If detailed information is collected, such as several levels of appointments, that information should be a
meaningful part of the state insurance department’s consumer protection plan. If information is only rarely used in support of
investigations, it may not be cost-effective to collect that information and require staff to compile it and process it. During a
recent assessment of state insurance department licensing units, it was often found that information about affiliations and
branch offices often required at the time of application was rarely used. Sub-appointments and BE appointments are
discouraged.
Just as the uniform appointment process contemplates that only one appointment will be required for an individual producer
no matter how many types of products that producer sells for a given company, if a state requires appointments for a BE, then

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
the state should require only one appointment per BE per company—no matter how many types of products that BE sells for
a given company.
Section 6(B)(2) of the PLMA requires a BE to designate a licensed producer as responsible for compliance. This is
commonly referred to as the designated responsible producer (DRP). There is no provision in the PLMA to require multiple
DRPs if the BE chooses to write multiple lines of insurance. For example, if a DRP holds a life LOA only, and an affiliated
producer is authorized to sell P/C products, it is not necessary for a DRP with a P/C LOA to be named as a second DRP.
The PLMA does not give specific guidance on appropriate action to take when a notification is received that the DRP has lost
their home state license. A recommended practice is to send a notification to the BE and inform it that the BE license will go
inactive unless a new DRP is named and approved within a reasonable number of days.
A BE has an ongoing responsibility to report misconduct of the BE or any of its affiliated producers. Section 12(c) of the
PLMA states:
The license of a BE may be suspended, revoked or refused if the insurance commissioner finds, after hearing, that an
individual licensee’s violation was known or should have been known by one or more of the partners, officers or
managers acting on behalf of the partnership or corporation and the violation was neither reported to the insurance
commissioner nor corrective action taken.
 Use the NAIC uniform application for BEs, and eliminate all other state-specific forms.
 Review all state insurance laws and regulations, and amend any that require attachments that might violate reciprocity.
 Review the practical consumer protection value of all information collected, and collect only information that adds value.
 Require only one DRP per BE.
 If appointments are required for a BE, require only one appointment per state, and require no sub-appointments.
 Use electronic filings for more efficiency.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 13
Temporary Licenses
Section 11 of the PLMA contains a provision that allows a state insurance director to issue a temporary license to the
survivor of a producer if the insurance commissioner deems it necessary for servicing the deceased producer’s customers.
The license is limited to 180 days and also may be limited in scope by the insurance commissioner. The intent of this section
is to wind up the business affairs of the producer and not to indefinitely continue the decedent’s insurance business.
The PLMA gives three examples of persons eligible for a temporary license:
1. The surviving spouse or court-appointed personal representative of a licensed insurance producer who dies or
becomes mentally or physically disabled to allow adequate time for the sale of the insurance business owned by the
producer, or for the recovery or return of the producer to the business, or to provide for the training and licensing of
new personnel to operate the producer’s business.
2. A member or employee of a BE licensed as an insurance producer, upon the death or disability of an individual
designated in the BE application or the license.
3. The designee of a licensed insurance producer entering active service in the armed forces of the U.S.
The insurance commissioner also is given discretion to grant a temporary license in any other circumstance where the
insurance commissioner deems that the public interest will best be served by the issuance of this license. The insurance
commissioner also may require the temporary licensee to have a licensed producer as a sponsor.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section C License Continuation
Chapter 14 Continuing Education

Chapter 15 Reporting of Actions and Compensation Disclosure
Chapter 16 License Renewal and Reinstatement
Chapter 17 Post Licensing Producer Conduct Reviews

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 14
The completion of CE is the method used by state insurance regulators to ensure continued competence of producers. Under
the previous GLBA reciprocity requirements, a state had to recognize a producer’s completion of a CE requirement in the
producer’s home state as satisfying the other state’s CE requirement for license renewal. The only exception was if the
producer’s home state refused to provide reciprocity to another state.
Some states have adopted special training requirements for specific lines of insurance. When such a requirement exists, it is
typically imposed on resident and nonresident producers selling a specific insurance product. A specific CE standard, which
is derived from federal mandates, may be imposed on nonresidents such as for long-term care insurance (LTCI), flood or crop
insurance and would not violate the ULS.
Section 16(B) of the PLMA specifically states:
A nonresident producer’s satisfaction of his or her home state’s CE requirements for licensed insurance producers
shall constitute satisfaction of this state’s CE requirements if the nonresident producer’s home state recognizes the
satisfaction of its CE requirements imposed upon producers from this state on the same basis.
Under the ULS, producers are to complete 24 credits of CE for each biennial compliance period. Three of the 24 credits must
be in ethics. Fifty minutes is equal to one credit hour of CE. If applicable, the CE compliance period should coincide with the
license renewal. The ULS indicate that the license term should be tied to the birth date or birth month.
CE is required if the producer holds one of the six major lines of authority contained in the PLMA, but it is not required for
each line of authority. For example, if a producer holds a life and a property line of authority, the requirement for renewal is
24 credits. If a producer holds only the life line of authority, the requirement for renewal is 24 credits. States may limit the
subject area requirements for CE. Some states prohibit CE credit for training on sales techniques. Generally, CE is not
required for limited lines. Under the ULS, producers may repeat CE courses for credit in successive renewal terms but are not
permitted to take a course for credit more than once in the same license continuation period. States must accept both
classroom study and verifiable self-study. States should not impose a limit on the use of self-study courses.
Producers and CE providers must submit evidence of course completion in the method specified by the insurance
commissioner. Some states require the producer to present a certificate of completion at the time of license renewal. Many
states require the CE provider to report attendance. Under this system, a producer is required to present only the attendance
certificates if there is a discrepancy. Another option is to require producers to self-certify completion and then verify
compliance by random desk audits.
The PLMA and the ULS contain two exemptions from CE requirements. The exemptions are an inability to comply due to
military service and/or a demonstration of an extenuating circumstance, such as medical disability. States with waivers for
professional designations should consider allowing CE credits for filed and approved courses used to obtain and maintain
professional designations.
Some states grant an extension instead of an exemption. This decision is left to each state to decide.
Course Approvals
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted standards for course approval and reciprocity in filing of courses.
States are to follow the standards set forth in the Continuing Education Reciprocity (CER) process as adopted by the
Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group. Under a reciprocity filing, states are to accept the number of credits awarded by
another state and treat a request for reciprocity as a registration. Only the home state of the CE provider is to perform a
content review of the course filing. The Appendices contain information on CER and the current filing forms. The most
current information on CER can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group web page.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
States vary in their method for course content approval. Some states use outside vendors, and others do the course reviews
internally. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has not adopted any guidelines on methods for approving classroom
courses.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted guidelines for approval of online and self-study courses. The goal
of these standards is to deliver functional computer-based Internet courses that offer quality insurance and/or risk
management material in a password-protected online environment.
The key elements are:
1. Material that is current, relevant and accurate, and includes valid reference materials, graphics and interactivity.
2. Clearly defined objectives and course completion criteria.
3. Specific instructions to register, navigate and complete the coursework.
4. Technical support or provider representative available during business hours.
5. A process to authenticate student identity.
6. A method for measuring the student’s successful completion of course material and for evaluating the learning
experience.
7. A process for requesting and receiving CE course-completion certificates.
The standards call for an examination that is proctored by a disinterested third party. The standards also provide several
methods to compute the number of credits that should be awarded. The standards also recommend acceptance of courses that
are part of a program that is part of a nationally recognized professional designation. For designation courses, the course
should receive credit hours equivalent to hours assigned to the same classroom course material.
The Continuing Education Recommended Guidelines on Online and Self-Study is included in the Appendices.
The ULS prohibit CE providers from advertising CE programs until state course approval is received.
The Appendices contain a sample list of questions and answers frequently asked by insurance producers about CE
requirements.
Continuing Education Providers
A state should have a process for registering and qualifying persons who wish to be recognized as CE providers. The process
should include duties, responsibilities and performance standards for CE providers. An aspiring CE provider should
demonstrate an ability to deliver quality instruction and to comply with all reporting and course supervision requirements.
These standards should also contain the conditions under which a CE provider may be removed from the state’s approved
provider list.
The Appendices contain a sample outline of instructions to CE providers.
 Require CE providers to electronically report class attendance to the state insurance department or its designated vendor.
 Set a reasonable deadline for CE providers to deliver electronic reports.
 Require CE providers to promptly issue attendance certificates (or certificate of completion for self-study courses) and
require producers to retain them. The certificates should be sent only to the state insurance department in the event of a
dispute.
 Provide access for producers and insurers to department records to monitor CE credits on file.
 Implement an audit program to observe and evaluate CE providers and instructors.
 Participate in the NAIC Personalized Information Capture System (PICS) to receive alerts or monitor actions against
existing licensees.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 15
Reporting of Actions and Compensation Disclosure
Reporting of Actions
Section 17 of the PLMA requires a producer to report, to all states in which the producer is licensed, any administrative
action taken against the producer in another jurisdiction or by another governmental agency in this state within thirty (30)
days of the final disposition of the matter. Producers also are required to report any criminal prosecution of the producer
taken in any jurisdiction within 30 days of the initial pretrial hearing date.
The challenge for producers is that it can be difficult to ensure that all relevant states received the report. NIPR has created an
electronic solution, called Reporting of Actions (ROA), to facilitate distribution of one report to multiple states. States should
encourage the use of this electronic process to save time and create an electronic record of timely submission.
State licensing directors should have a method to receive these reports and refer them for investigation. The director should
consider giving staff limited authority to review and clear reports that include violations such as traffic citations or certain
misdemeanors.
 Use the Attachment Warehouse/Reporting of Action system to receive electronic notifications to alert a state when an
individual or business entity producer has added information into the Attachment Warehouse since their initial entry
regarding administrative, criminal or civil actions.
Compensation Disclosure
Section 18 of the PLMA requires disclosure where the producer receives any compensation from the customer for the
placement of insurance or represents the customer with respect to that placement. This section contains several specific
definitions and exceptions to the disclosure requirement. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has not developed
any formal guidance on the implementation of Section 18, but the NAIC issued an FAQ document to give additional
guidance. This FAQ is in the Appendices. State licensing directors should confer with their legal counsel as to appropriate
methods for implementing this section.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 16
License Renewal and Reinstatement
License Renewal
Under the PLMA, the general rule is that a producer license remains in effect unless suspended, cancelled or revoked. All
states have a procedure for individual producers to verify compliance with CE requirements. In states that renew licenses, the
CE compliance period should coincide with the license renewal.
The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has adopted a uniform license renewal application that is recommended for use
by states that renew producer licenses. The current version of the application can be found on the Producer Licensing (EX)
Working Group web page. States should use the data elements from the uniform renewal application, whether renewal is
done via paper application or electronically.
The previous reciprocity provisions of the GLBA also applied to license renewal of nonresidents. The process should be
similar to initial licensing:
1. The proper application and fee are submitted.

2. If the answers to any of the questions on the renewal application indicate conduct prohibited by Section 12 of the
PLMA, a state can require additional documentation.
3. No other attachments should be required.
A number of states use the electronic license renewal process. This process automatically checks the NAIC and NIPR
databases to verify the producer’s standing in the home/resident state. The NIPR process uses the data elements from the
uniform renewal application.
The PLMA contains a special process for producers who cannot comply with CE requirements due to military service or
other extenuating circumstances.
Reinstatement
The PLMA allows a producer to reinstate a lapsed license within 12 months of expiration. No examination is required as long
as the producer was otherwise eligible to renew. The PLMA also provides that a penalty fee can be assessed.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 17
Post Licensing Producer Conduct Reviews
Section 12 of the PLMA contains a list of 14 reasons a producer may be disciplined. The insurance commissioner is given
authority to take administrative action against a producer who commits any of these acts. Disciplinary action may include
suspension, revocation or refusal to renew the producer license. Some states have added additional provisions to this list. For
example, if a state does not align the CE compliance term with license renewal, it may be necessary to commence an
administrative action to suspend the producer’s license for failure to timely complete CE. In some states, insurance
departments are required to suspend the license of any individual who fails to pay student loans on a timely basis.
States should use caution in adding additional disciplinary reasons and should carefully review the requirements of the ULS.
The full text of the PLMA can be found in the Appendices.
After a license is issued, an insurance regulator may become aware of potential violations of Section 12 in several ways:
1. A licensed producer notifies the insurance regulator of pending criminal charges.

2. The insurance regulator receives a notice from PICS indicating that a nonresident producer failed to disclose
criminal charges.
3. A PICS Notice is received of previously unreported administrative action.
4. A letter is received from the producer informing of an administrative sanction by another state or FINRA.
5. The insurance regulator receives subsequent arrest or conviction information from the state’s department of justice
(DOJ).
The following considerations should be taken into account:
1. If the producer is a nonresident, the insurance regulator should consider what, if any, action was taken by the
producer’s resident state or FINRA.
2. Whether the criminal charge or administrative action indicates that the producer is or may be a danger to consumers.
3. Whether the charge involves theft or other financial fraud, or involves an activity that threatens the safety of
consumers, such that action should be taken immediately to revoke or suspend the producer’s license.
4. Whether it is appropriate to contact the producer and request a voluntarily surrender of the license.
5. If the producer failed to report an action, the insurance regulator should consider contacting the producer and request
an explanation from the producer. Technical violations (e.g., bad address, failure to timely report) generally do not
merit formal action. However, the failure to report an action in itself can be cause for administrative penalty or a
warning letter, depending on the particular state’s statutes and regulations.
6. Whether the individual did not disclose previous criminal or administrative actions taken in response to the answers
to the background questions on any application.
License Reinstatement or Reissuance After Disciplinary Action
Reinstatement of a producer license means the producer’s previous license is re-activated and will expire at the end of the
license term. Reissuance of a license means the issuance of a new license with a full license term.
Reinstatement or reissuance of a license after disciplinary action usually is not automatic. A producer whose license has been
revoked or suspended by order, or who forfeited a license in connection with a disciplinary matter, should be required to
make a written request to the insurance commissioner for reinstatement or reissuance in accordance with the terms of the
order of revocation or suspension or the order accepting the forfeiture.
When a producer’s license has been suspended for a period of time that extends beyond the producer’s license expiration
date, reinstatement is not an option. The producer must request reissuance of a license and should not be allowed merely to
apply for a new license by passing an examination and submitting a new application.
The producer’s request for reinstatement or reissuance must include sufficient information to allow the insurance department
to determine whether the basis of the revocation, suspension or forfeiture of the applicant’s license no longer exists and
whether it will be in the public interest to grant the request for a new or reinstated license. The burden of proof to establish
such facts is on the producer. In most states, the producer will have a right to an administrative hearing if the reinstatement
request is denied.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Some states allow a license to be voluntarily forfeited in lieu of compliance with an order of the insurance commissioner. In
this scenario, a request for voluntary forfeiture of a license should be made in writing to the insurance commissioner. The
written consent of the insurance commissioner usually is required.
Forfeiture of a license is effective upon submission of the request, unless a contested case proceeding is pending at the time
the request is submitted. If a contested case proceeding is pending at the time of the request, the forfeiture becomes effective
when and upon such conditions as required by order of the insurance commissioner. A forfeiture made during the pendency
of a contested case proceeding is usually considered a disciplinary action subject to reporting to RIRS.
Collaboration and Referrals Among Insurance Regulators
There are several NAIC tools to facilitate communication about enforcement actions among insurance regulators.
The NAIC’s Market Actions (D) Working Group (MAWG) identifies and reviews insurance companies that are exhibiting or
may exhibit characteristics indicating a current or potential market regulatory issue that may affect multiple jurisdictions. The
Working Group determines if regulatory action should be taken and supports collaborative actions in addressing problems
identified.
The NAIC has adopted the Market Regulation Handbook to guide state insurance regulators in the conduct of investigations
and enforcement activities. The Market Regulation Handbook also gives guidance to market conduct examiners on some
licensing issues. The Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group has advised examiners that insurers should not be required to
keep a hard copy of each individual producer license. Under the PLMA and the Market Regulation Handbook, insurers and
insurance regulators are directed to rely on the SPLD to verify license status.
 Report all formal final administrative actions to RIRS regardless of the voluntary forfeiture, fine or penalty amount.
 Use CRD, SPLD, RIRS, 1033 Application, PICS and state court records to verify information submitted by applicants.
State court records databases may be available online to analysts.
 Check the producer’s resident or home state’s website or other licensing records to verify actions reported or taken by
that state. The NAIC website has a map with links to each state insurance department website.
 Develop form letters or consent order templates pre-approved by legal staff to be used by experienced licensing staff to
propose settlement of minor violations without need to involve legal staff.
 Adopt an administrative rule that if an order of revocation or suspension does not contain terms regarding reissuance or
reinstatement, an application for reinstatement or reissuance may not be made until at least one year has elapsed from the
date of the order or acceptance of the forfeiture of a license.
 Maintain a record tickler system of all special conditions imposed on any producer licenses so that the compliance with
the conditions can be reviewed as the end of any special supervision term nears.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part II
Miscellaneous Licenses
Chapter 18 Adjusters
Chapter 19 Bail Bond Agents
Chapter 20 Charitable Gift Annuities
Chapter 21 Fraternals and Small Mutuals
Chapter 22 Insurance Consultants
Chapter 23 Managed Care Providers
Chapter 24 Managing General Agents
Chapter 25 Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements
Chapter 26 Reinsurance Intermediaries
Chapter 27 Risk Retention Groups and Risk Purchasing Groups
Chapter 28 Third-Party Administrators
Chapter 29 Title Insurance Agents
Chapter 30 Viatical and Life Settlement Brokers

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 18
Adjusters
An adjuster is a person who investigates claims, determines coverage, examines relevant documents and inspects property
damage. An adjuster also may determine the amount of a claim, loss or damage payable under an insurance contract or plan.
An adjuster often settles or negotiates settlement of the claim. In some states, the adjuster’s authority is limited to a specialty
area such as auto, homeowner, workers’ compensation or crop insurance.
There are three kinds of adjusters: 1) public; 2) independent; and 3) company (sometimes called staff adjusters). Public
adjusters represent the insured, while independent and staff adjusters represent the insurer. More than 30 states require
licensure of one or more of these types of adjusters.
Public adjusters directly contract with the person who is seeking coverage or benefits under an insurance policy or other kind
of insurance plan. The role of a public adjuster is to represent an insured or claimant in the settlement of a claim. The NAIC
has adopted the Public Adjuster Licensing Model Act (#228).
Under the model, a public adjuster is defined as:
“Public adjuster” means any person who, for compensation or any other thing of value, acts on behalf of an insured by doing
any of the following:
1. Acting for or aiding an insured in negotiating for or in effecting the settlement of a first-party claim for loss or
damage to real or personal property of the insured.
2. Advertising for employment as a public adjuster of first-party claims or otherwise soliciting business or representing
to the public that the person is a public adjuster of first-party claims for loss or damage to real or personal property
of an insured. 3. Directly or indirectly soliciting the business of investigating or adjusting losses, or of advising an
insured about first-party claims for loss or damage to real or personal property of the insured.
Staff adjusters are typically salaried employees of an insurer or an insurer’s affiliates and do not adjust claims for entities
other than their employer or its affiliates. Independent adjusters are self-employed or associated with or employed by an
independent firm. Independent adjusters may adjust claims on behalf of many insurers. The NAIC has adopted model
guidelines for Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines adjusters that states are encouraged to adopt. The Appendices
contain the model guideline.
Most states recognize one or more of the following exemptions to adjuster licensing:
1. Attorneys-at-law admitted to practice in this state, when acting in their professional capacity as an attorney.
2. A catastrophe situation officially declared by the insurance commissioner or governor (according to state law).
Registration may be required, but no permanent license should be required of a nonresident adjuster who is sent on
behalf of an insurer for the purpose of investigating or adjusting a loss or a series of losses resulting from a
catastrophe.
3. A person employed solely to obtain facts surrounding a claim or to furnish technical assistance to a licensed
independent adjuster.
4. An individual who is employed to investigate suspected fraudulent insurance claims but who does not adjust losses
or determine claims payments.
5. A person who solely performs executive, administrative, managerial or clerical duties, or any combination thereof,
and who does not investigate, negotiate or settle claims with policyholders, claimants or their legal representative.
6. A licensed health care provider or its employee who provides managed care services as longs as the services do not
include the determination of compensability.
7. A managed care organization or any of its employees or an employee of any organization providing managed care
services as long as the services do not include the determination of compensability.
8. A person who settles only reinsurance or subrogation claims.
9. An officer, director, manager or employee of an authorized insurer, surplus lines insurer, a risk retention group
(RRG) or an attorney-in-fact of a reciprocal insurer.
10. A U.S. manager of the U.S. branch of an alien insurer.
11. A person who investigates, negotiates or settles life, accident and health, annuity, or disability insurance claims.
12. An individual employee, under a self-insured arrangement, who adjusts claims on behalf of his or her employer.
13. A licensed insurance producer to whom claim authority has been granted by the insurer.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
14. A person authorized to adjust workers’ compensation or disability claims under the authority of a third-party
administrator (TPA) license pursuant to [applicable licensing statute].
Drafting Note: This guideline is drafted to eliminate redundant licensure requirements with respect to the activities
engaged in by a licensee. If licensed as an independent adjuster, TPA or similar business entity, licensees should not
be required to obtain separate independent adjuster licenses, provided that the types of claims adjusted do not
include life, health, annuity or disability insurance claims.
Qualifications of an Adjuster
States that do require licensure assess the qualifications of potential adjusters in various ways. States use one or more of the
following methods to determine that a person has the requisite knowledge to properly adjust claims:
1. Specialized or related education prior to licensure, i.e., prelicensing coursework.

2. A specified amount of experience that is relevant to the kind of adjusting work the applicant will be doing (i.e., P/C,
workers’ compensation or life/health).
3. A license examination.
4. Relevant professional designation such as the Chartered Property Casualty Underwriter (CPCU) or Associate in
Claims (AIC).
5. Prior similar licensure in another state.
For states implementing a new regulatory scheme for adjusters, it is common practice to waive the initial exam for applicants
with appropriate credentials and experience.
Fitness and Character Considerations
Like insurance producers, many states also evaluate an applicant’s fitness, character and trustworthiness to engage in this
aspect of the insurance business. Insurance regulators typically consider:
1. Criminal history.
2. Administrative actions taken by other state insurance regulators.
3. Civil judgments that may shed light on an applicant’s character or fiscal integrity.
In some states, an adjuster must apply for a license by line of insurance, or line of authority, similar to the manner in which
producers are licensed. Other states require adjuster licenses by categories such as motor vehicle physical damage, workers’
compensation or crop.
States are encouraged to implement a fingerprint requirement for public and independent adjusters, similar to what is required
of producers. Additionally, if a state permits a nonresident adjuster to designate that state as its home state, fingerprinting of
that nonresident should be required. States are encouraged to adopt the Authorization for Criminal History Record Check
Model Act (#222) when evaluating and considering whether an applicant or licensee has met the character and
trustworthiness requirements to obtain, maintain or renew a license.
Reciprocity
In almost every jurisdiction where licensure is required, it is the “home state” insurance regulator who assesses the
qualifications of his or her resident adjusters. Based upon securing a license in one’s home state, many states will grant a
comparable or similar nonresident license to such an individual. This is not the case in all states, and varying lines of
authority, qualification standards and license types have created barriers to nonresident licensure. In addition, an adjuster
based in a state that does not license adjusters may be required to take exams in multiple states.
The New NAIC Public Adjuster Model Act defines home state as:
“Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the U.S. in which the public adjuster’s principal
place of residence or principal place of business is located. If neither the state in which the public adjuster maintains the
principal place of residence nor the state in which the public adjuster maintains the principal place of business has a
substantially similar law governing public adjusters, the public adjuster may declare another state in which it becomes
licensed and acts as a public adjuster to be the “home state.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The NAIC Independent Adjuster Guidelines defines home state as:
“Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the U.S. in which an independent adjuster
maintains his, her or its principal place of residence or business and is licensed to act as a resident independent adjuster. If the
resident state does not license independent adjusters for the line of authority sought, the independent adjuster shall designate
as his, her or its home state any state in which the independent adjuster is licensed and in good standing.
There are a few states that will not grant nonresident licensure based upon a person having qualified and passed a license
exam in the applicant’s home state. Instead, these states require the nonresident applicant to take an exam in the nonresident
state even though the person has taken and passed the license exam in the home state.
Adjuster licensing processes were modeled on producer licensing processes and in 2011, the NAIC adopted the Independent
Adjuster Reciprocity Best Practices Guidelines paper, which provides jurisdictions with a model to meet reciprocity
requirements, as well as take major steps toward reaching uniformity. The NAIC uniform licensing forms are designed to be
used by applicants for adjuster licenses. Producer licensing for nonresidents is predicated on the producer satisfying the
requirements for a home state license. Those producer requirements often include prelicensing education and examination.
Since, at this writing, 40 states license public adjusters, 33 states license independent adjuster licenses and only 15 states
require company adjusters to be licensed, obtaining nonresident adjuster licenses becomes more complex because adjusters
often do not have an underlying resident license. Until states adopt the provision that allows an individual to qualify for
licensure by designating another state as the person’s home state or to designate the state in which the application is filed as
the person’s home state, obtaining a nonresident adjuster license becomes more complex because adjusters often do not have
an underlying resident license.
Some states do not license adjusters. In order for the use of electronic licensing systems, adjusters residing in states that do
not license adjusters can select an Adjuster Designated Home State (ADHS). The ADHS is the state in which the adjuster
does not maintain his, her or its principal place of residence or business, and the adjuster qualifies for the license as if the
person were a resident.
A state whose laws permit a nonresident adjuster to designate that state as its home state will require the nonresident to
qualify as if the person were a resident (exam requirements; fingerprinting, if required; and CE). Once the individual has met
the qualifications, the designated home state will issue a nonresident license. The PDB and designated home state will list the
record as nonresident, designated home state.
If the resident state of the adjuster does not require an adjuster license, adjusters cannot use the NIPR ADHS module unless
they declare another state to be the home state. NIPR has recently added a new Nonresident Adjuster Licensing (NRAL)
application that allows an individual to designate a state other than the resident state as the home state. NIPR contains
functionality to allow adjusters that have designated another state as the home state to renew online. Adjusters with any
license can update contact information through the NIPR CCR.
Approximately 18 states have CE requirements for their resident adjusters. Reciprocity exists among a majority of these
states but not all, in part as a result of the inconsistency among lines of authority granted within each state’s adjuster licensing
scheme. It also becomes problematic when the resident adjuster’s home state does not have any CE requirements.
Model #228 and the Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines contain a CE requirement that the home state shall require 24
hours of CE every two years, with three of the 24 hours covering ethics. It is recommended that a state accept an adjuster’s
satisfaction of its home state’s CE requirements as satisfying that state’s CE requirements, provided that the home state
recognizes CE satisfaction on a reciprocal basis. For a state that permits a nonresident adjuster to designate that state as its
home state, the home state will require and track CE compliance for that adjuster.
Emergency/Catastrophic Adjusters
A state that offers temporary licensure or registration for emergency/catastrophic adjusters are encouraged to follow the
Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines and develop an automated notification or registration procedure that allows for an
immediate, streamlined and efficient filing process for adjusters who are seeking authority to adjust claims in the event an
emergency or catastrophe is declared.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Non-U.S. Adjusters for Limited Lines Portable Electronics Insurance Products
Many states license, or are considering licensure for, limited lines portable electronics insurance producers. Because some
major portable electronics insurance companies provide claims adjustment services via non-U.S. entities, the issue of
licensing adjusters who do not reside in the U.S. has gained increased prominence. The Independent Adjuster Licensing
Guidelines and Model #228 are silent on the licensing of non-U.S. citizens beyond the requirement to designate a home state.
Some states, however, have tax laws or other laws that require licensees and applicants for licenses to submit and maintain a
Social Security number (SSN). State license laws that allow for the licensing of non-U.S. adjusters must take this possible
barrier to licensure into consideration. States also should require non-U.S. citizens to comply with all necessary qualification
requirements, such as passing the resident license examination (if applicable).
 Adopt the NAIC Model Act for Public Adjusters.

 Adopt the NAIC Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines.
 Use the NAIC uniform applications and develop a mechanism for electronic submission and electronic bulk submissions.
 Use the definition of “home state” as defined in the NAIC Public Adjuster Model Act as the basis of reciprocity.
 Provide resident and nonresident adjuster licensing requirements on forms and Web sites and on the SPLD.
 Allow electronic payment for residents and nonresidents for authorized submitters as well as individual adjusters.
 Post applications and license status information on Web sites and on the SPLD
 Eliminate perpetual licenses, eliminate the word “perpetual” from issued licenses, and adopt a biennial renewal process
tied to the uniformity standards.
 Adopt the NAIC Independent Adjuster Reciprocity Best Practices Guidelines.
 Use the definition of “home state” as defined in the NAIC Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines (#1224)
 Participate in the NIPR ADHS application.
 Participate in the NAIC Personalized Information Capture System (PICS) to receive alerts or monitor actions against
existing licensees.
 Use the Attachments Warehouse/Reporting of Action system to receive electronic notifications to alert a state when an
adjuster has added information into the Attachments Warehouse since their initial entry regarding administrative,
criminal or civil actions. For nonresidents that designate your state as the “home state”, a nonresident license should be
issued.
 For nonresidents that designate your state as the “home state”, develop internal data fields that will allow the tracking of
CE compliance.
 Include a provision in law that prohibits simultaneous licensure as both an Independent Adjuster and a Public Adjuster.
 If your state requires a license examination, require applicants for a resident license to pass your own state’s
examination, not simply use passing results from another’s state’s examination. However, recognition of an exam taken
in another state may be given where a nonresident license is being requested.
 Grant an exemption from the license examination requirement to applicants for the crop line of authority who have
satisfactorily completed the National Crop Insurance Services Crop Adjuster Proficiency Program or the loss adjustment
training curriculum and competency testing required by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation Standard Reinsurance
Agreement.
 If your state allows non-U.S. citizens to receive a license, ensure that other laws in your state (such as tax laws) do not
require every licensee or applicant for a license to submit a Social Security Number (SSN) or Individual Taxpayer
Identification Number (ITIN).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 19
Bail Bond Agents
A bail bond is one method used to obtain the release of a defendant awaiting trial upon criminal charges from the custody of
law enforcement officials. A bail bond can be based on an insurance product or collateral. The defendant, the defendant’s
family and friends, or a professional bail bond agent executes a document that promises to forfeit the sum of money
determined by the court to be commensurate with the gravity of the alleged offense if the defendant fails to return for the trial
date. A bail bond is considered a three-part contract between the defendant, the government and the insurance company.
Some states regulate bail bonds through the insurance department, and others leave the administration to the discretion of the
court system. It is usually required that a bail bond insurer file a power of attorney with the local court authority. This power
of attorney is proof to the court that the bail agent is authorized to write bonds for that insurer up to a certain dollar amount.
State insurance departments vary in the manner in which bail bond activities are regulated. There is no NAIC model to guide
state licensing directors for bail bond agents. A number of states use the surety line of authority to regulate only the bonds
that are insurance-based. In other states, a more comprehensive system has been developed that includes examinations,
background checks and personal integrity bonds. The majority of bail bond transactions are executed by resident bail bond
agents. Some states prohibit nonresident bail bond agents. In many states, the state court system and local county sheriff may
also have a process for approval of bail bond agents.
States that regulate bail bond agents should consider including the following elements in their regulatory scheme:
1. Minimum content and disclosure requirements for the bail bond contract.
2. Detailed record-keeping.
3. Requirement that bail funds be segregated in a trust account.
4. Appointments for all bail bond agents.
5. Written examination.
6. Background check, including fingerprints.
7. Prelicensing education on state laws and bond procedures.
8. Completion of CE.
9. Laws that clearly place liability on insurers’ appointed bail bond agents who fail to comply with state law on bail
bonds and return of collateral.
10. Cross reference the PLMA and the state’s unfair trade practices act to apply penalties for misconduct.
11. Laws that create a fiduciary relationship between the bail bond agent and the criminal defendant.
12. Dialogue with the appropriate state court and law enforcement officials to coordinate efforts at regulating bail bond
agents.
13. Adoption of a specific list of prohibited activities by bail bond agents.
Bond Forfeiture
Forfeiture enforcement may or may not be the responsibility of the state insurance department. In some states, enforcement is
left to the court system. This may result in a bail agent’s bond privileges being revoked in a particular county. If enforcement
is the responsibility of the state insurance department, the state likely will have authority to suspend or revoke the license of a
bail agent.
Prohibited Activities
The following list contains excerpts from several states’ laws and regulations regarding bail bond agent licenses. This is a
suggested starting point for states to draft a list of prohibited activities for bail bond agents and insurers:
1. Pay, rebate, give or promise anything of value to a jailer, peace officer, magistrate or any other person who has
power to arrest or hold a person in custody, or to any public official or public employee for the purpose of securing a
settlement, compromise, remission or reduction of the amount of bail bond, or to secure delay or other advantage.
This section does not prohibit public reward paid for the return of a fugitive.
2. Pay, rebate, give or promise anything of value to an attorney in a bail bond matter, except in defense of an action on
a bail bond, collateral or indemnification agreement.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Pay, rebate, give or promise anything of value to a defendant or anyone acting on the defendant’s behalf in exchange
for a referral of bail bond business.
4. Recommend a particular attorney to represent a defendant.
5. Solicit business where a prisoner is confined in or near a courtroom if otherwise prohibited by court order or law.
6. Sign or countersign a bail bond that the licensee did not execute.
Immigration Bonds
An immigration bond guarantees the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) that an alien will comply with one of
several obligations under U.S. immigration laws. Most often, an immigration bond guarantees the alien while released
from U.S. custody during the pendency of the government’s case for unlawful entry into the country. An immigration
bond can be in the form of a surety product or collateral. (See INS Form I-352.) With respect to surety products, the
underlying guarantee is an insurance product permitted to be issued solely by a licensed insurer. Consequently, an
individual selling, soliciting or negotiating an immigration bond must maintain a resident or nonresident producer license
in order to legally sell the bond in a state.
States should recognize that immigration bonds are a form of insurance required to be issued by a licensed insurer and
that the sale, solicitation and negotiation of immigration bonds constitute activities for which an individual must
maintain a license as a resident or nonresident producer under the respective states’ licensing laws. New Jersey Bulletin
No. 09-09 contains an example of notification regarding appropriate treatment of immigration bonds.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 20
Charitable Gift Annuities
A charitable gift annuity (CGA) is a transfer by a donor to a charitable organization. In return, the donor receives an annuity
payable over one or two lives. If the actuarial value of the annuity is less than the value of the property transferred, then the
difference in value constitutes a charitable deduction for federal tax purposes. CGAs are not investments. Annuity payments
are tax-free partial returns of the donor’s gift based on actuarial tables of life expectancy.
To qualify as a charitable organization under the federal law, the entity must be one described in either Section 501(c)(3) or
Section 170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC).
The maximum rates of return that are typically paid on these uninsured annuities are established by the American Council on
Gift Annuities (ACGA).
Gift annuity payments are fixed. They never go down or up. CGAs are not insured. A charity could become insolvent and be
unable to make annuity payments. Most gift annuities are not protected by any state guaranty fund.
The NAIC has adopted two models to regulate CGAs. The Charitable Annuities Model Act (#240) contains a detailed
licensing scheme for CGAs. The Charitable Gift Annuities Exemption Model Act (#241) calls for a simplified registration
mechanism.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 21
Fraternals and Small Mutuals
Fraternal Benefit Societies
A fraternal benefit society is a membership organization that is legally required to offer life, health and related insurance
products to its members, be not-for-profit, and carry out charitable and other programs for the benefit of its members and the
public. It must be composed of members having a common bond and be organized into lodges or chapters (local membership
groups). A fraternal benefit society exists solely for the benefit of its members and their beneficiaries. Fraternal benefit
societies must have a representative form of governance.
Federal law allows a fraternal to offer life and health insurance products. Section 501(c)(8) of the IRC defines a fraternal
beneficiary society as:
(a) a nonprofit mutual aid organization;

(b) operating under the lodge system or for the exclusive benefit of the members of a fraternity itself operating
under the lodge system; and
(c) providing for the payment of life, sick, accident or other benefits to the members of such society, order or
association, or their dependents.
Fraternal benefit societies offer insurance products, are chartered and licensed according to state insurance laws, and are
regulated and examined by state insurance departments. Individuals who sell, solicit or negotiate insurance products for a
fraternal benefit society are required to obtain a state insurance producer license.
The NAIC has adopted the Uniform Fraternal Code (#675). However, this model is not widely in use. At this writing, 45
states had adopted a version of the Model Fraternal Code as drafted by the National Fraternal Congress of America (NFCA).
Both the NAIC model and the NFCA model contain a section about producer licensing that pre-dates the PLMA. States
should check the fraternal law that has been adopted in their state and update it to reference the PLMA.
Small Mutual Insurers
Small mutual insurers are risk-bearing entities that historically formed around common interests of farmers, householders,
and ethnic and religious groups. Small mutuals, commonly known as farm mutuals, may also be called “town” or “county” or
“state” mutuals.
Small mutuals provide, with only a few exceptions, property insurance for homes, farmsteads, crops and some small
businesses. They do not, except for the legal liability associated with those risks, write casualty insurance. In some states,
small mutuals are allowed to offer liability coverage through an affiliation with an insurer. State laws usually limit small
mutuals to either a certain premium volume or geographic area or both. Most states also impose a lighter regulatory burden
than that applied to larger mutual and investor-owned insurers.
Mutual insurers are owned and operated by the policyholders. Unlike a stock company, a mutual policyholder has an
indivisible interest in the enterprise that, in general, cannot be bought or sold like a share of stock. Policyholders often are
referred to as “members.” In some cases, a dividend or return of premium is paid when the mutual’s board of directors judges
it has sufficient capital. Members of the board also are policyholders.
Individuals who sell products for small mutuals should be licensed as producers as outlined in the PLMA and the ULS.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 22
Insurance Consultants
An insurance consultant is a person who charges a fee for giving advice about insurance products. Not all states require a
separate consultant license. In those states, the individual can obtain a producer license and abide by the disclosure provisions
for insurance consultants. In states that do require a special license, the applicant usually is required to pass an examination.
The exam may be either one of the same subject-matter examinations that insurance producers must pass or an examination
specific to consultants. In states that require an examination, a waiver may be granted if the applicant can demonstrate a
specified amount of insurance experience.
States usually adopt exemptions from the consultant licensing requirement. The exemptions are available as long as the
person is acting in his or her professional capacity or in the normal course of business. Common exemptions are:
1. A licensed attorney.
2. A trust officer of a bank.
3. An actuary or certified public accountant.
4. A risk manager who consults for his or her employer only.
If a state requires appointments for insurance producers, appointments should not be required of insurance consultants. The
consultant represents the insured and is not an agent of the insurance company. Some states prohibit an individual from
holding both an insurance producer license and an insurance consultant license. Other states allow an insurance producer to
function in either capacity with full disclosure. In all cases where an individual is acting as an insurance consultant, a written
contract should be used to clearly explain the terms of the consultant arrangement.
In states that have a separate insurance consultant license, it is a common practice to have a CE requirement that mirrors the
CE requirement for insurance producers.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 23
Managed Care Providers
Health Maintenance Organizations
A health maintenance organization (HMO) is a type of managed care organization that provides a form of health care
coverage that is fulfilled through hospitals, doctors and other providers with which the HMO has a contract. Unlike
traditional health insurance, an HMO sets out guidelines under which doctors can operate. On average, an HMO costs less
than comparable traditional health insurance, with a trade-off of limitations on the range of treatments available. Unlike many
traditional insurers, HMOs do not merely provide financing for medical care. The HMO actually delivers the treatment as
well. Doctors, hospitals and insurers all participate in the HMO business arrangement.
The NAIC has adopted a model law and regulation that governs the licensure of HMOs: Health Maintenance Organization
Model Act (#430) and Model Regulation to Implement Rules Regarding Contracts and Services of Health Maintenance
Organization (#432). In most cases, access to an HMO is only available to employer group plans.
Preferred Provider Organizations
A preferred provider organization (PPO) is a group of doctors and/or hospitals that provides medical service only to a
specific group or association. The PPO may be sponsored by a particular insurance company, by one or more employers, or
by some other type of organization. PPO physicians provide medical services to the policyholders, employees or members of
the sponsor(s) at discounted rates and may set up utilization review programs to help control the cost of medical care.
In some states, managed care providers may be licensed by an agency outside the insurance department.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 24
Managing General Agents
A managing general agent (MGA) is an insurance producer authorized by an insurance company to manage all or part of the
insurer’s business in a specific geographic territory. Activities on behalf of the insurer may include marketing, underwriting,
issuing policies, collecting premiums, appointing and supervising other agents, paying claims, and negotiating reinsurance.
Many states regulate the activities and contracts of MGAs.
The NAIC has adopted the Managing General Agents Act (Model #225) to guide states in regulating MGAs. Under the
model, an MGA is defined as any person who engages in all of the following:
1. Negotiates and binds ceding reinsurance contracts on behalf of an insurer or manages all or part of the insurance
business of an insurer—including the management of a separate division, department or underwriting office—and
who acts as an agent for such insurer whether known as a managing general agent, manager or other similar term or
title.
2. With or without authority and either separately or together with affiliates, directly or indirectly produces and
underwrites an amount of gross direct written premium equal to or greater than 5% of the policyholder surplus in
any one quarter or year, as reported in the last annual statement of the insurer.
3. Engages in either or both of the following:
(a) Adjusts or pays claims in excess of an amount determined by the insurance commissioner.
(b) Negotiates reinsurance on behalf of the insurer.
Under the model, an MGA does not include any of the following:
1. An employee of the insurer.

2. A manager of a U.S. branch of an alien insurer who resides in this country.
3. An underwriting manager who, pursuant to contract, manages all insurance operations of the insurer, who is under
common control with the insurer, subject to [cite to state law] relating to the regulation of insurance holding
company systems, and who is not compensated based upon the volume of premiums written.
4. An insurance company, in connection with the acceptance or rejection of reinsurance on a block of business.
5. The attorney-in-fact authorized by or acting for the subscribers of a reciprocal insurer or interinsurance exchange
under a power of attorney.
In most states, MGAs must be licensed as producers and are not allowed to place business until a written contract exists
among all parties. Under the Model #225, insurers are required to monitor the financial stability of MGAs under contract.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 25
Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements
Multiple employer welfare arrangements (MEWAs) are arrangements that allow a group of employers collectively to offer
health insurance coverage to their employees. MEWAs are most often found among employer groups belonging to a common
trade, industry or professional association.
MEWA plans are generally available to the employees (and sometimes their dependents) of the employers who are part of the
arrangement. People who do not have an employment connection to the group cannot obtain coverage through the MEWA
plan. MEWA plans cannot be sold to the public.
To qualify as an MEWA, the organization must be nonprofit, in existence for at least five years and created for purposes
other than that of obtaining health insurance coverage. In other words, employers cannot group together solely for the
purpose of offering health insurance. However, employers that already have grouped together for another common purpose
(for example, a trade association) may also offer health insurance coverage to their member employers.
States and the federal government coordinate the regulation of MEWAs pursuant to a 1982 amendment to the federal
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA). This dual jurisdiction gives states primary responsibility for overseeing
the financial soundness of MEWAs and the licensing of MEWA operators. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) enforces
the fiduciary provisions of ERISA against MEWA operators to the extent a MEWA is an ERISA plan or is holding plan
assets. State insurance laws that set standards requiring specified levels of reserves or contributions are applicable to MEWAs
even if they also are covered by ERISA.
The NAIC has adopted a model regulation, Prevention of Illegal Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWAs) and
Other Illegal Health Insurers Model Regulation (#220), to give guidance to states in the supervision of MEWAs.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 26
Reinsurance Intermediaries
A reinsurance intermediary acts as a broker in soliciting, negotiating or procuring the writing of any reinsurance contract or
binder. Reinsurance intermediaries act as insurance producers in accepting any reinsurance contract or binder on behalf of an
insurer.
The NAIC has adopted the Reinsurance Intermediary Model Act (#790), which contains a simplified registration process for
nonresident reinsurance intermediaries. Nonresident reinsurance intermediaries verify that they are licensed in their home
states under similar laws as in the nonresident states, i.e., the NAIC Model, and the nonresident reinsurance intermediaries
are granted reciprocity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 27
Risk Retention Groups and Risk Purchasing Groups
Risk Retention Groups
Congress enacted the federal Risk Retention Act (RRA) in 1981. This federal law enabled product sellers to form RRGs to
provide group self-insurance. RRGs are insurers licensed and fully regulated in one state pursuant to that state’s laws. In the
mid-1980s, general liability insurance premiums skyrocketed, and certain lines were unavailable. Coverage for some classes
of businesses was typically either unavailable or extremely expensive for the desired limits and coverages. Congress
intervened again in 1986, this time expanding the RRA to permit RRGs to cover broader liability risks. The RRA is now
referred to as the federal Liability Risk Retention Act (LRRA).
Under the Model Risk Retention Act (#705), an RRG “registers” in non-domicile states and is then exempt from most
insurance laws in non-domicile states. RRGs are limited to providing non-workers’ compensation commercial lines liability
insurance to its members. All owners of an RRG must be insureds, and all insureds must be owners.
RRGs can be required by states to:
1. Comply with the unfair claim settlement practices law.

2. Pay applicable premium and other taxes that are levied on admitted insurers and surplus lines insurers, brokers or
policyholders.
3. Participate in residual market mechanisms.
4. Register and designate the insurance commissioner as agent for service.
5. Submit to a financial examination in any state in which the group is doing business if:
a. The domiciliary insurance commissioner has not begun or refused to initiate an examination.
b. Any examination shall be coordinated to avoid unjustified duplication and repetition.
6. Comply with a lawful order issued in a delinquency proceeding commenced by the insurance commissioner if there
has been a finding of financial impairment or in a voluntary dissolution proceeding.
7. Comply with deceptive, false or fraudulent acts or practices laws, except that if the state seeks an injunction
regarding the conduct, it must be from a court of competent jurisdiction.
8. Comply with an injunction issued by a court of competent jurisdiction, upon a petition by the state insurance
commissioner alleging that the group is in hazardous financial condition or is financially impaired.
9. Provide the following notice, in 10-point type, in any insurance policy:
NOTICE
This policy is issued by your risk retention group (RRG). Your RRG may not be subject to all of the
insurance laws and regulations of your state. State insurance insolvency guaranty funds are not available
for your RRG.
A state may require that a person acting, or offering to act, as a producer or broker for an RRG obtain a license from that
state, except that a state may not impose any qualification or requirement that discriminates against
a nonresident producer or broker.
Risk Purchasing Groups
The second type of entity allowed to operate under the RRA is a risk purchasing group (RPG). RPGs are vehicles for any
insurer to market on a group basis, with the ability to discriminate as to rates for those groups. But as with RRGs, RPGS are
only allowed to place liability coverage. RPGs are formed so that similar risks may pool purchasing power. RPGs are
purchasing entities, not insurers, and are not generally subject to state insurance laws.
Insurance departments generally do not actively regulate RPGs. The insurer writing for an RPG is subject to all insurance
laws, with few exceptions. The transaction of insurance for an RPG in a state generally follows a traditional transaction based
on the form of the insurer in relation to that state. Hence, if the insurer is licensed in the state, then producer licensing and, if
applicable, appointment procedures apply. If the insurer is a writer of surplus lines, then the traditional surplus lines producer

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
licensing rules apply. As with RRGs, a state may require that a person acting, or offering to act, as a producer or broker for a
purchasing group obtain a license from that state. A state may not impose any qualification or requirement that discriminates
against a nonresident producer or broker.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 28
Third-Party Administrators
A TPA is an entity that directly or indirectly underwrites, collects charges or premium from, or adjusts or settles claims on
residents of a state, in connection with life, annuity or health coverage offered or provided by an insurer, unless accepted by
statute.
When an employer offers its employees a self-funded health care plan (the employer helps finance the health care costs of its
employees), the employer often contracts with a TPA to administer the plan. The employer also may contract with a reinsurer
to pay amounts in excess of a certain threshold in order to share the risk for potential catastrophic claims experience.
In most states, a TPA is required to register with the state. Some states require a bond. The TPA is required to answer
inquiries from the state insurance department, but, if the TPA is working for a self-funded ERISA plan, a state has limited
authority to take enforcement action against the TPA. An insurer also may act as a TPA for certain customers. This can be
confusing to a consumer who has an identification card that has a name similar to a well-known health insurance company.
The consumer often thinks coverage is provided by that insurance company instead of the employer plan.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 29
Title Insurance Agents
Title insurance is insurance indemnifying against financial loss from defects in title of real property arising from conditions
of title that exist on the date of issuance of the policy. While most insurance coverage indemnifies insureds against loss
caused by future events, title insurance is unique as it focuses on the elimination of risk before the policy is issued. Title
insurance policies are typically purchased when real property is conveyed or financed. Insureds pay one premium for
coverage that has no expiration. In many states, title insurance has essentially replaced abstracts of title, and it is often
required as a condition for obtaining a loan secured by a lien on real property.
Title insurance policies commonly guarantee or indemnify the fee title of owners or the lien priority of a lender from losses
or damages from liens, encumbrances, defects or unmarketability of title, or adverse claims to title in the real property, and
defects in the authorization, execution or delivery of an encumbrance on the real estate. Coverage is subject to standard
exceptions, as well as specific exclusions listed on a schedule attached to the policy limiting the extent of the insurer’s
liability. Coverage is often expanded or amended through endorsements attached to the policy.
Two types of title insurance policies are commonly issued: the owner’s policy and the lender’s policy. The owner’s policy
ensures that the title to the real property is vested as described in the policy, that the title is marketable, that there is a right of
access to the property, and against defects in or lien or encumbrances on the title. Title insurance does not require a written
application. Policies often are ordered by real estate agents or lenders. The title insurance agent issues a commitment or
binder basically revealing the current state of title to the property and agreeing to insure the property, provided that the
requirements in the commitment are met to the satisfaction of the title insurer.
The effective date of the policy is typically the date that transactional documents (deed, deed of trust, etc.) are recorded in the
public real estate records. Losses under the policy are subject to the limits listed on the title page, plus any costs of defense.
The policy limit of an owner’s policy is generally the purchase price of the real property, and the policy limit of a lender’s
policy is generally the original amount of the loan. Losses from title defects are rare, and loss ratios for insurers are relatively
low. The goal of a title insurer is to find defects in title prior to issuing a policy; consequently, expense ratios are fairly high
due to the cost of title research.
Most states place monoline restrictions on title insurers. Monoline restrictions prohibit title insurers from issuing any line of
insurance other than title insurance. Rates and rate setting processes vary by state. Some states regulate only the risk
premium, while other states regulate an all-inclusive premium, which generally includes all costs of issuing the policy, search
expenses and the risk premium.
Functions of title insurance agents include conducting title searches, performing underwriting functions, preparing and
issuing title insurance commitments and policies, maintaining policy records, and receiving premiums. In addition, many title
agents perform real estate closings, and provide settlement and escrow services.
Many activities of state licensing divisions with regard to title insurance are the same as in other lines of insurance. In most
states, agents are required to pass a licensing exam and fulfill ongoing (CE) requirements. In some states, the licensing
division also will be responsible for receiving and filing agency appointments with insurers, bonds or letters of credit (LOCs),
proof of errors and omissions (E&O) coverage, and forms disclosing controlled and affiliated business relationships. The
NAIC has adopted the Title Insurance Agent Model Act (#230) to give guidance to state licensing directors.
Title insurance creates some unique regulatory issues, primarily due to the risk elimination nature of the insurance coverage,
and the business relationships between title insurance agents and those who refer title insurance business. The entity referring
the title insurance business often is viewed as the customer rather than the insured due to the nature of real estate transactions.
Entities that regularly refer title insurance business—such as mortgage brokers, lenders, realtors and attorneys—are referred
to as producers of title insurance business. Note that “producer of title insurance” as used in this context carries a very
different meaning from “insurance producer.”
Controlled and affiliated business relationships refer to business relationships between title insurance agents and producers of
title insurance business. Many states require that controlled and affiliated business relationships be disclosed both to the
insured and to the insurance department in writing. Many states also prohibit title insurance agents from providing rebates,
referral fees, inducements or financial incentives to producers of title insurance business. In addition to state laws, rebates and
referrals related to most residential real estate transactions are prohibited under the federal Real Estate Settlement Procedures
Act (RESPA).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Chapter 30
Viatical and Life Settlement Providers and Brokers
The Viatical Settlements Model Act (#697) defines a viatical settlement as a transaction in which the owner of a life insurance
policy sells the right to receive the death payment due under the policy to a third party. Typically, the owner/insured receives
a cash payment, and the buyer agrees to make any remaining premium payments on the policy.
In 1993, the NAIC adopted the Viatical Settlements Model Regulation (#698) and Model #697 to provide a regulatory
structure to protect consumers involved in viatical settlements. The Model #697 was revised in 2003 and 2004 to address the
issue of healthy consumers who might want to sell their insurance policy on the secondary market, better known as “life
settlements.”
Licensing requirements vary as a result of the several versions of Model #697. Under the 1993 version of Model #697, a
viatical settlement broker was required to have an underlying life producer license before being able to apply for and receive
a viatical settlement broker license. This provision was not uniformly adopted.
The 2003 version of Model #697 provided for licensing procedures of individuals who were not licensed life insurance
producers by requiring CE to maintain the license. The 2003 version was modified in 2004 to allow for licensed life
insurance producers to notify or register with the insurance regulator as prescribed by the insurance commissioner if they
were engaging in the business of settlements, and exempted life insurance producers from the viatical settlement brokers’
examination and the CE requirements.
The 2003 and 2004 versions of Model #697 also required the viatical settlement broker to maintain financial responsibility in
the form of an errors and omissions policy, surety bond or cash deposit, or a combination of any of the three. It also placed
fiduciary responsibility requirements on the broker. The 2003 and 2004 versions of Model #697 required brokers to disclose
the method by which compensation was calculated and the amount of compensation. It is essential the viatical broker meet
the licensing requirements of the state where the transaction occurs.
The 2003 version of Model #697 also provided for licensing procedures for viatical settlement providers.
Model #697 was revised in 2007 to address, among other things, transactions that have been called stranger-originated life
insurance (STOLI) or investor-originated life insurance (IOLI). These transactions are related to a life insurance policy
exhibiting any one of three characteristics prior to or within two years of policy issue:
1. Non-recourse premium financing.

2. Guarantee of settlement.
3. Settlement evaluation.
Settlement of such policies is prohibited for five years.
Other key revisions include:
1. New consumer disclosures related to viatical settlement compensation.

2. A new consumer disclosure requiring a statement that the viatical settlement broker represents exclusively the viator
and owes a fiduciary duty to the viator, including a duty to act in the best interest of the viator.
3. Allowing life agents to sell without a viatical license, but special conditions apply.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Additional revisions include:
Under specified circumstances, a life insurance producer may operate as a viatical settlement broker. The life insurance
producer is deemed to meet the viatical settlement broker licensing requirements. The revisions also permit a person licensed
as an attorney, certified public accountant (CPA) or financial planner accredited by a national recognized accrediting agency,
who is retained to represent the viator and whose compensation is not paid directly or indirectly by the viatical settlement
provider, to negotiate viatical settlement contracts on behalf of a viator without having to obtain a viatical settlement broker’s
license.
To receive and maintain a license, the 2007 revisions require a viatical settlement provider or broker to demonstrate evidence
of financial responsibility through a surety bond or a deposit of cash, certificates of deposit or securities, or any combination
thereof in the amount of $250,000. The surety bond must be issued in the favor of the state and must specifically authorize
recovery by the insurance commissioner on behalf of any person in the state who sustained damages as the result of
erroneous acts, failure to act, conviction of fraud or conviction of unfair practices by the provider or broker. The insurance
commissioner may ask for evidence of financial responsibility at any time the insurance commissioner deems necessary. The
revisions make clear that a provider or broker that is licensed in more than one state is not required to file multiple bonds in
each state. Some problems have arisen with implementing the bonding requirements of the Model #697. Regulated entities
argue that it is impossible to obtain a bond as described by Model #697.
The revisions also require an individual licensed as a viatical settlement broker to complete, on a biennial basis, 15 hours of
training related to viatical settlements and viatical settlement transactions. A life insurance producer who is operating as a
viatical settlement broker is not subject to this requirement.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III Appendices
Section One – Documents Adopted by the Producer Licensing Working Group and the NAIC
A. Broker Compensation Frequently Asked Questions ....................................................................... 99

B. Commercial Lines Multi-State Exemption and Commission Sharing Recommendations............ 103
C. Continuing Education Reciprocity ............................................................................................... 107
D. Continuing Education Standardized Terms and Definitions ........................................................ 109
E. Prelicensing Education Standardized Terms and Definitions ...................................................... 111
F. Continuing Education Recommended Guidelines for Online Courses ......................................... 113
G. Continuing Education Recommended Guidelines for Classroom Course ................................... 115
H. Continuing Education Reciprocity Uniform Course Filing Form ................................................. 117
I. Course Guidelines for Classroom Webinar/Webcast Delivery .................................................... 119
J. Emergency Adjuster Licensing Best Practices Guidelines .......................................................... 121
K. Independent Adjuster Reciprocity Best Practices and Guidelines ................................................ 123
L.Independent Adjuster Licensing Guideline................................................................................... ....127
M. Limited Line Term Life Resolution .............................................................................................. 139
N. Low Compliance Licensing Standards Recommendations .......................................................... ...141
O. Progress Report to Membership on Producer Licensing State Assessments – March 2009…..….147
P. Progress Report to Membership on Producer Licensing State Assessments – March 2010……...163
Q. Model Bulletin on Flood Insurance .............................................................................................. 175
R. Model Bulletin on Long-term Care Continuing Education ........................................................... 177
S.Producer Licensing Model Act ......................................................................................................... 179
T. Professional Licensing Standards Recommendations................................................................... ..191
U. Public Adjuster Model Act ........................................................................................................... ...193
V. Report of the NARAB Working Group: Recommendation of States Continuing to Meet
Reciprocity Requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act ........................................................ 209
W. Uniform Criminal History & Regulatory Action Background Review Guidelines .…………….237
X. Uniform Appointment Process. ..................................................................................................... .243
Y. Uniform Licensing Standards........................................................................................................ .245
Z. Chart on Licensable and Non-Licensable Acts ............................................................................. 255
Section Two – General Reference Materials
A. Sample Continuing Education Program Instructions to Course Providers ................................... 259

B. Sample Frequently Asked Questions by Producers Regarding Continuing
Education Requirements ............................................................................................................... .......263
C. Sample State Licensing Department Internal Training Manual .................................................... 265
Section Three – Glossary

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix A
Frequently Asked Questions

Compensation Disclosure Amendment to the PLMA
This document has been prepared by the NAIC’s Executive Task Force on Broker Activities for informational purposes only.
The following questions and answers are based on the language and development of the Compensation Disclosure
Amendment to the NAIC’s Producer Licensing Model Act. This document is not intended as legislative history or to replace a
state insurance department’s independent review and analysis of issues regarding the Compensation Disclosure Amendment.
The contents of this document should not be interpreted as a formal opinion or policy statement of the NAIC or of any
individual NAIC member or state insurance department
Question 1: How has the NAIC responded to the issue of inadequate disclosure of compensation by insurance producers?
Answer 1: The NAIC established the Executive Task Force on Broker Activities, composed of 14 states, to develop a
coordinated approach to evaluate and address the issues raised in various regulatory and law enforcement investigations of
producer compensation. The Task Force immediately formulated a three-pronged action plan: (1) to amend the existing
Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA) to require greater disclosure of producer compensation information; (2) to facilitate
regulatory coordination through the development of uniform “templates” for the states to use in collecting information from
insurers and/or producers; and (3) to establish an online fraud reporting mechanism to allow for the anonymous reporting of
“tips” of unscrupulous business practices for investigation by state insurance departments.
Question 2: How did the Compensation Disclosure Amendment to the PLMA evolve?
Answer 2: In developing the Amendment, the Task Force sought input from state insurance regulators across the country
regarding possible ways to achieve greater transparency of producer compensation. An initial draft of model legislation was
developed and exposed for public comment in mid-November 2004. The Task Force held numerous meetings, including two
public hearings at the NAIC’s 2004 Winter National Meeting in early December. Subsequent to the public hearings, a revised
draft was released for public comment. More than 100 oral and/or written comments from state insurance regulators and
interested parties were considered in arriving at the final draft.
Question 3: Will there be further changes to the Amendment?
Answer 3: Yes. When the Amendment was adopted Dec. 29, 2004, the Task Force committed to giving further consideration
of possible additional requirements, including but not limited to recognition of a fiduciary responsibility for producers,
disclosure of all quotes received by a producer for a particular placement, and disclosures relating to producer-owned
reinsurance arrangements.
Question 4: To whom does the Amendment apply?
Answer 4: The Amendment applies to all producers and their affiliates that receive any compensation from the customer for
the placement of insurance or, irrespective of compensation from the customer, represent the customer with respect to that
placement. In the PLMA, a producer is defined as “a person required to be licensed under the laws of this state to sell, solicit
or negotiate insurance.” The PLMA goes on to define “person” to include either an individual or a business entity. For
information about the definition of “affiliate,” see No. 21 below.
Question 5: Are any producers expressly exempt from the Amendment?
Answer 5: Yes. Subsection C of the Amendment expressly exempts producers, such as managing general agents, sales
managers or wholesale brokers, who act only as intermediaries between an insurer and other producers. This exemption was
developed because these types of producers do not have direct contact with the person involved in the purchase of insurance.
In addition, Subsection C expressly exempts reinsurance intermediaries.
Question 6: Does the Amendment apply to producers who represent one insurer exclusively?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Answer 6: Yes. Such producers, commonly known as “captive agents,” are not exempt from the Amendment. However, this
type of producer will typically have to comply with the disclosure requirements of only Subsection A(2), because the
producer does not normally receive compensation from the customer and is appointed by the insurer the producer represents.
Question 7: Does the Amendment apply to independent producers?
Answer 7: Yes. Such producers, commonly known as “independent agents,” are not exempt from the Amendment. The
disclosure this type of producer must make depends on whether the producer is appointed by the insurer the producer
represents for a particular placement or whether the producer receives compensation from the customer for the placement.
Question 8: Does the Amendment apply to registered or licensed NASD broker/dealers?
Answer 8: The application of the disclosure to registered or licensed NASD broker/dealers depends on the activities of the
individual broker/dealer. The disclosure requirements would apply to a broker/dealer who is licensed as a producer and
engaged in the placement of insurance, such as a variable life insurance product.
Question 9: Does the Amendment apply to producers selling annuities?
Answer 9: Yes. The disclosure requirements apply when a producer receives compensation from the customer for the
placement of products considered to be insurance or represents the customer with respect to that placement.
Question 10: Does the Amendment apply to placements of insurance in the residual market?
Answer 10: Yes. It is recognized that residual markets encompass placements of various types of insurance through
programs established to ensure that insurance is available to individuals and businesses having difficulty obtaining coverage
in the voluntary market. The Amendment does not draw any distinctions between the residual market and voluntary market
based on the type or line of insurance being placed. Given the statutory nature of residual market programs, the disclosure
required by the Amendment is relatively straightforward.
Question 11: What does the drafting note about the licensing of business entities mean?
Answer 11: Most states permit business entities to be licensed as producers. The drafting note is intended to encourage these
states to evaluate the applicability of the Amendment to licensed business entities. States that do not require producer
business entities to be licensed should adjust the language of the amendment in a manner consistent with their statutory
framework, if necessary, to ensure that individual licenses make the required disclosures when compensation is made to the
licensee’s unlicensed corporate employer.
Question 12: At what point in the placement of insurance must disclosure be made?
Answer 12: Pursuant to Subsection A, disclosure under Paragraph (1) or (2) must be made prior to the purchase of insurance.
For disclosure to be useful to the consumer, disclosure should be made before the customer has committed to purchasing the
insurance. Logistical concerns about obtaining the customer’s documented acknowledgement are addressed in Subsection
D(4). See Nos. 15 and 16.
Question 13: Must a producer provide disclosure when servicing an existing policy, such as adding a driver to existing
coverage under an auto policy or changing policy limits?
Answer 13: No. These types of policy changes are viewed as modifications to existing placements, which do not typically
involve the customer evaluating various options for the purchase of insurance.
Question 14: Must a producer provide disclosure when processing a policy renewal?
Answer 14: Yes. A renewal is considered to be the placement of insurance. As such, if the producer is involved in the
renewal process, the disclosure should be given. However, if the insurer independently generates and processes a renewal
without the producer’s participation or involvement, the renewal would not trigger disclosure by the producer.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 15: How should a producer document the customer’s acknowledgement of the required disclosures?
Answer 15: The producer should be able to establish that: (1) the required information was conveyed to the customer on a
specific date; and (2) the customer indicated his or her consent regarding the described compensation to be received by the
producer or affiliate. The definition of documented acknowledgement in Subsection D(4) is intended to address the
technological possibilities for obtaining the customer’s written consent.
Question 16: What if: (1) a producer cannot figure out his or her compensation on a particular placement; or (2) the producer
believes it is too difficult to explain how the producer’s compensation is calculated?
Answer 16: The disclosure of compensation required by Subsection A should make the customer aware of factors and
methodology used that affect the producer’s compensation. While it is not necessary to provide mathematical formulas, the
appropriate disclosure is nonetheless required. If a producer is unable to provide the amount of compensation on a particular
placement, the producer may accomplish this by providing specific information about compensation from the past year and
any anticipated changes or a range of possible outcomes while being sufficiently specific to provide valuable information to
the customer.
Question 17: For group insurance where a producer receives compensation from the customer or represents the customer, to
whom must a producer make the required disclosures prior to the receipt of compensation from the insurer or other third
party for that placement of insurance?
Answer 17: The producer must make the disclosures to the entity named on the policy as the group policyholder. The
disclosure should be made to the person actually applying for insurance or that person’s authorized representative. A
producer does not need to provide the disclosures to each individual certificate holder under a group insurance policy.
Question 18: Will a producer who is also an investor with an insurer and who receives stock be considered to have received
“compensation from the insurer” and thus be subject to the disclosure requirements? Will an agency that has a separate,
structured financial loan with a carrier for an agency acquisition or a new computer system also trigger compliance?
Answer 18: The intention of the disclosure is to ensure that the insurance consumer is aware of the various aspects of
compensation involved in any particular insurance placement so that the consumer can make an informed decision as to
whether he/she wishes to proceed with the transaction under the disclosed terms. Because of this, the disclosure should focus
on “compensation from the insurer” that is related to the placement of an insurance policy. If the receipt of the stock or the
structuring of the loan is connected in any manner to the placement of insurance, this should be disclosed.
Question 19: Will a producer who provides services unrelated to the placement of insurance be required to provide the
disclosures to a customer who pays compensation to the producer for these services?
Answer 19: A producer may receive compensation from the customer for services unrelated to the placement of insurance
without providing the disclosure as long as the producer does not receive compensation from or represent the customer with
respect to the placement of insurance. For example, the receipt of compensation for the preparation of IRS Form 5500 is not
related to the placement of insurance.
Question 20: Subsection D(3) refers to fees or expenses permitted by statute. What does this mean?
Answer 20: By separate law or regulation, some states permit payment for the recovery of expenses related to a specific
service, such as the receipt of the cost to obtain a Motor Vehicle Report. Some states may enact the Amendment to include a
specific reference to these specific laws or regulations. If the Amendment when adopted in a state includes such a statutory
reference, the producer may also receive compensation from the insurer without providing the disclosure so long as the
receipt of such fee does not result in any additional compensation to the producer, or the producer does not represent the
customer with respect to the placement of insurance.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Question 21: What is the intent of the disclosures applying to an “affiliate” of the producer?
Answer 21: The intent of this provision is to ensure that the disclosures apply to those situations where a producer or insurer
may direct a payment of compensation to another appropriately licensed affiliated entity. States that do not require producer
business entities to be licensed should adjust the language of the Amendment in a manner consistent with their statutory
framework, if necessary, to ensure that individual licenses make the required disclosures when compensation is made to the
licensee’s unlicensed corporate employer.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix B
RECOMMENDATIONS FOOR THE COMM MERCIAL LINES

S MULTI-STATTE EXEMPTIONN AND
COMMISSIION SHARING L AWS
ED BY THE PRO
ADOPTE ODUCER LICEN NSING WORKINNG GROUP: NOOVEMBER 17, 2
2008
ADOPTE OMMITTEE, NO
ED BY THE D CO OVEMBER 20, 2
2008
T
TO: NAIIC Officers and
d the Market Regulation
R & Consumer
C Affaiirs (D) Committtee
F
FROM: Ann
ne Marie Narcini, Chair of thee Producer Liccensing Workinng (D) Group
R
RE: Com
mmercial Liness Multi-State Exemption
E and Commission S
Sharing Laws
AAs part of the 2008

2 f the Producer Licensing (D
charges for D) Working G Group (PLWG)), the NAIC offficers asked thhe working
ggroup to evaluuate the key finndings and isssues regarding full adoption,, and uniform interpretation of the commeercial lines
mmulti-state exemmption and thee commission sharing
s exempption across all states; providee further guidaance on areas oof disparate
innterpretations and application
ns and continu
ue to encouragee all states to addopt these exem
mptions
P
Process for Co
ompletion of Charge
C
DDuring July annd August, a team

t of regulaators from Alaska, District of Columbia, Virginia, Maaryland, Kentuucky, Utah,
MMississippi, Michigan,
M Califo
fornia and Neww Jersey met byb conference call to discusss the aggregaate findings, reeview prior
ssurveys and prrepare recommmendations. Linnda Brunette of Alaska led thhe Task Team
m. The draft waas then postedd for public
ccomment on th he NAIC webssite and the Working
W Group
p discussed thee document duuring conferennce calls in Noovember of
22008.
C
Commercial Lines
L Multi-State Exemption
n
TThe task team observed that most problems with the mullti-state exempption appearedd related to surpplus lines rathher than the
aadmitted markeet. In 2007 thee Surplus Liness Subgroup of PLWG review wed this issue and reported thhat the majoritty of states
rrequire a nonreesident propertyy and casualty license in ordeer for a surpluss lines placemeent to be made.. Of the states rresponding
too a survey at that
t time, only
y seven (7) included surplus lines in the coommercial mullti-state exempption. Issues suurrounding
thhe inclusion off surplus lines in a commerciial multi-state exemptions annd the perceiveed need for a liicense due to ppayment of
ppremium taxes may affect otther Committeees such as the Surplus Liness (C) Task Forrce. We thereffore recommennd that any
cconsideration of
o expanding th he exemption too include surpluus lines be cooordinated with tthe Task Forcee.
T
The Producer Licensing
L Asseessment Aggreegate Report staates that at leaast forty five (445) states havee adopted the ccommercial
liines multi-statte exemption. It is our reccommendation n that the adopption of this language be cconsidered a U Uniformity
S
Standard. We recommend
r thee following new
w standard:
338. Commerciaal Line Multi-S

State Exemption
n
T
The state must adopt Section 4B (6) of the Producer
P Licen
nsing Model Acct which statess:
A person who is no ot a resident ofo this state wh ho sells, soliciits or negotiatees a contract oof insurance ffor
commmercial property y and casualty y risks to an innsured with riisks located inn more than onne state insureed
under that contract, provided that that
t person is otherwise licennsed as an insuurance produceer to sell, soliccit
or neggotiate that insurance in the state
s where thee insured mainntains its princcipal place of bbusiness and thhe
contraact of insurancee insures risks located in that state;
T
This exemption
n applies at a minimum
m to adm
mitted businesss.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Commission Sharing
Subsection 13D of the Producer Licensing Model Act sets forth the following:
An insurer or insurance producer may pay or assign commissions, service fees, brokerages or other
valuable consideration to an insurance agency or to persons who do not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance
in this state, unless the payment would violate [insert appropriate reference to state law (i.e., citation to
anti-rebating statute, if applicable)].
The Producer Licensing Assessment Aggregate Report stated that while the application of this exemption will be fact-
specific, states should review this exemption and work toward a general statement of interpretation to help eliminate the
current confusion in the marketplace.
We view the problem as two-fold: 1) Not all states have adopted Subsection 13D of the PLMA and 2) States that have
adopted it may not all interpret the provision in a uniform manner.
In a survey conducted by the PLWG in 2006, forty-four (44) jurisdictions responded and twenty-eight (28) reported they
adopted this provision of PLMA. We believe that the lack of uniform implementation of this provision results in confusion
in the marketplace as well as inefficiencies and a burden on resources both for regulators and the industry. This confusion
may be eliminated in part if it is clarified that the reference to the anti-rebating statute is not exclusive but may refer to other
state laws that limit the scope of Subsection 13D. Therefore, we recommend that the requirement to adopt Section 13D of the
PLMA be added as a Uniform Standard and that the Uniformity Subgroup of PLWG work with the states that have not
adopted this provision to identify the barriers to adoption and encourage legislative change to incorporate the provision.
We recommend the following new standard:
39. Commission Sharing
The state must adopt Section 13D of the Producer Licensing Model Act which states:
An insurer or insurance producer may pay or assign commissions, service fees, brokerages or other
valuable consideration to an insurance agency or to persons who do not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance
in this state, unless the payment would violate [insert appropriate reference to state law (i.e., citation to
anti-rebating statute, if applicable)].
Reference to the anti-rebating statute is not exclusive but may refer to other state laws that limit the scope of Subsection 13D.
It has been reported anecdotally that some states that have already adopted this provision, make a distinction between so
called “override commissions” and other forms of compensation, or allow individuals to receive commissions if they do not
sell, solicit or negotiate, but prohibit agencies from doing the same, or limit the exemption to particular lines of insurance.
Subsection 13D of the Producer Licensing Model Act is clear. Any individual or agency can receive commissions, service
fees or any valuable consideration without a license as long as doing so does not violate any other state law, such as anti-
rebating, and the individual or entity does not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance. Individual circumstances may be fact
specific simply because the person or agency must examine the particular conduct and whether the activity involves selling,
solicitation or negotiation as defined in PLMA; however, if it is determined that the activity does not involve the sale,
solicitation or negotiation of insurance, any jurisdiction that has adopted this subsection should not require a license.
The following are three examples of scenarios where a license would not be required to receive commission or other valuable
consideration.
Example 1
A person authorized by the insurer to oversee or supervise producers with no involvement whatsoever in the sale, solicitation,
or negotiation of insurance who receives only an override commission for business produced by the producer whom the
person oversees or supervises, is not required to be licensed or hold an appointment with the insurer paying the commission.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Example 2
An insurer or producer may pay or assign a commission, service fee, brokerages or other valuable consideration to a business
entity or an individual that does not sell, solicit, or negotiate insurance as long as the payment does not violate the state's
insurance laws.
Example 3
If an individual does not use a business entity's name for any sales, solicitations, or negotiations for insurance business, the
business entity would not be required to be licensed as long as the business entity does not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance.
Solicitation would include any written or verbal communication as well as executed contracts issued in the business entity's
name that authorize the producer to act as the insurer's agent or the client's broker.
It is our recommendation that states use this guidance and examples of when a license is not required to receive commissions
or other valuable consideration in rendering determinations regarding a need for licensure.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix C
Continuing Education Reciprocity
On July 1, 1998, the Midwest Zone launched a project to simplify continuing education (CE) course approval filings for
regulators and CE providers. Members of the Midwest Zone signed a reciprocity agreement that provides, in essence, that
one member state will accept the CE credit award given to a course by another member state. As of March 31, 2004, 46 states
and the District of Columbia had signed an addendum to the Midwest Zone Declaration regarding CE course approval and
had agreed to participate in what is now referred to as the NAIC CE Reciprocity (CER) process. The agreement does not
require any state to accept CE filings that are not otherwise approvable. For example, if a state does not award CE credit for a
topic such as sales and marketing, that state is not required to give credits to that portion of a course that includes the
prohibited topic. If your state is interested in participating, the process is as follows:
 Review the information and forms on the NAIC Web site.

 Make any needed changes in policies or forms to comply with the agreement.
 The commissioner signs an addendum to the NAIC CE Reciprocity Agreement and forwards it to the Midwest Zone
Chair. Please include a letter stating the date your state will be prepared to accept reciprocity filings.
 The Midwest Zone will act on requests to join the project at Zone meetings held at the NAIC quarterly national
meetings.
 Inform your providers of the start date for reciprocity filings.
For the most current information, check the Producer Licensing (D) Task Force page on the NAIC Web site.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Secction I – Appendix D
CONTINUINNG EDUCATIION (CE) STA ANDARDIZE D TERMS—D DEFINITIONNS

Adopteed by the Prod
ducer Licensing
g (EX) Workingg Group Aug. 225, 2013
Ado
opted by the Prroducer Licensing (EX) Task Force Nov. 200 2013
 Classrooom (a.k.a. syn nchronous, co ontact) – Courrse activities oor informationn occurring inn real time at a
specific time, date an nd place, and d delivered viia Internet orr in person, such as but not limited tto
seminar/wworkshop, web binar, virtual class
c or teleconference (see CER form). Student attendaance is based oon
personallly identifiable information (ee.g., usernamee, password, em mail, governm
ment-issued ideentification, annd
signaturee) and student participation
p orr interaction with
w course actiivities. Classrooom courses doo not require aan
examinattion.
 Complettion Date – Thee date on which

h the student completes the ccourse includinng passing any required exam
m.
 Course – A self-study or classroom presentation

p off information oon insurance annd/or risk management topics,
d in person, in print or electrronically, whicch may be inteeractive or nott, with successsful completioon
delivered
measuredd either by atten
ndance (classro
oom) or by exaamination/assesssment (self-stuudy).
 Course Completion
C Roster
R – A lissting of course completionss, provided in a format deteermined by thhe
Departmeent, which includes the studeent’s name, naational produceer and/or licennse number, prrovider number,
course nu
umber, and cou
urse completionn date.
 Course Difficulty
D Level – Course difficulty level isi determined bbased on wheth ther the course is designed foor
inexperieenced or experiienced practitioners, as well as the amountt of informatioon presented annd at what pacce
the inform
mation is preseented.
o Basic: A course designed for entrry-level practitiioners or practiitioners new too the subject maatter.
o Interrmediate: A co ourse designed
d for practitioneers who have eexisting compeetence in the suubject area andd
who seek to furtheer develop and apply their skills.
o Adva anced: A course designed forr practitioners who have a strrong foundatioon and high levvel of
comp petence in the subject matter..
 Course Offering
O – An approved syncchronous event with a specificc start and end time.
 Interactiive – Course includes

i regulaarly occurring opportunities for student paarticipation, enngagement, annd
interactio
on with or in co
ourse activitiess and informattion. Exampless include but aare not limited to question annd
answer seessions, polling
g, games, sequencing, and maatching exercisses.
 Instructoor – A subjecct matter experrt presenting course

c activitiees or informattion in a contaact/synchronouus
course (in
n person or viaa Internet). Thee provider musst select an insttructor that is ccompetent to teeach the coursee.
Regulatorr review and approval is optional
o but iss not requiredd. Instructors/i /instructor appprovals are noot
required for
f non-contacct/asynchronou us courses.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Online Course – An asynchronous/non-contact program of study where activities and information are delivered in a
recorded, streaming, or multimedia format that concludes with an examination/assessment. Course may alternatively
require frequent interaction with courseware as a condition of progressing through the course material, with
chapter/section quizzes providing continuous feedback on learning. Personally identifiable information (e.g., username,
password, email) and interactivity. Credit for course is based on attendance and activity, not examination.
 Proctor – A disinterested third party, with minimum age of 18 years old who can be any person except for family
members or individuals who have a financial interest in the student’s success on the exam. Co-worker proctors must not
be above or below in the student’s line of supervision.
 Proctor Affidavit/Certification – When a student successfully completes a self-study final exam, the proctor must sign
an affidavit/certification attesting that the student completed the exam without assistance from any person, course
material, or reference material. In addition, proctors must provide their name, address, and phone number to the exam
provider. Affidavits/certifications may be administered and signed electronically.
 Self-study (a.k.a. asynchronous, non-contact) – Course activities or information delivered outside of real time
(recorded or otherwise similarly accessible) and available at any time, such as but not limited to correspondence, online
training, video, audio, CD, or DVD (see CER form). Student attendance is verified based on identity (e.g., username,
password, email, signature) and successful completion of knowledge assessments or an examination. Self-study courses
do not require interaction with instructors.
 Synchronous vs. Asynchronous – A distinction between programs of study that are either “live” or “self-study.”
Synchronous learning happens in real time and requires students and instructors to be online (or in class) at the same
time. Asynchronous learning involves study materials, assignments and examinations/assessments that can be accessed
by students at any time.
 Teleconference (a.k.a. video conference or Web conference) – A type of classroom study featuring the live exchange
of information among several persons who are remote from one another but linked by telecommunications and featuring
audio, video, and/or data-sharing and offering opportunities for learner/instructor/facilitator interaction. A synchronous
program of study having a specific start time and end time that validates student attendance through personally-
identifiable information (e.g. username, password, email) and interactivity. Credit for course is based on attendance and
activity, not examination.
 Virtual Class/Webinar – A type of classroom study that is instructor-led, delivered using the Internet to remote
attendees, with a specific start time and end time, in which students enroll before gaining access to the instructor,
information, and course activities. Student attendance is monitored and validated based on personally identifiable
information (e.g., username, password, email) and student participation in interactive exercises is required. Credit for
course is based on attendance and activity, not examination.
W:\National Meetings\2013\Fall\TF\PLTF\NAIC CE Standardized Terms - Definitions 112013.docx

________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III – Section I – Appendix E
12.10.16
PRELICENSING EDUCATION STANDARDIZED TERMS & DEFINITIONS

Adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group and Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force 12.10.16
• Classroom (a.k.a. synchronous, contact) – Course activities or information occurring in real time at a specific
time, date and place, and delivered via Internet or in person, such as but not limited to seminar/workshop, webinar,
virtual class or teleconference. Student attendance is based on personally identifiable information (e.g., username,
password, email, government-issued identification, and signature) and student participation or interaction with
course activities.
• Completion Date - The completion date is the date on which the student completes all of the required elements of
the course including passing any required exam.
• Content Outline – A summary of all of the topics and subtopics that will be tested on a license exam. Content
outlines should be developed for each major line of authority by the state in conjunction with the testing service
according to testing industry best practices.
• Course – A self-study or classroom presentation of information on entry level insurance topics, delivered in person,
in print or electronically, which may or may not be interactive.
• Course Completion Roster – A listing of course completions, provided in a format determined by the Department,
which includes at a minimum the student’s name, provider number, course name, course number (if applicable), and
course completion date.
• Course Offering – An approved synchronous event with a specific start and end time.
• Interactive – Course includes regularly occurring opportunities for student participation, engagement, and
interaction with or in course activities and course information. Examples include, but are not limited to, question and
answer sessions, polling, games, sequencing, and matching exercises.
• Instructor – A subject matter expert presenting course activities or information in a contact/synchronous course (in
person or via Internet). The provider must select an instructor that is competent to teach the course. Regulator
review and approval is optional but is not required.
• Job Analysis – The creation of a valid, reliable and legally defensible license exam depends on a job analysis
survey that includes input from regulators and subject matter experts to identify the requirements and work
performed by an entry-level insurance candidate. The testing service vendors are responsible for performing job
analysis surveys at regular intervals.
• License Exam – A test used to determine eligibility for an insurance producer license and that measures the
minimum competency required for a candidate to perform at an entry level. License exams should be created
according to industry-recognized test development practices. A fair and valid state-based test should incorporate
knowledge, skills, and abilities that measure state-specific and product expertise based on the line of authority
sought. License exams should differentiate between candidates who are minimally qualified/competent to be an entry-
level insurance producer and those who are not.
• Minimally Qualified/Competent – The baseline entry-level knowledge that a candidate must demonstrate in order
to successfully pass a license exam and become an insurance producer.
• Online Course – An asynchronous/non-contact program of study where activities and information are delivered in a
recorded, streaming, or multimedia format that concludes with an examination/assessment, if required.

_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
• Passing Score – A passing score, sometimes called a “cut score,” is the minimum score one needs to achieve in order to
pass the exam.
• Pass Rate –The percentage of candidates who pass the exam, usually measured as “First Time Pass Rate” or “Overall
Pass Rate”. First time pass rate is defined as the percentage of candidates who pass the entire exam on their first
attempt. Overall pass rate is the percentage of candidates who pass the entire exam, including repeat attempts and/or
multiple attempts by the same candidate.
• Proctor – A disinterested third party, with a minimum age of 18 years, who can be any person except for family
members or individuals who have a financial interest in the student’s success on the exam. Co-worker proctors must not
be above or below in the student’s line of supervision.
• Proctor Affidavit/Certification – When a student successfully completes a self-study final exam, the proctor must
sign an affidavit/certification attesting that the student completed the exam without assistance from any person,
course material, or reference material. In addition, proctors must provide their name, address, and phone number to
the exam provider. Affidavits/certifications may be administered and signed electronically.
• Self-study (a.k.a. asynchronous, non-contact) – Course activities or information delivered outside of real time
(recorded or otherwise similarly accessible) and available at any time, such as but not limited to correspondence,
online training, video, audio, CD, or DVD.
• Synchronous vs. Asynchronous – A distinction between programs of study that are either “live” or “self-study.”
Synchronous learning happens in real time and requires students and instructors to be participating online (or in
class) at the same time. Asynchronous learning involves study materials, assignments and examinations/assessments
that can be accessed by students at any time.
• Teleconference (a.k.a. video conference or Web conference) – A type of classroom study featuring the live
exchange of information among several persons who are remote from one another but linked by telecommunications
and featuring audio, video, and/or data-sharing and offering opportunities for learner/instructor/facilitator
interaction. A synchronous program of study having a specific start time and end time that validates student
attendance through personally-identifiable information (e.g. username, password, email) and interactivity.
• Virtual Class/Webinar – A type of classroom study that is instructor-led, delivered using the Internet to remote
attendees with a specific start time and end time, in which students enroll before gaining access to the instructor,
information, and course activities. Student attendance is monitored and validated based on personally identifiable
information (e.g., username, password, email) and student participation in interactive exercises is required.
W:\National Meetings\2016\Fall\TF\PLTF\PLWG\National Meetig Material\Meeting Materials\NAIC Prelicensing Standardized Terms - Definitions - Clean
- Adopted by PLWG-PLTF 12.10.16 FINAL.docx

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix F
E Recommended G
Guidelines for O
Online Coursees
Adopted
A by the Producer
P Licensing (EX) Workingg Group on Marrch 29, 2015
Adopted by thee Producer Licen
nsing (EX) Task Force on Marchh 29, 2015
G
Goal: To deliv
ver functional computer-base
c d internet courrses that offer qquality insurannce and/or risk management m
material in
a password-pro
otected online environment.
e
K
Key Componeents:
 Materiial that is curreent, relevant, acccurate, and thaat includes valiid reference m
materials, graphiics and interacttivity.
 Clearly defined objectives and course completion n criteria
 Speciffic instructions to register, naavigate and com mplete the courrse work
 Techn nical support/prrovider represeentative should d be available dduring businesss hours and ressponse provided within
24houurs of initial conntact.
 Instrucctors/subject matter
m experts must
m be availab ble to answer sttudent questionns during proviider business hhours
 Processs to authenticaate student iden ntity such as paasswords and ssecurity promptts
 Metho od for measurin ng the student’s successful co ompletion of coourse which inncludes the matterial, exam annd any
procto
or requirementss.
 Processs for requestin ng and receivin ng CE course-ccompletion certtificate and repporting studentt results to the
approppriate regulatorr
 Requirre each agent to t enroll for thee course beforee having accesss to course matterial.
 Preven nt access to thee course exam before
b review of the course m materials.
 Preven nt downloading g of any coursee exam.
 Providde review questions at the end m until each set of
d of each unit/cchapter and preevent access too the final exam
questio
ons are answerred at a 70% raate.
 Providde final exam questions
q that do
d not duplicatee unit/chapter qquestions.
 Preven nt alternately accessing
a coursse materials and d course examms. This does noot apply if the state allows foor “open
book” exams.
 Have monitor
m affidaavit containing specific monittor duties and rresponsibilitiess printed for m monitor’s use too direct the
taking
g of the final ex xam. Monitor will complete the affidavit aafter the exam is completed. (This only forr states that
require a monitored exam).
e

F
Final Assessment (exam) Crriteria:
 Minimum of 10 questions for 1 credit hour h course witth additional 5 questions for eeach subsequennt credit hour aand a
score of 700% or greater
 At least en nough questions to fashion a minimum
m of 2 versions with a least 50% off questions beinng new/differennt in each
subsequentt version
 Inability too print the exam
m or to view thhe exam prior too reviewing maaterial
 Proctor, if required by the state, who veerifies identity by photo identtification and pprocesses affidavit testifying the
student recceived no outside assistance
Procedures to determine Ap
P ppropriate Nu
umber of Cred
dit Hours:
W
Word Count/Diifficulty Level
 Divide totaal number of words
w by 180 (d
documented aveerage reading ttime) = numbeer of minutes too read material
 Divide num mber of minutees by 50 = cred dit hours
 Course diffficulty level is identified by the
t CE provideer on the CER fform and shouuld be based onn the NAIC CE E
Standardizzed Terms-Defiinitions for bassic, intermediatte and advanced course difficculty levels.
 Multiply number
n of hourrs by 1.00 for a basic level course; 1.25 for aan intermediate level; 1.50 foor an advancedd course for
additional study time = tootal number off credit hours (ffractional hourrs rounded up iif .50 or abovee and rounded ddown if .49
or less)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Interactive Course Content

 Elements included in the online course, in addition to text, such as video, animation, interactive exercises, quizzes, case
studies, games, and simulations.
 Interactive elements should be applicable to course material and facilitate student learning.
 Only mandatory interactive elements should be included in the calculation of CE credit hours.
 Calculation of CE hour credits should be based on the run time of the interactive elements.
 CE providers will indicate run time of the interactive elements in the course content and upon request provide access to
the state for review of the course.
Professional Designation Course

 Course that is part of a nationally recognized professional designation
 Credit hours equivalent to hours assigned to the same classroom course material
Final Assessment
 Time spent completing the final assessment should not be used in calculation of CE credit hours.
Adopted by the NAIC Membership 2015
W:\Spring15\TF\PLTF\PLWG\UE\CE - Recommended Guidelines for Online Courses - Clean - Adopted by PLWG 3.29.15.docx

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix G
D
Date: 8/26/16
NA
AIC – Continu uing Education n Classroom C Course Recom mmendations
Adop
pted by the Pro
oducer Licensiing (EX) Workiking Group on M May 16, 2016.
Ado
opted by the Prroducer Licenssing (EX) Taskk Force on Auggust 26, 2016.
1. The deecision whetheer to use electro

onic devices fo
or synchronouss contact coursees should be leeft to the discreetion of the
educattion provider.
2. States that require an

n education provider to submmit notificationn of a course offering should require it to bbe provided
no moore than 10 caleendar days in advance
a of the course offeringg date.
3. States that require an

n education pro
ovider to give the
t state notificcation of a couurse offering caancellation shoould require
it to be
b provided no o more than 5 calendar days in advance off the course offfering date. Thhis requiremennt does not
apply to emergency cancellations
c due
d to adverse weather,
w instruuctor illness, orr other unforeseeen events.
4. An edducation providder should be considered

c in compliance
c if tthe state speciffied course completion rosteer reporting
timefrrames are met as
a a regular bu
usiness practicee. The state shhould consider reporting exceeptions on a caase by case
basis and
a grant allowwances to courrse completionn roster reportinng timeframes if the delay w was due to factors outside
of the education prov
viders control or
o an unusual processing
p issuue.
5. States should establiish proceduress to audit classsroom courses either directlyy or through a third party veendor. The
coursee should be mo
onitored for apppropriate courrse time, adherrence to coursee content outliine, student atttention and
attend
dance.
6. State that required an education provider

p to au
uthenticate ideentify of attenddees should alllow them disscretions in
proced dures such as check of gov vernment issuued photo ID, company isssued photo ID D, conference ID badge,
attestaation of compan
ny/association representative,, etc.
W
W:\National Meetin
ngs\2016\Summerr\TF\PLTF\PLTF\N
NAIC CE Classroom Course Recom
mmendations - Adoopted by the PLTF
F 8.26.16.docx

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix H

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
INSTRUCTION SHEET
NOTE: This course may NOT be advertised or offered as approved in the state to which application has been
made until approval has been received from the Insurance Department.
1. If you are a PROVIDER filing for approval from the Home State:
1.1 Complete all the fields in the “Provider Information” section except “Reciprocal State” and the
adjacent “Provider #” fields.
1.2 Complete the Course Information Section.
1.3 In the “Credit Hours Requested and Course/Hours Decision” section, complete the “Hrs.
Requested by Provider” columns, detailing in the respective columns the number of hours for sales
– and marketing-related instruction and the number of hours for other insurance-related instruction.
Please note the following:
1.3.1 When using this application, which is governed by the NAIC CE Reciprocity
Agreement in conjunction with ‘states’ laws, only whole numbers of credit hours will be
approved – partial hours will be eliminated.
1.3.2 States that approve sales/marketing topics will consider the hours in the “sales/Mktg”
column and the hours in the “Insurance” column when deciding the number of hours to
approve. States that do not permit sales/marketing topics as part of continuing education credit
hours will only consider the hours shown in the “Insurance” column when making their credit-
hour approval decisions.
1.3.3 Contact the individual state to determine whether there are any specific requirements
for submitting insurance adjuster courses.
1.4 Submit the application form along with required course materials, a detailed course outline,
instructor information, if required, and the required course application fee. Refer to website below for
instructor information
(www.naic.org/documents/urtt_cer_CE_Matrix.xls).
2. If you are a PROVIDER filing for approval from a Reciprocal State:
2.1 Make a sufficient number of photocopies of the Home State approval form to enable you to
submit a copy of this application to each of the Reciprocal States where you are seeking credit.
2.2 On each application, write the Reciprocal State and the provider number assigned to you by that
state in the “Reciprocal State” and adjacent “Provider #” fields.
2.3 Send the CER application, home state approval, if home state issues one, a detailed course
outline, and the required fee to the reciprocal state. If this is a National Course *, the Providers will be
allowed to submit an agenda which must include date, time, each topic and event location in lieu of a
detailed course outline.
2.4 Subsequent national course offerings should only be reported for events that are conducted in
the “home” state.
* National Course is defined as an approved program of instruction in insurance related topics, offered by an
approved provider, and leads to a national professional designation or is a course offered to individuals who must
update their designation once it is earned.
3. If you are a HOME STATE or the designated Representative of the Home State:
3.1 After reviewing the course materials, complete the “Hrs Approved by Home State” column.
3.2 Enter the date of approval, course # assigned, course approval expiration date. Sign the CER
Form OR attach the home state approval form.
3.3 If the class is not approved, note it on the bottom of the CER Form.
4. If you are the RECIPROCAL STATE or designated representative of the Reciprocal State:
4.1 After reviewing “Hrs approved by Home State” complete the “Hrs Approved by Reciprocal
State”.
4.2 Enter the date of approval, course number assigned, course approval expiration date. Sign the
CER Form OR attach the reciprocal state approval form.
4.3 If the class is not approved, note it on the bottom of the CER Form.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix I
NAIC - Course Guidelines for Classroom Webinar/Webcast Delivery

Adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force Aug. 1, 2014
 These guidelines are intended to apply to courses conducted and viewed in real time (live) in all locations and are not
intended to apply when courses have been recorded and are viewed at a later time or to other online courses.
 Each student will be required to log in to the webinar using a distinct user name, password and/or email. Students
that view webinars in group settings, which is two or more individuals, should alternatively verify their participation
in the form of sign-in and sign-out sheets submitted by a monitor with an attestation or verification code.
 The provider will verify the identity and license number, or National Producer Number (NPN), of all students.
 A provider representative, using computer-based attendance-monitoring technology, must monitor attendance

throughout the course.
 The provider must have a process to determine when a participant is inactive or not fully participating, such as when
the screen is minimized, or the participant does not answer the polling questions and/or verification codes.
 For webinars not given in a group setting, no less than two polling questions and/or attendance verification codes
must be asked, with appropriate responses provided, at unannounced intervals during each one-hour webinar session
to determine participant attentiveness.
 The provider will maintain an electronic roster to include records for each participant’s log-in/log-out times. If
required by the jurisdiction, chat history and polling responses should be captured as part of the electronic records.
 When a student is deemed inactive, or not fully participating in the course by the course monitor for failure to enter
appropriate polling question responses or verification codes, continuing education (CE) credit is denied.
 All students and the instructor do not need to be in the same location.
 Students in all locations must be able to interact in real time with the instructor. Students should be able to submit
questions and/or comments at any point during the webinar session.
 The course pace must be set by the instructor and must not allow for independent completion.
 Instruction time is considered the amount of time devoted to the actual course instruction and does not include
breaks, lunch, dinner or introductions of speakers.
 One credit will be awarded for each 50 minutes of webinar/webcast instruction, and the minimum number of credits
that will be awarded for a webinar/webcast course is one credit.
 The provider must have a procedure that informs each student in advance of course participation requirements and
consequences for failing to actively participate in the course.
 A comprehensive final examination is not required.
Note: Once a webinar program is recorded or archived for future presentation, it will continue to be considered a webinar
program only where a live subject-matter expert facilitates the recorded presentation in real time. Recorded presentations
should be scheduled with a specific start and end time and satisfy the other applicable attendance guidelines.
W:\National Meetings\2014\Summer\TF\PLTF\PLWG\CE\CE WebinarWebcast Guidelinses\NAIC Course Guidelines for Classroom WebinarWebcast Delivery - (Clean)Adopted
by PLTF 8.1.14 .docx

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix J
NAIC EMERGENCY INDEPENDENT ADJUSTER

BEST PRACTICES AND GUIDELINES
Adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force Nov. 17, 2014
Adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group Nov. 17, 2014
RECOMMENDED GUIDELINES AND BEST PRACTICES FOR REGULATORS
1. Adopt Section 5 of the Independent Adjuster Licensing Guideline (#1224) to ensure consistency with standards and
requirements.
2. License/Registration Qualification: Require the individual to be licensed in his/her home state or a designated home
state.
3. Create an electronic filing process for emergency/catastrophic adjusters. A state may consider utilizing the NIPR by
updating state-specific business rules to allow for these types/classes of licenses or registrations or by contract with a
third-party vendor.
4. Submit emergency/catastrophic adjuster information to the NAIC Producer Database (PDB). This may occur by
reviewing and updating the state-specific business rules on file with the NIPR.
5. Ensure that the automated notification process is off-site, and preferably out of state, so that if the emergency occurs
locally, adequate resources will be available to respond and issue approval to the emergency/catastrophic adjusters.
6. Develop NAIC uniform emergency/catastrophic adjuster applications/registrations consistent with the adopted
guidelines. Until such time the application/registration is developed, the states should use the NAIC Uniform
Application for Individual Adjuster or Apprentice License/Registration for individuals and business entities.
7. Work with state officials responsible for the oversight of emergency situations to coordinate its activities to determine
if any other credentials (such as a photo ID and/or badge) are required.
8. Establish an “incident commander” for each disaster. Individuals wishing to access an emergency area must determine
who the incident commander is in order to request and obtain permission to enter the scene. This person would
determine who can access an area for purposes of adjusting, no matter what part of the country, including federal or
tribal lands, and across state borders or countries (e.g., Canada). The incident commander would be responsible for the
safety of all concerned and for the integrity of the scene and, as such, would be the ultimate authority for access to an
emergency area.
9. Establish a one-time fee (if applicable) for a specified time period and not per disaster.
10. Require either the insurer for whom the emergency adjuster represents (or an individual or business entity independent
adjuster licensed in the state where the catastrophe has been declared) be responsible for the work performed by the
emergency adjuster.
OTHER ISSUES TO CONSIDER/CROSS JURISDICTIONAL ISSUES
 Process to obtain permission, certifications or approval on tribal lands and/or federal lands.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Create a national Emergency Adjuster Database (NIPR/NAIC to create a central repository for emergency/catastrophic
adjuster registration). Use of the database would be optional for the states; however, data elements would NOT be
customized per state.
2. Create a national ID card (license with photo/disaster ID number. Determine whether this is this feasible, given that
most licenses are now available for printing online.
3. Create a prior-approval process so that, when an emergency is triggered, the emergency/catastrophic adjuster has been
preapproved by the state(s), the approval is posted online and the adjuster is ready for deployment.
4. Create a separate emergency/catastrophic adjuster licensing number system, which would be used in the Emergency
Adjuster Database.
5. Post a listing of the states that need emergency/catastrophic adjusters. Provide the type of disaster and what companies
and/or federal agencies to contact in order to provide assistance with the disaster.
6. Allow an individual to post his/her permissions and/or certifications—such as Crop Adjuster Proficiency Program
(CAPP) accreditation—for federal (national parks or forests) and/or tribal access permissions.
7. Determine whether the NAIC can post emergency/catastrophic adjuster requirements based on where the catastrophe
is or whether this the companies’ responsibility.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Secction I – Appendix K
NAIC IN
NDEPENDE
ENT ADJUS
STER RECIIPROCITY
Y BEST PRA
ACTICES & GUIDELINES
Adoptted by the Prod
ducer Licensing
g (EX) Working
g Group and P
Producer Licennsing (EX) Tassk Force 11.4.111
OOne of the 2011 charges for th he Producer Liicensing Workking Group (PL LWG) is to conntinue with its w
work in achievving
uuniformity in liicensing, with a focus on developing best prractices and guuidelines for addjusters.
IIn most jurisdiictions where liicensure is requ

uired, it is the “home state” rregulator that aassesses the quaalification of itts resident
aadjusters. Based on securing a license in onee’s home state,, many states w will grant a com
mparable or simmilar nonresideent license.
WWhile many staates offer vario ous types of adjjuster licenses,, there are nummerous inconsisstencies from sstate to state thaat have
ccreated a complex, cumbersom me, non-uniforrm, non-recipro ocal license ennvironment. Too facilitate the llicensing of inddependent
aadjusters and fo or jurisdictionss to have a com
mfort level with h adjuster licennse requiremennts establishmennt of a reciproccal license
pprocess is necessary.
TTo transition in
nto and create a more reciproccal and ultimattely, uniform liicense environm ment for adjusster licensing, aall
juurisdictions aree encouraged to
t utilize the vaarious tools thaat have been deeveloped and aadopted in achiieving these gooals.
AAlthough not mandated
m or ideentified in any laws, in terms of the general reciprocity fraamework that iis modeled afteer and
cconsistent for producers,
p to acchieve reciproccity for non-ressident adjuster licensing, a juurisdiction musst satisfy the foollowing
twwo (2) conditioons:
((1) Permit an addjuster with a license

l for inveestigating, negotiating, or setttling claims inn its home Statee to receive a nnon-
rresident to the same
s extent thaat the adjuster is permitted to
o investigate, nnegotiate, or setttle claims in itts home State, if the
hhome State also o licenses recip
procally, withoout satisfying anny additional rrequirements oother than subm mitting (A) a reequest for
liicensure; (B) th
he application for licensure; (C)
( proof of liccensure and goood standing inn home State; aand (D) successsful
ccompletion of ana adjuster exaam; (E) paymen nt of any requisite fee and othher requiremennts such as stanndards of conduuct
ddescribed in Seection 15 of thee Independent Adjuster
A Guideelines, and
((2) Acceptancee of an adjusterr’s satisfaction of its home Staate’s continuinng education

rrequirements ass satisfying thaat State’s continnuing educatio
on requirementts, provided thaat the home Staate recognizes continuing
eeducation satisffaction on a recciprocal basis.
IIn order to provide jurisdictio

ons with a moddel for meetingg these reciproccity requiremennts, in June 2008, the NAIC aadopted
thhe Independen nt Adjuster Guiidelines. The Guidelines
G serv
ve as the primarry vehicle for SStates not onlyy to achieve recciprocity,
bbut also takes major
m steps tow
ward reaching uniformity.
u Wiith respect to reeciprocity, the Guidelines proovides for streaamlined
aadministrative licensing
l requiirements, license qualification
ns, and reciproocal recognitionn of continuingg education, ammong other
thhings. The goaal is to developp best practices and guidelines that provide cconsistency in license requireements to allow w for
rreciprocal
liicensing for inndependent adju usters. This document addressses administraative licensing rrequirements tto facilitate thee
aapplication and d renewal proceess for indepenndent adjuster licensing.
l
RReciprocity Fraamework
TThe Producer Licensing
L Work king Group (PLLWG) recomm mends the folloowing framewoork for measuriing whether a S
State is
rreciprocal on sp
pecific non-ressident independ
dent adjuster licensing requirrements.
1
1. Adopt key n the Independeent Adjuster Guidelines to ennsure consistenncy with standaards and requirrements.
y provisions in
Provision
ns include, but are
a not limited
d to
A. Deffinitions – hom
me state, individdual, business entity,
e indepenndent adjuster, U Uniform Indivvidual Applicattion and
Uniform Business Entity Applicaation. Add a neew definition oof “Designatedd Home State” to read, “Desiggnated
Homme State is thee state in which
h the adjuster does
d not maintaain his, her or iits principal plaace of residencce or
busiiness, and the adjuster
a qualifiied for the licen
nse as if the peerson were a reesident.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Best Practices and Guidelines do not include definitions for public or company (staff) adjusters, however,
states are encouraged to refer to the definition of public adjuster within the Public Adjuster Model Act.
Company (staff) adjuster is defined as a person who is a salaried employee of an insurer or an affiliate of the
insurer, and who is engaged in adjusting insured losses solely for that company or other companies under common
control or ownership.
B. License Qualifications; age, and fitness and character (moral turpitude)
C. Lines of Authority; If a state issues an adjuster license by lines of authority (LOA), lines offered should include
property, casualty, workers compensation, or crop. States are encouraged to license nonresident adjusters for at
least the line of authority held in the home state/designated home state, even if the line of authority held in the
applicant’s home state/designated home state may not precisely align with the lines issued by the nonresident
state.
D. Class of License; states must offer an individual license; business entity licenses are optional and applies only to
states that have a business entity requirement
E. Designation of Home State - A state whose laws permit a nonresident adjuster to designate that state as its home
state, the home state will require the nonresident
to qualify as if the person was a resident (exam requirements; fingerprinting, if required, and CE). Once the
individual has met the qualifications, the designated
home state will issue a nonresident license. The PDB and designated home state will list the record as nonresident,
designated home state.
F. Designation of Home State; Conversion to true Resident State - When an adjuster’s resident state offers an
adjuster license, within 90 days, the adjuster must file an application, proof of licensure and good standing from
the designated nonresident state and fees to qualify for, and obtain the resident adjuster license. The new resident
state should waive exam requirements. The prior designated home state adjuster license should be changed from a
nonresident, designated home state license to a nonresident license.
G. Designation of Home State; Fingerprinting – If a state requires fingerprinting of resident adjusters, a state that
permits a nonresident adjuster to designate that state as its home state shall require fingerprinting of that
nonresident adjuster.
H. Designation of Home State; CE Requirements - A state that permits a nonresident adjuster to designate that state
as its home state, the home state will require and track continuing education compliance for that adjuster.
I. Renewal Process; jurisdictions are encouraged to develop a renewal cycle consistent with what has been
established for producers (biennial basis on the licensee’s month or birth of date of birth. Business entity licenses
will continue on a date certain)
J. Examination Requirements; states must offer a separate test for home state adjusters and shall test the knowledge
for the lines of authority sought, the duties and responsibilities of an adjuster and the home state’s insurance laws
and regulations
K. License Denial, Non-renewal, or Revocation; at a minimum, as defined in Section 12 of independent Adjuster

Guidelines
L. Continuing Education; the home state shall require twenty-four (24) hours of CE with three (3) of the twenty-four
hours covering ethics.
M. Reporting of Actions; the state shall participate in the NAIC Attachments Warehouse, notifications and reporting
of actions; Personal Information Capture System (PICS) alerts or another appropriate mechanism to monitor
actions against existing licensees and take necessary action, when warranted based on the information obtained
through such actions.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
1. Post adjuster license information on state web sites and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)
Producer Database (PDB)
2. Participate in National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR) Adjuster licensing (“Other”) product module that allows
adjusters to electronically apply for initial and renewal of a license.
3. Participate in National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR) Nonresident Adjuster Licensing product module that allows
states to license and track adjusters that designate another state as the home state.
4. Participate in National Insurance Producer Registry Address Change Request (ACR) product module that allows a
licensed adjuster to change their address.
5. A state that offers temporary licensure or registration for Emergency Adjusters shall do so in accordance with the
Independent Adjuster Licensing Guidelines

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix L
INDEPENDENT ADJUSTER LICENSING GUIDELINE
Table of Contents
Section 1. Purpose and Scope

Section 2. Definitions
Section 3. License Required
Section 4. Exceptions to License Requirement
Section 5. Temporary Licensure or Registration for Emergency Independent Adjusters
Section 6. Application for License
Section 7. License
Section 8. Examination
Section 9. Exemptions from Examination
Section 10. Nonresident License
Section 11. Apprentice Independent Adjuster License [Optional]
Section 12. License Denial, Non-Renewal, or Revocation
Section 13. Continuing Education
Section 14. Record Retention
Section 15. Standards of Conduct of Independent Adjusters [Optional]
Section 16. Reporting or Actions
Section 17. Regulations
Section 18. Severability
Section 19. Effective Date
This Guideline governs the qualifications and procedures for licensing independent adjusters. It specifies the duties of and
restrictions on independent adjusters.
Drafting Note: It is recommended that any statute or regulation inconsistent with this Guideline be repealed or amended.
A. “Apprentice independent adjuster” means one who is qualified in all respects as an independent adjuster except as to
experience, education and/or training.
B. “Business entity” means a corporation, association, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability
partnership, or other legal entity.
C. “Catastrophe” means an event that results in large numbers of deaths or injuries; causes extensive damage or
destruction of facilities that provide and sustain human needs; produces an overwhelming demand on state and local
response resources and mechanisms; causes a severe long-term effect on general economic activity; or severely
affects state, local and private sector capabilities to begin and sustain response activities. A catastrophe shall be
declared by the Governor of the state, district, or territory in which the catastrophe occurred.
Drafting Note: Some states may need to expand the authority to include the insurance commissioner or other eligible
governmental or regulatory body, if they are authorized to declare a catastrophe.
D. “Fingerprints” for the purposes of this Guideline, means an impression of the lines on the finger taken for purpose of
identification.
Drafting Note: States that require fingerprinting would incorporate this Section, states that do not require fingerprinting need
to determine if this would apply.
E. “Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the United States in which an independent
adjuster maintains his, her or its principal place of residence or business and is licensed to act as a resident
independent adjuster. If the resident state does not license independent adjusters for the line of authority sought, the

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
independent adjuster shall designate as his, her or its home state any state in which the independent adjuster is
licensed and in good standing.
F. “Independent adjuster” means a person who:
(1) Is an individual, a business entity, an independent contractor, or an employee of a contractor, who contracts
for compensation with insurers or self-insurers;
(2) One whom the insurer’s or self-insurer’s tax treatment of the individual is consistent with that of an
independent contractor rather than as an employee, as defined in the Internal Revenue Code, United States
Code, Title 26, Subtitle C; and
(3) Investigates, negotiates or settles property, casualty or workers’ compensation claims for insurers or for
self-insurers.
G. “Individual” means a natural person.
H. “Insurer” means (insert reference to appropriate section of state law).
I. “Person” means an individual or business entity.
J. “Uniform Individual Application” means the current version of the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC) Uniform Individual Application for resident and nonresident individuals.
K. “Uniform Business Entity Application” means the current version of the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC) Uniform Business Entity Application for resident and nonresident business entities.
Drafting Note: Subsection K is optional and only applies to those states that have a business entity license requirement.
Drafting Note: If any term is similarly defined in a relevant section of the state’s insurance code, do not include the
definition of the term in this Guideline or, in the alternative, reference the statute: “[term] is defined in [insert appropriate
reference to state law or regulation].”
A person shall not act or hold himself out as an independent adjuster in this state unless the person is licensed as an
independent adjuster in accordance with this Guideline, or is exempt from licensure as an independent adjuster under this
Guideline.
Section 4. Exceptions to License Requirement
The definition of independent adjuster shall not be deemed to include, and a license as an independent adjuster shall not be
required of the following:
A. Attorneys-at-law admitted to practice in this state, when acting in their professional capacity as an attorney;
B. A person employed solely to obtain facts surrounding a claim or to furnish technical assistance to a licensed
independent adjuster;
C. An individual who is employed to investigate suspected fraudulent insurance claims but who does not adjust losses
or determine claims payments;
D. A person who solely performs executive, administrative, managerial or clerical duties or any combination thereof
and who does not investigate, negotiate or settle claims with policyholders, claimants or their legal representative;
E. A licensed health care provider or its employee who provides managed care services so longs as the services do not
include the determination of compensability;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
F. A managed care organization or any of its employees or an employee of any organization providing managed care
services so long as the services do not include the determination of compensability;
G. A person who settles only reinsurance or subrogation claims;
H. An officer, director, manager or employee of an authorized insurer, surplus lines insurer, a risk retention group, or
an attorney-in-fact of a reciprocal insurer;
I. A U.S. Manager of the United States branch of an alien insurer;
J. A person who investigates, negotiates or settles life, accident and health, annuity, or disability insurance claims;
K. An individual employee, under a self-insured arrangement, who adjust claims on behalf of their employer;
L. A licensed insurance producer, attorney-in-fact of a reciprocal insurer or managing general agent of the insurer to
whom claim authority has been granted by the insurer;
M. A person authorized to adjust workers’ compensation or disability claims under the authority of a third party
administrator (TPA) license pursuant to [insert applicable licensing statute].
Drafting Note: This Guideline is drafted to eliminate redundant licensure requirements with respect to the activities engaged
in by a licensee. If licensed as an independent adjuster, third party administrator or similar business entity, licensees should
not be required to obtain separate independent adjuster licenses, provided that the types of claims adjusted do not include life,
health, annuity, or disability insurance claims.
Section 5. Temporary Licensure or Registration for Emergency Independent Adjusters
A. In the event of a declared catastrophe, an insurer shall notify the insurance commissioner via an application for
temporary emergency licensure, or registration if temporary emergency licensure is not statutorily required, of each
individual, not already licensed in the state where the catastrophe has been declared, that will act as an emergency
independent adjuster on behalf of the insurer. The insurance commissioner shall establish standards and procedures
to allow for the temporary emergency licensure or registration of an emergency independent adjuster in this state.
B. A person who is otherwise qualified to adjust claims, but not already licensed in this state where the catastrophe has
been declared, may act as an emergency independent adjuster and adjust claims, if, within five days of deployment
to adjust claims arising from the declared catastrophe, the insurer notifies the commissioner by providing the
following information in a format prescribed by the insurance commissioner:
(1) Name of the individual;
(2) Social security number of individual;
(3) Name of insurer the independent adjuster will represent;
(4) Effective date of the contract between the insurer and independent adjuster;
(5)Catastrophe or loss control number;
(6) Catastrophe event name; and
(7) Other information the insurance commissioner deems necessary.
Drafting Note: The participating states, by rule, should clarify the state’s meaning and application of “qualify” as used
Section 5B.
C. An emergency independent adjuster’s license or registration shall remain in force for a period not to exceed 90 days,
unless extended by the insurance commissioner.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Drafting Note: The fee for emergency independent adjuster application for licensure or registration shall be in an amount
determined by the insurance commissioner and shall be due and payable at the time of application for licensure or
registration.
Drafting Note: The insurance commissioner may provide additional provisions that would trigger licensure or registration of
an emergency independent adjuster.
A. An individual applying for a resident independent adjuster license shall make application to the insurance
commissioner on the appropriate NAIC Uniform Individual Application in a format prescribed by the insurance
commissioner and declare under penalty of suspension, revocation or refusal of the license that the statements made
in the application are true, correct and complete to the best of the individual’s knowledge and belief. Before
approving the application, the insurance commissioner shall find that the individual:
(1) Is at least eighteen (18) years of age;
(2) Is eligible to designate this state as his or her home state;
(3) Is trustworthy, reliable and of good reputation, evidence of which shall be determined by the insurance
commissioner;
(4) Has not committed any act that is a ground for probation, suspension, revocation or refusal of an independent
adjuster’s license as set forth in Section 12;
(5) Has completed a prelicensing course of study for the line(s) of authority for which the person has applied, where
required by the insurance commissioner; and
(6) Has successfully passed the examination for the line(s) of authority for which the person has applied;
(7)Has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation.
B. A business entity applying for a resident independent adjuster license shall make application to the insurance
commissioner on the appropriate NAIC Uniform Business Entity Application in a format prescribed by the
insurance commissioner and declare under penalty of suspension, revocation or refusal of the license that the
statements made in the application are true, correct and complete to the best of the business entity’s knowledge and
belief. Before approving the application, the insurance commissioner shall find that the business entity:
(1) Is eligible to designate this state as its home state;
(2) Has designated a licensed independent adjuster responsible for the business entities compliance with the
insurance laws, rules and regulations of this state;
(4) Has not committed an act that is a ground for probation, suspension, revocation or refusal of an
independent adjuster’s license as set forth in Section 12; and
(5) Has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation].
Drafting Note: This Section is optional and applies only to those states that have a business entity requirement.
Drafting Note: Employee of the authorized affiliate insurer may be considered under this exemption with the
Commissioner’s consent.
C. In order to make a determination of license eligibility, the insurance commissioner is authorized to require
fingerprints of applicants and to submit the fingerprints and the fee required to perform the criminal history record
checks to the state identification bureau (or state department of justice public state agency) and the Federal Bureau
of Investigation (FBI) for state and national criminal history record checks.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Drafting Note: The FBI requires that fingerprints be submitted to the state Department of Law Enforcement, Public Safety
or Criminal Justice for a check of state records before the fingerprints are submitted to the FBI for a criminal history record
check. The FBI recommends all fingerprint submissions be in an electronic format. Public Law 92-544 requires specific
parameters to submit fingerprints and obtain criminal history record information. The FBI has approved the language in
Section 6C to authorize a state identification bureau to submit fingerprints on behalf of its applicants in conjunction with
licensing and employment.
D. The insurance commissioner shall require a criminal history record check on each applicant in accordance with this
Guideline. The insurance commissioner shall require each applicant to submit a full set of fingerprints (including a
scanned file from a hard copy fingerprint) in order for the insurance commissioner to obtain and receive national
criminal history records from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services Division.
E. The insurance commissioner may contract for the collection and transmission of fingerprints authorized under this
Guideline. If the insurance commissioner does so, the insurance commissioner may order the fee for collecting and
transmitting fingerprints to be payable directly to the contractor by the applicant. The insurance commissioner may
agree to a reasonable fingerprinting fee to be charged by the contractor.
F. The insurance commissioner shall treat and maintain an applicant's fingerprints and any criminal history record
information obtained under this Guideline as confidential and shall apply security measures consistent with the
Criminal Justice Information Services Division of the Federal Bureau of Investigation standards for the electronic
storage of fingerprints and necessary identifying information and limit the use of records solely to the purposes
authorized in this Guideline. The fingerprints and any criminal history record information shall not be subject to
subpoena, other than one issued in a criminal action or investigation, and shall be confidential.
G. The insurance commissioner is authorized to receive criminal history record information from another government
agency in lieu of the state identification bureau (or state department of justice or other public state agency) that
submitted the fingerprints to the FBI.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted fingerprint requirements for other classes of licenses, it may not necessary to adopt
this language. This provision does not permit the sharing of criminal history record information with the NAIC or other
insurance commissioners as such sharing of information is prohibited by 28 CFR 20.33.
H. The insurance commissioner may require any documents reasonably necessary to verify the information contained
in the application.
Section 7. License
A. Unless denied licensure pursuant to Section 12, persons who have met the requirements of Sections 6 and 8 shall be
issued an independent adjuster license. An independent adjuster may qualify for a license in one or more of the
following lines of authority:
(1) Property and Casualty; or
(2) Workers Compensation; or
(3) Crop.
B. Any person holding a license pursuant to this provision shall not be required to hold any other independent adjuster,
insurance or self-insurance administrator license in this state pursuant to [insert applicable TPA law cross reference]
or any other provision, including, but not limited to, licenses by the [Workers Compensation Commissions, the
Department of Labor or other applicable cross reference] provided that he, she or it does not Guideline as an
independent adjuster with respect to life, health or annuity insurance, other than disability insurance.
Drafting Note: This Guideline is drafted to eliminate redundant licensure requirements with respect to the activities engaged
in by the licensee. If licensed as an independent adjuster, third party administrator or similar business entity additional
licenses should not be required provided that the type of claims adjusted do not include life, health, or annuity insurance
claims, other than disability claims.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. An independent adjuster license shall remain in effect unless probated, suspended, revoked or refused as long as the
request for renewal and fee set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation] is paid and all other
requirements for license renewal are met by the due date, otherwise the license expires.
D. An independent adjuster whose license expires may, within twelve (12) months of the renewal date, be reissued an
independent adjuster license upon receipt of the renewal request, as prescribed by the insurance commissioner.
However, a penalty in the amount of double the unpaid renewal fee shall be required to reissue the expired license.
E. An independent adjuster who is unable to comply with license renewal procedures and requirements due to military
service, long-term medical disability or some other extenuating circumstance may request a waiver of same and a
waiver of any examination requirement, fine or other sanction imposed for failure to comply with renewal
procedures.
Drafting Note: Some states may not contain expiration date or reissue a license that has been discontinued for nonrenewal.
F. An independent adjuster shall be subject to [cite state’s Unfair Claims Settlement Act and state’s Trade Practices
and Fraud sections of the Insurance Code].
G. The independent adjuster shall inform the insurance commissioner by any means acceptable of any change in
resident or business address(es) for the home state or in legal name, within thirty (30) days of the change.
H. The license shall contain the licensee’s name, address, personal identification number, the date of issuance and
expiration and any other information the insurance commissioner deems necessary.
I. In order to assist in the performance of the insurance commissioner’s duties, the insurance commissioner may
contract with non-governmental entities, including the NAIC, its affiliates or subsidiaries, to perform any ministerial
functions, including the collection of fees and data, related to licensing that the insurance commissioner may deem
appropriate.
A. An individual applying for an independent adjuster license under this Guideline shall pass a written examination
unless exempt pursuant to Section 9. The examination shall test the knowledge of the individual concerning, the
lines of authority for which application is made, the duties and responsibilities of an independent adjuster and the
insurance laws and regulations of this state. Examinations required by this Section shall be developed and conducted
under rules and regulations prescribed by the insurance commissioner.
B. The insurance commissioner may make arrangements, including contracting with an outside testing service, for
administering examinations and collecting the nonrefundable fee set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state
law or regulation].
C. Each individual applying for an examination shall remit a non-refundable fee as prescribed by the insurance
commissioner as set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation].
D. An individual who fails to appear for the examination as scheduled or fails to pass the examination shall reapply for
an examination and remit all required fees and forms before being rescheduled for another examination.
Drafting Note: A state may wish to prescribe by regulation limitations on the frequency of application for examination in
addition to other prelicensing requirements.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act, it may not be necessary to adopt this section.
Rather, the state may want to amend its relevant insurance producer statute to include independent adjusters.
A. An individual who applies for an independent adjuster license in this state who is or was licensed in another state for
the same line(s) of authority based on an independent adjuster examination shall not be required to complete any
prelicensing education or examination. This exemption is only available if the person is currently licensed in another

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
state or if that state license has expired and the application is received by this state within ninety (90) days of
expiration. The applicant must provide certification from the other state that the applicant’s license is currently in
good standing or was in good standing at the time of expiration or certification from the other state that its Producer
Database records, maintained by the NAIC, its affiliates or subsidiaries, indicate that the applicant or their company
is or was licensed in good standing. The certification must be of a license with the same line of authority for which
the individual has applied;
B. A person licensed as an independent adjuster in another state based on an independent adjuster examination who
establishes legal residency in this state shall make application within ninety (90) days to become a resident
independent adjuster licensee pursuant to Section 6, with the exception that no prelicensing education or
examination shall be required of this person;
C. An individual who applies for an apprentice independent adjuster license, pursuant to Section 11, and who adjust
claims in that capacity, shall not be required to take and successfully complete the independent adjuster
examination.
Drafting Note: If the state does not adopt Section 11, Apprentice Independent Adjuster License, then 9C should be removed
as an exemption from examination.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act, it may not be necessary to adopt this Section.
Section 10. Nonresident License
A. Unless refused licensure pursuant to Section 12, a nonresident person shall receive a nonresident independent
adjuster license if:
(1) The person is currently licensed in good standing as an independent adjuster in his, her, or its resident or
home state;
(2) The person has submitted the proper request for licensure, has paid the fees required by [insert appropriate
reference to state law or regulation];
(3) The person has submitted or transmitted to the insurance commissioner the appropriate completed
application for licensure; and
(4) The person’s designated home state awards nonresident independent adjuster licenses to persons of this
state on the same basis.
B. The insurance commissioner may verify the independent adjuster’s licensing status through any appropriate
database, including the Producer Database maintained by the NAIC, its affiliates or subsidiaries, or may request
certification of good standing as described in Section 9A of this Guideline.
C. As a condition to the continuation of a nonresident independent adjuster license, the licensee shall maintain a
resident independent adjuster license in his, her or its home state. The nonresident independent adjuster license
issued under this Section shall terminate and be surrendered immediately to the insurance commissioner if the
resident independent adjuster license terminates for any reason, unless the termination is due to the independent
adjuster being issued a new resident independent adjuster license in his, her or its new home state. The new state
resident independent adjuster license must have reciprocity with the licensing nonresident state(s) otherwise the
nonresident independent adjuster license(s) will terminate. Notice of resident independent adjuster license
termination must be given to any state(s) that issued a nonresident independent adjuster license. Notice must be
given within thirty (30) days of the termination date; if terminated for change in resident home state then the notice
must include both the previous and current address. Maintaining a resident independent adjuster license is required
for the nonresident independent adjuster license(s) to remain valid.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Drafting Note: In accordance with Public Law No. 106-102 (the “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act”) states should not require any
additional attachments to the Uniform Application or impose any other conditions on applicants that exceed the information
requested within the Uniform Application.
Section 11. Apprentice Independent Adjuster License [Optional]
A. The apprentice independent adjuster license is an optional license to facilitate the experience, education and/or
training necessary to ensure reasonable competency of the responsibilities and duties of an independent adjuster as
defined in this Guideline.
B. An individual applying for a resident apprentice independent adjuster license shall make application to the insurance
commissioner on the appropriate NAIC Uniform Individual Application in a format prescribed by the insurance
commissioner and declare under penalty of suspension, revocation or refusal of the license that the statements made
in the application are true, correct and complete to the best of the individual’s knowledge and belief. Before
approving the application, the insurance commissioner shall find that the individual:
(2) Is a resident of this state and has designated this state as his or her home state;
(3) Has a business or mailing address in this state for acceptance of service of process;
(4) Has not committed any act that is a ground for probation, suspension, revocation or denial of licensure as
set forth in Section 12;
(5) Is trustworthy, reliable and of good reputation, evidence of which may be determined by the insurance
commissioner;
(6) Has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation].
C. The apprentice independent adjuster license shall be subject to the following terms and conditions:
(1) Accompanying the apprentice adjuster application shall be an attestation, from a licensed independent
adjuster with the same line(s) of authority for which the apprentice has applied, certifying that the
apprentice will be subject to training, direction and control by the licensed independent adjuster and further
certifying that the licensed independent adjuster assumes responsibility for the actions of the apprentice in
the apprentice’s capacity as an independent adjuster;
(2) The apprentice independent adjuster is only authorized to adjust claims in the state that has issued the
apprentice independent adjuster license;
(3) The apprentice licensee is restricted to participation in the investigation, settlement and negotiation of
claims subject to the review and final determination of the claim by the supervising licensed independent
adjuster;
(4) Compensation of an apprentice independent adjuster shall be on a salaried or hourly basis only;
(5) The apprentice independent adjuster shall not be required to take and successfully complete the
independent adjuster examination pursuant to Section 8, to adjust claims as an apprentice independent
adjuster. However, at any time during the apprenticeship the apprentice independent adjuster may choose
to take the examination required by Section 8. If the individual takes and successfully completes the
independent adjuster exam the apprentice independent adjuster license shall automatically terminate and an
independent adjuster license shall be issued to that individual in place thereof;
(6) The apprentice independent adjuster license is for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months and is
nonrenewable; and

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(7) The licensee shall be subject to probation, suspension, revocation, or refusal pursuant to Section 12 of this
Guideline.
D. The licensed independent adjuster responsible for the apprentice independent adjuster, as stated in Section 11(C)(1),
shall only supervise [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation]
Section 12. License Denial, Non-Renewal, or Revocation
A. The insurance commissioner may place on probation, suspend, revoke, or refuse to issue or renew an independent
adjuster’s license or may levy a civil penalty in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law] or any
combination of the above actions for any one or more of the following causes:
(1) Providing incorrect, misleading, incomplete or materially untrue information in the license application;
(2)Violating any insurance laws, regulations, subpoena or order of the insurance commissioner or of another state’s
insurance commissioner;
(3) Obtaining or attempting to obtain a license through misrepresentation or fraud;
(4) Improperly withholding, misappropriating, or converting any monies or properties received in the course of doing
insurance business;
(5) Intentionally misrepresenting the terms of an actual or proposed insurance contract or application for insurance;
(6)Having been convicted of a felony;
(7) Having admitted or been found to have committed any insurance unfair trade practice or fraud;
(8) Using fraudulent, coercive or dishonest practices, or demonstrating incompetence, untrustworthiness or

financial irresponsibility, in the conduct of insurance business in this state or elsewhere;
(9) Having an insurance license, or its equivalent, probated, suspended, revoked or refused in any other state,
province, district, or territory;
(10) Forging another’s name to any document related to an insurance transaction;
(11) Cheating, including improperly using notes or any other reference material, to complete an examination for
an insurance license;
(12) Failing to comply with an administrative or court order imposing a child support obligation; or
(13) Failing to pay state income tax or comply with any administrative or court order directing payment of state
income tax which remains unpaid.
Drafting Note: Paragraph (13) is for those states that have a state income tax.
B. In the event that the action by the insurance commissioner is to refuse application for licensure or renewal of an
existing license, the insurance commissioner shall notify the applicant or licensee in writing, advising of the reason
for the refusal. The applicant or licensee may make written demand upon the insurance commissioner within [insert
appropriate time period from state’s Administrative Procedure Act] for a hearing before the insurance commissioner
to determine the reasonableness of the refusal. The hearing shall be held within [insert time period from state law]
and shall be held pursuant to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
C. The license of a business entity may be probated, suspended, revoked, or refused if the insurance commissioner
finds, after a hearing, that its designated individual licensee’s violation occurred while acting on behalf of or
representing the business entity and that the violation was known or should have been known by one or more of the
business entity’s partners, officers or managers and that the violation was neither reported to the insurance
commissioner nor was corrective action taken.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
D. In addition to or in lieu of any applicable probation, suspension, revocation or refusal, a person may, after a hearing,
additionally be subject to a civil fine according to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
E. The insurance commissioner shall retain the authority to enforce the provisions of and impose any penalty or remedy
authorized by this Guideline and Title [insert appropriate reference to state law] against any person who is under
investigation for or charged with a violation of this Guideline or Title [insert appropriate reference to state law] even
if the person’s license or registration has been surrendered or has expired by operation of law.
A. An individual, who holds an independent adjuster license and who is not exempt under Subsection B of this Section,
shall satisfactorily complete a minimum of twenty-four (24) hours of continuing education courses, of which three
(3) hours must be in ethics, reported to the insurance commissioner on a biennial basis in conjunction with their
license renewal cycle.
B. This Section shall not apply to:
(1) Licensees not licensed for one (1) full year prior to the end of the applicable continuing education
biennium; or
(2) Licensees holding nonresident independent adjuster licenses who have met the continuing education
requirements of their designated home state.
An independent adjuster shall maintain a copy of each contract between the independent adjuster and the insurer or self-
insurer and comply with the record retention policy as agreed to in that contract.
Section 15. Standards of Conduct of Independent Adjusters [Optional]
A. An independent adjuster shall be honest and fair in all communications with the insured, the insurer and the public;
B. An independent adjuster shall give policyholders and claimants prompt, knowledgeable service and courteous, fair
and objective treatment at all times;
C. An independent adjuster shall not give legal advice, and shall not deal directly with any policyholder or claimant
who is represented by legal counsel without the consent of the legal counsel involved;
D. An independent adjuster shall comply with all local, state and federal privacy and information security laws, if
applicable;
E. An independent adjuster shall identify himself as an independent adjuster and, if applicable, identify his employer
when dealing with any policyholder or claimant; and
F. An independent adjuster shall not have any financial interest in any adjustment or acquire for himself or any person
any interest or title in salvage, without first receiving written authority from the principal.
Section 16. Reporting of Actions
A. The independent adjuster shall report to the insurance commissioner any administrative action taken against the
independent adjuster in another jurisdiction or by another governmental agency in this state within thirty (30) days
of the final disposition of the matter. This report shall include a copy of the order, consent order and any other
relevant legal documents.
B. The independent adjuster shall report to the insurance commissioner any criminal action taken against the
independent adjuster in this or any jurisdiction within thirty (30) days of the final disposition of the criminal matter.
The report shall include a copy of the initial complaint filed, the final order issued by the court, and any other

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The insurance commissioner may, in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law], promulgate reasonable
regulations as are necessary or proper to carry out the purposes of this Guideline.
If any provisions of this Guideline, or the application of a provision to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, the
remainder of the Guideline, and the application of the provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is
held invalid, shall not be affected.
This Guideline shall take effect [insert date].
Note: A minimum of six months to one year implementation time for proper notice of changes, fees and procures is
recommended.
Chronological Summary of Action (all references are to the Proceedings of the NAIC)
2008 Proc. 3rd Quarter (adopted).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix M
Limited Line Term Resolution
LIMITED LINE TERM LIFE RESOLUTION June 14, 2005
Where As, the NAIC membership adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act in 2000, which established life insurance as a
major line of authority and defines the life insurance line of authority as insurance coverage on human lives including
benefits of endowment and annuities, and may include benefits in the event of death or dismemberment by accident and
benefits for disability income;
Where As, the NAIC membership adopted the Uniform Licensing Standards in 2002, which confirmed the establishment of
the six major lines of authority set forth in the Producer Licensing Act and established the following five core limited lines:
(1) Car Rental, (2) Credit, (3) Crop, (4) Surety and (5) Travel;
Where As, the NAIC membership adopted the Regulatory Modernization Action Plan in 2003, which sets forth that NAIC
members will build upon the regulatory framework established by the Uniform Licensing Standards adopted in 2002 and will
continue the implementation of a uniform, electronic licensing system for individuals and business entities that sell, solicit or
negotiate insurance while preserving the necessary consumer protections;
Where As, representatives of the insurance industry have presented individual NAIC members with a proposal for the
establishment of a limited line license for producers to sell term life insurance;
Where As, this issue has been communicated by individual NAIC members to the NAIC’s Producer Licensing Working
Group of the Market Regulation & Consumer Affairs (D) Committee for consideration;
Where As, the Producer Licensing Working Group recognizes the producer licensing process, which includes prelicensing
education, testing and continuing education requirements, ensures individuals selling, soliciting or negotiating insurance have
the minimum level of competency and knowledge to engage in such activities;
Where As, consumer protection, consistency and uniformity of state insurance regulation are of the highest priority for state
insurance regulators;
Now Therefore, the NAIC rejects any and all proposals which directly or indirectly establish a limited line license for
producers to sell term life insurance.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix N
L nce Licensing Standards Reecommendatio

Low Complian ons
D
DATE: July 10, 200
08
T
TO: NAIC Officcers and the Market Regulatio
on & Consumeer Affairs (D) C
Committee
F
FROM: Anne Mariee Narcini, Chaiir of the Produccer Licensing ((D) Working G
Group
R
RE: Low Compliance Licensin
ng Standards Recommendatio
R ons

2 charges for
fo the Produceer Licensing Working
W Group (PLWG), the N NAIC officers asked the worrking group
too evaluate thee key findingss and issues regarding comp pliance with tthe Uniform llicensing Standdards and idenntify those
sstandards that are not generaally supported by the local industry
i organnizations at thee state legislattive level, as w
well as the
sspecific issues associated with
h non-support, and provide a recommendatiion on eliminaating or amendiing these standdards.
P
Process for Co
ompletion of Charge
C
SSince the NAIC C Spring Natio onal Meeting, the

t working grroup surveyedd states regardinng areas wheree local trade aassociations
oopposed legislaative initiativess to implementt uniform stand
dards; reviewedd the areas of llow compliancce as reported tthrough the
sstate assessmennts; and soliciited commentss from interestted parties. T The working ggroup also helld discussions during an
innterim meeting in Kansas City C following E Regulation n Conference. The working group also meet at the NAIC C Summer
NNational Meetiing. A small teeam of regulato ors from Alask
ka, Kentucky, Utah and New w Jersey also mmet by confereence call to
ddiscuss the find
dings and prepaare recommend dations.
G
General Recom
mmendations
It is noteworthy y that several regulators

r indiccated that it is not so much loocal oppositionn to implemenntation of the sttandards as
itt is lack of sup
pport. With so many legislatiive priorities, regulators
r oftenn find it difficuult to pursue leegislative channge if there
aaren’t organizaations actively advocating
a refform. In some instances,
i it is not so much aan inability to ppass legislationn as it is an
innability to creaate enough inteerest for a bill to be posted. WeW have separaated the areas of low compliance into thosee standards
wwhere there is opposition and d those standarrds where therre is lack of suupport – eitherr by industry oor sometimes eeven within
innsurance deparrtments.
T
Throughout thee discussions of o this charge,, it was appareent that both rregulators and interested parrties were not anxious to
m
make significan nt changes to the standards. Many states have h worked ddiligently to acchieve uniform
mity and the coonsensus is
thhat it would not
n be fair to trrivialize their efforts by changing the rulees midstream. IIn addition, staates are conceerned about
loosing credibility with their sttate legislators if they go back
k with new propposals based oon new standardds.
TThe working group

g recommeends that any adjustments
a to the standards should be maade by establishhing additionaal means of
aachieving unifformity rather than recommending changees in standardds that would move states from compliaant to non-
ccompliant.
T
The Working Group
G also recommends conttinued Commissioner level iinvolvement too assist in obtaaining the needded support
inn states having
g difficulty effeecting legislativ
ve change and//or internal suppport for implem
mentation of thhe standards.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Low Compliance Standards with Local Opposition
Uniformity Standard 14 - Background Checks: Background checks will follow the following three steps: 1) states will
ask and review the standard background questions contained on the Uniform Applications; 2) states will run a check
against the NAIC RIRS/PDB and 1033 Application and 3) moving forward on an electronic basis, states will fingerprint
their resident producers and will process electronic fingerprints through NIPR during the initial, resident producer
licensing process.
The majority of states have achieved uniformity in using the Uniform Application and running checks against the NAIC’s
Regulatory Information Retrieval Systems (RIRS) and1033 Application Step 3 of the background check process is the area
where there is low compliance, as well as resistance in several states from local trade associations. During the working
group’s discussions at the interim and summer meetings, industry representatives for limited lines associations voiced
opposition to fingerprinting for limited line producers, citing the ancillary nature of certain limited line products that are
“add-ons” to non-insurance products. Other national trade associations supported the idea of fingerprinting but encouraged
the states to consider ways to implement the process without delaying the licensing process. They also voiced concerns about
significant delays in states that still require fingerprinting for nonresident applicants and mandate paper ink and roll methods.
The working group believes Step 3 of this standard should be revised. Fingerprinting is an important consumer protection
tool and states should be encouraged to move forward with the process now. There is no central repository at this point and
waiting until this issue is resolved only delays implementation of a complete background check process. The primary reason
for a repository is to implement a once and done approach to the fingerprint process so that a producer changing resident
states would not have to be reprinted. The working group believes the purpose of fingerprinting will still be realized without
a repository for the prints.
The working group also believes that the means of printing, whether paper or electronic, is not as important as conducting the
background check, ideally at both a state and federal level. The working group does, however, recognize the barriers to full
implementation of fingerprinting when a state’s police or its equivalent does not have the technology in place to accept
electronic fingerprints or to transmit requests to the FBI. While the goal of state and national background checks via an
electronic fingerprinting process should still be kept in mind, the working group recommends adding a sub-category for states
to commence state background reviews. In adding this sub-category, states that do not have the technology for state and
federal background checks would at least commence state background reviews now.
Recommendation:
 The working group suggests the following revision to Standard 14 (Fingerprinting):
Background Checks: Background checks will follow the following three steps:
1) States will ask and review the standard background questions contained on the Uniform
Applications;
2) States will run a check against the NAIC RIRS/PDB and 1033 Application and
3a) States will fingerprint their new resident producers and conduct state and federal criminal
background checks on new resident producer applicants. Although electronic fingerprinting is
strongly encouraged, a state will be compliant with this requirement if the fingerprints are
obtained through paper or electronic means.
3b) If a state lacks the authority or resources to accept and receive data from the FBI, it shall
conduct a statewide criminal history background check through the appropriate governmental
agency for new resident producer applicants until such time as it can become compliant with
Standard 14(3) a.
 The working group strongly encourages the NAIC membership to support the goal of a nationwide resident
fingerprint initiative and to work with national trade associations to educate the local trade associations so
fingerprinting will gain support rather than opposition. In addition, we recommend that NAIC membership
encourage the states that require nonresident applicants to submit fingerprint to work towards elimination of this
requirement for nonresident applicants who were previously fingerprinted by their resident state. There are at least
10 states that now fingerprint resident applicants and run criminal history checks at the state and national level. It
appears duplicative and time consuming when residents of these states must again be fingerprinted when they apply
as nonresidents in other fingerprinting states.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Uniformity Standards 23-25 and Standard 30 - CE Requirements: Twenty four hours of CE for all major lines of
authority with three of the twenty-four hours covering ethics. Fifty minutes shall equal one hour of CE. Biennial CE
compliance period would coincide with the producer’s license continuation date. No waiver/exemption except as provided in
subsection 7D of the PLMA.
The majority of states that are non-compliant with the CE term are noncompliant because they have not implemented birth
month continuation. Most states are non-compliant with the number of CE hours because they do not require 3 hours of
ethics. It would appear that whatever legislative change is necessary to move to birth month continuation could also include
the ethics requirement. There is little local opposition to this change.
In reference to the standard for twenty four hours of CE for all major lines of authority with three of the twenty-four hours
covering ethics, states that are not compliant have laws requiring either more or less hours of CE. Several states have
reported significant local opposition to changes whether it is raising or lowering the required hours, including but not limited
to Ohio, California and Louisiana.
The working group has found that the area of greatest resistance and local opposition within CE compliance is eliminating
waivers and exemptions. Thirty-one states were deemed noncompliant because they allow exemptions based on certain
professional designations or based on age and experience. Many states indicated the resistance to legislative change in this
area is strong because certain lawmakers are eligible for these exemptions. In discussions with interested parties, the working
group found that opinions were mixed. Some trade associations were indifferent to such exemptions while others felt that all
licensed producers should be required to fulfill CE.
Recommendation:
 The working group believes the only way to eliminate waivers based on age or years in the business is to propose
legislation on prospective basis with the current exemptions and waivers having a sunset date. In so doing, those
producers currently licensed and exempt would remain exempt. The working group recommends a state which has
successfully effectuated such a change be deemed compliant with the no waiver/exemption standard.
 The working group also recommends open dialogue with regulators in noncompliant states to exchange suggested
methods to provide credit for continuing education courses that licensees pursue to maintain their professional
designations, rather than across the board waivers.
Low Compliance Standards Lacking Local Support
Uniformity Standard 4 – Prelicensing Education: States that require prelicensing education shall require 20 hours of
prelicensing education per major line of authority. States may waive prelicensing education requirements for the variable line
of authority. States that do not require prelicensing education shall not be required to implement prelicensing education.
Since the state assessments, one state has adopted this standard, leaving 21 jurisdictions noncompliant. The working group
considered recommending a revision to the standard to allow states to select prelicensing education up to, rather than exactly
equal to 20 hours per major line of authority; however, a review of the noncompliant states indicates this change would not
bring most states into compliance. The vast majority of the states that are still noncompliant have requirements exceeding the
uniform standard. Lowering requirements to reach a standard is sometimes difficult for states since it gives the appearance of
lowering the bar. At the same time, it should be noted that some states have successfully lowered minimum prelicensing
education standards to become compliant.
Recommendation:
 The working group believes that no change should be made to this standard, but that there should be increased
outreach to the noncompliant states to provide education about methods to achieve uniformity without lowering
standards. Several states that changed their requirements to achieve the standard did so by establishing the standard
as a floor rather than the ceiling and encouraging providers to offer additional prelicensing education on an as
needed basis to assure that applicants were sufficiently prepared both for the licensing examination and for entering
the world of insurance sales.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Uniformity Standard 7 - Waiver/ Exemption from prelicensing education: Individuals with the following designations
are exempt from prelicensing education: CEBS, ChFC, CIC, CFP, CLU, FLMI, and LUTCF for Life Line of Authority.
RHU, CEBS, REBC, HIA for Health Line of Authority. AAI, ARM, CIC, CPCU for Property and Casualty Lines of
Authority. A college insurance degree exempts from prelicensing education for all lines.
Uniformity Standard 9 - Waiver/Exemption from examination: No waiver or exemption except for those noted in Section
9 of the PLMA
Since the assessment, two states have enacted legislative changes to become compliant with this standard while 18 states
remain noncompliant. Since the uniformity standards allow a state to opt for no prelicensing education for all applicants, it
would appear that the presence or absence of exemptions by a state is not a barrier to licensing. The working group
suggests that the more important standard is that all applicants for major lines pass an examination in their home states to
assure sufficient knowledge to engage in the business of insurance. Several states still exempt applicants with certain
professional designations from examination. Without a uniform approach of testing all applicants for major lines of
authority, all states may not agree to reciprocity. Examination is considered a necessary consumer protection.
Recommendation:
 Although there does not appear to be active opposition to Standard 7, the working group recommends that the
prelicensing education exemption list be a form of guidance to state departments, rather than a uniformity
standard, and allow commissioner discretion for the types of designations and degrees that would exempt an
applicant from prelicensing education. The working group recommends no change to Standard 9 but does
recommend further clarification to this standard.
Uniformity Standard 8 - Lines of Authority: Six major lines as defined in the Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA)
Uniformity Standard 16 - Lines of Authority Issued: Six major lines as defined by the PLMA and core limited lines as
defined by the Uniform Producer Licensing Initiatives Subgroup. Other limited lines as determined by each state. States are
encouraged to eliminate as many limited lines of authority as possible
Uniformity Standard 33 - Definitions of Core Limited Lines: Follow the definitions established by the Limited Lines
Licensing Subgroup
Because these standards overlap, the working group considered them together. The working group and interested parties all
agree these three standards are critical to achieving uniformity and eliminating delays and barriers to licensure. If lines of
authority are not substantially similar, nonresident applicants will face challenges and delays as they try to obtain licenses
in other states. With ever increasing electronic licensing processing, successful mapping depends upon uniformity in lines
of authority issued.
A review of state assessments indicates there are a wide variety of reasons for noncompliance. Several states either do not
offer personal lines as a line of authority or treat it as a limited line. Several states consider surety a major line of authority
rather than include it within the casualty line of authority or treating it as a limited line. Other states have an extensive
number of limited lines, consider lines of business that are clearly part of major lines as limited lines, or offer lines that are
similar in name to one or more of the six major lines or the core limited lines but have definitions that vary significantly
from the uniform definitions.
Recommendation:
 Although we do not believe changes should be made to these standards, we do recommend the group continue to
discuss significant issues regarding limited lines (e.g. fingerprint requirements, the necessity of licensing all
individuals in an office; and ways that states can achieve expeditious licensing of limited lines in a nonresident
state that does not offer the limited line held by the producer in his home state) and provide clarification of these
standards as part of our upcoming charge to provide additional interpretive guidance to states on certain
uniformity standards. Specifically, we believe the standards should more clearly identify which limited lines
beyond the core limited lines are acceptable because they are incidental in nature rather than a significant line of
business covered under a major line of authority; the extent to which states must use the core limited lines
definitions to be compliant, and when a state may require testing for a limited line. The working group believes
state outreach and education is the key to increasing uniformity in this area. States may wish to consider sunset
provisions as they eliminate duplicative limited lines.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Uniformity Standard 18 - Continuation Process: Individual licenses will continue on a biennial basis on the licensee’s
month of birth or date of birth. Business entity licenses will continue on a date certain.
Thirty three states were deemed noncompliant with the continuation process, primarily because the license continuation
date does not coincide with the producer’s birth date or birth month. The vast majority of states require legislative changes
to implement this standard. Industry has repeatedly indicated birth month/date renewals save time and money since
monitoring varied continuation dates uses considerable resources. This is an area where there is not as much local
opposition as there is lack of strong support. Some insurance departments also indicate they lack the resources to
implement the necessary system changes.
Recommendation:
 The working group believes that consistency in a continuation process is critical to achieving uniformity. The
working group recommends no change to this standard, but encourages national trade associations to work with
local trade associations to fully support legislative change to implement the biennial birth date/month continuation
process. Regulators that have already implemented birth date/month renewals can assist noncompliant states by
sharing processes that achieve a smooth transition. NIPR can also provide expertise and support in this area since
they have implemented the birth month renewals for several states that use their products.
 The working group also recommends this standard be further clarified for those states without a renewal or
continuation process. There is disagreement among regulators on whether this standard mandates a renewal process
and use of the NAIC Uniform Renewal Application.
Implementation of Recommendations
The working group believes that reactivating the Uniformity Subgroup as a focus group to work with individual states would
be beneficial in moving forward with these recommendations and in continuing our progress towards uniformity. The
Uniformity Focus Group would consist of one or two seasoned regulators from each zone who would follow up with each
state individually to update their progress in implementing all uniformity standards; provide assistance with suggested
process changes to simplify the implementation of the standards and provide up to date information on the progress and
challenges that states are facing in implementing the uniform standards. Several of the recommendations made in this report
require outreach and education with the states and we believe the focus group can perform such tasks.

146
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Secction I – Appendix O
PROGREESS REPORT
T TO MEMBEERSHIP ON
PRODUCERR LICENSING
G
STAT
TE ASSESSM
MENTS MARC CH 16, 2009
Oveerview of NAIC
C/Industry Pro
oducer Licensiing Coalition O
Outreach and
Summary of 2008 Action
n Items
I. INTRODUCT
I TION
This reportt provides an update

u on all aspects
a of the NAIC’s
N produucer licensing sstrategy, includding the work of the
NARAB (E EX) Working Group, the Prroducer Licenssing (D) Workking Group andd the Nationall Insurance Prooducer
Registry too address the key
k findings an nd recommendaations arising ffrom the 2008 Producer Liceensing Assessm ment, a
comprehen nsive, memberrship-wide on--site assessmeent of each sttate’s laws annd processes. It also providdes an
overview of the Produccer Licensing Coalition and d its recent reegulator/industrry team outreeach efforts, ggeneral
outcomes of this efforrt and recomm mended next steps for conntinued progrress and mom mentum. The report
demonstrattes the tremen ndous progress made by the members, botth individuallyy and collectively, since the NAIC
first underrtook the produucer licensing strategic initiaative in May 22007 to furtheer achieve com mpliance with NAIC
reciprocity
y and uniformiity standards anda improving the licensing process for reesident and noonresident producers
across the nation.
n
The Produ ucer Licensing Coalition, wh hich is a joint group of Com mmissioners, pproducer licennsing regulatorrs, and
industry reepresentatives, recently comppleted outreachh to forty- two several state innsurance deparrtments for puurposes
of identifying the support needed to ach hieve remaininng producer liceensing reformss. The outreachh effort was a llogical
next step in the NAIC C’s producer licensing
l reform strategy. Industry tradee representativves were giveen the
opportunity y to actively en
ngage Commisssioners and th heir staff on issuues of concernn to their membbers. This interractive
dialogue highlighted
h areas requiring su
upport from thhe industry andd legislature ffor successful iimplementation, and
provided the
t opportunity y for the respective Departm ments to gaugge the level off industry suppport, indifferennce or
opposition to certain refoorm efforts. This report summmarizes these effforts and provvides recommeendations for arreas of
focus in 20009.
II. SUMMARY OF
O 2008 ACT
TION ITEMS
A.
A Overview of Produ
ucer Licensing
g Assessment
07, the NAIC, at the request of the memberrship, with the support of thee Coalition, andd with the assiistance
In Fall 200
of a dediccated team of producer liceensing regulato ors, completedd a membershhip-wide, compprehensive prooducer
licensing assessment.
a In three short moonths, 12 statee insurance reggulators, along with ten NAIIC staff, divideed into
teams of th
hree and conduucted on-site visits
v to 50 stattes, the Distric t of Columbia and Puerto Riico to review ccertain
componentts of a state’ss producer liceensing laws, practices
p and pprocesses. Thiis effort also involved signnificant
preparation
n by the state’s licensing sttaff as well ass active particcipation by thee Commissionners and their senior
department officials.
In Februarry 2008, the NAIC publish hed the Produ ucer Licensingg Assessment Aggregate Reeport of
Findings (Aggregate Rep port) which ouutlined the key
y findings, connclusions and recommendattions for
next steps.. The Aggregaate Report proovided a nationnal picture of the state of pproducer licenssing and
identified those areas off success as well
w as roadblo ocks in achievving full recipprocity and unniformity
compliancee.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
It also recommended areas for targeted improvement. The Aggregate Report provided the groundwork for several
significant projects and initiatives assigned by the NAIC Executive (EX) Committee and managed by the Market
Regulation and Consumer Affairs (D) Committee.
B. Implementation of Aggregate Report Recommendations
1. NARAB Working Group
One of the significant initiatives stemming from the producer licensing assessment was to reconstitute the NARAB (EX)
Working Group, to evaluate whether certain non- reciprocal states were eligible for reciprocity certification based on changes
to their laws and regulations governing non-resident licensing. In 2008, the NARAB (EX) Working Group certified as
reciprocal the District of Columbia, Montana, Indiana, Missouri, New Mexico and Tennessee based on the reciprocity
standard outlined in the 2002 Report of the NARAB Working Group: Certification of States for Producer Licensing
1
Reciprocity (2002 NARAB Report). Forty-seven jurisdictions are now recognized by the NAIC as
having met the reciprocity mandates of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA). A map of the states currently certified as
reciprocal is attached as Appendix I.
The NARAB Working Group formed last year was also charged to evaluate whether certain state requirements imposed upon
non-residents and not necessarily addressed in the 2002 NARAB Report impact the reciprocity requirements of federal law or
fall under the GLBA savings clause. Recognizing that both the producer licensing industry and producer licensing regulation
have significantly evolved and modernized since 2002, the NAIC members willingly and voluntarily undertook this effort to
carefully scrutinize possible additional reciprocity issues that exist today. In June 2008, the Working Group adopted a set of
recommendations identifying five issues as potential violations of GLBA:
 Requiring an underlying life license prior to the issuance of a non-resident variable life license;
 Requiring the designated responsible producer to be licensed or appointed prior to the issuance of a
non-resident business entity license;
 Requiring a non-resident business entity to submit articles of incorporation;
 Requiring individuals seeking a fraternal non-resident license to have an accident/health
license and have a fraternal certificate from a company; and
 Requiring non-resident producers to renew licensure annually, while resident producers renew
biennially.
The Working Group is currently considering preliminary recommendations on several additional possible GLBA issues,
including among others, (1) requiring foreign corporations to register to do business and provide proof of foreign
corporation registration and (2) requiring non-resident applicants to obtain a non-resident general or major lines license
prior to the issuance of a surplus lines license.
A key finding in the Aggregate Report was disparate business entity licensing laws, regulations and practices and the need
for standardization. The NARAB Working Group was charged with developing recommendations for simplifying and
standardizing the business entity licensing process. The new Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force is currently gathering
information on each of the practices identified for standardization and expects to provide a full set of recommendations in
2009.
1 Because the original working group dissolved in 2004, the District of Columbia and Montana had not been
formally certified as reciprocal by an NAIC committee though both received recommendations for reciprocity
certification from the NAIC Legal Division.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Producer Licensing Working Group
In 2008, the Producer Licensing (D) Working Group was charged with further evaluating many of the Aggregate Report’s
findings and recommendations, including identifying which Uniform Licensing Standards should be considered
professional licensing standards and which Uniform Licensing Standards were not generally supported by local industry
organizations at the state legislative level. The professional standards adopted by the NAIC Executive (EX) Committee and
Plenary in September 2008 were based on the Uniform Licensing Standards and covered four basic areas:
1. Legal authority to enter into contracts;
2. Education and initial testing for minimum competency;
3. Background checks for moral character; and
4. Ongoing commitment to professional conduct.
These standards go far beyond a code of conduct and are fundamental requirements found in many other professions, such
as securities brokers, real estate agents and attorneys.
The Working Group also provided a candid assessment of barriers to implementation of uniform standards finding it is not
always local opposition to implementation of the standards, but general lack of support due to other legislative priorities or
inability to create sufficient industry/legislative interest.
The Producer Licensing Working Group spent considerable time in 2008 modifying the interpretive guidance associated
with the Uniform Licensing Standards. The Aggregate Report found some inconsistent interpretations of what constituted
compliance and noncompliance for certain Uniform Licensing Standards, especially those with low compliance. The
Working Group provided very useful recommendations on minor adjustments to certain standards and guidance for
purposes of establishing additional means of achieving uniformity, such as acknowledging compliance for states that
conduct a background check based on either a paper or electronic fingerprinting process. The revisions to the standards
provided detailed benchmarks for states to evaluate compliance and curtail inconsistencies in interpreting and applying
standards. The Working Group completed several other important assignments including creating new uniform standards
and interpretive guidance regarding the commercial lines multi-state exemption and commission sharing exemption, both
contained in the Producer Licensing Model Act (“PLMA”).
The Working Group also developed and adopted a comprehensive licensing manual, the NAIC State Producer Licensing
Handbook, to provide guidance to state insurance departments and regulated entities on how to administer a producer
licensing program. It is based on the PLMA, the Uniform Licensing Standards and all guidelines adopted through the NAIC
Executive (EX) Committee and Plenary. The Handbook will assist regulators in continued movement towards uniformity in
procedures among the states and offer “best practices.”
C. National Insurance Producer Registry
In 2008, the National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR) completed the all-state electronic solution for Address Changes
(ACR) and implemented the final state achieving 100% participation. This accomplishment stands out because ACR was
introduced in July 2007, and by the end of 2008, NIPR had processed over 910,432 address changes. NAIC/NIPR also
introduced the breakthrough product Attachment Warehouse. The Warehouse electronically receives, stores, and shares with
the states licensing-related documents submitted by applicants in response to “yes” answers to background questions on the
Uniform License Application. Producers and authorized submitters no longer have to fax or mail a copy of the required
documentation to every state in which they are applying for or renewing a resident or non-resident license. States receive an
electronic notice alerting them to check the Warehouse for the required documentation. Future plans include expanding use
of the Warehouse to support regulatory requirements related to the notification and reporting of regulatory actions. The
Attachment Warehouse was well- received, garnering nearly 1,900 electronic submissions in the first four months of release.
Much progress was made in meeting NIPR’s long-term goal of being the one-stop shopping solution for producers and
companies. The focus this year was to expand the on-line licensing options to include selected limited and other lines. NIPR
also concentrated on offering electronic processing for business entities. Overall, considerable progress was achieved, with
many more products being added for several states. As of January 31, 2009, the following states are now in production with
NIPR products:
 Non-Resident Licensing for Individuals – 49 states;
 Non-Resident Licensing for Business Entities – 34 states;
 Non-Resident Renewals for Individuals – 39 states;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Non-Resident Renewals for Business Entities – 18 states;

 Resident Licensing for Individuals – 19 states;
 Resident Licensing for Business Entities – 16 states;
 Resident Licensing Renewals for Individuals – 17 states;
 Resident Licensing Renewals for Business Entities – 13 states;
 Appointment Renewals – 7 states;
 Electronic Funds Transfer for State Fees – 47 states;
 Address Change Requests – all states; and
 Attachments Warehouse – all states.
D. Producer Licensing Coalition
In June 2007, the NAIC/Industry Producer Licensing Coalition was formed as a partnership of regulators and national trade
organizations, to focus and facilitate producer licensing uniformity initiatives. In 2009, the Coalition is comprised of 11
Commissioners and 13 national trade associations, including American Council of Life Insurers; American Insurance
Association; America’s Health Insurance Plans; Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers; CPCU Society; Independent
Insurance Agents & Brokers of America; LIMRA; Million Dollar Roundtable; National Association of Insurance and
Financial Advisors; National Association of Health Underwriters; Professional Insurance Agents; Society of Financial
Service Professionals; and Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.
The Coalition has focused on targeted initiatives to further streamline the licensing process such as:
 Encouraging all state insurance departments to eliminate the proof of Secretary of State
2
registration as a prerequisite requirement to licensing,
 Exploring ways to reduce the administrative burden of the appointment process; and
 Discussing barriers to full adoption of major and core limited lines.
The Coalition also provided a forum for the exchange of views on proposed federal legislation, H.R. 5611, to create a
National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers. Another important topic of discussion from the Coalition regulator
members’ perspective was the opportunity to encourage industry trade organizations to embrace and promote professional
licensing standards at the national, state and local level, including supporting legislative and regulatory changes.
The Coalition has served as a conduit of useful information, opinions and ideas between regulators and industry
representatives. Often times, this exchange has turned into an action item for the industry or regulators, whether to solicit
feedback or support from their respective members or to develop a proposed solution to an identified issue. Therefore, it was
not surprising that both the regulators and industry members of the Coalition readily joined forces to conduct this aggressive
outreach effort. Every participant of this outreach effort–Coalition Commissioners, producer licensing regulators and
representatives of industry organizations–has given willingly of their time to help states move even closer to full reciprocity
and uniformity.
2 According to Producer Licensing Coalition information, of the 25 states initially having the SOS corporate registration
requirement as a prerequisite requirement to licensing, 15 states have eliminated the prerequisite requirement. Of the
remaining ten states, six states have committed to reviewing the requirement and implementing a statutory, regulatory or
practice change, if appropriate, and only four states have not yet introduced a change.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
III. OVERVIEW OF PRODUCER OUTREACH EFFORT
A. Impetus for Outreach
Under the leadership of NAIC President Roger Sevigny, the NAIC’s producer licensing strategy has raised the awareness of
the importance and challenges for achieving meaningful producer licensing reform. This topic is a regular discussion point
among and between Commissioners and their producer licensing staffs at all levels of the NAIC committee structure.
Because results of the producer licensing assessment confirmed that many of the remaining legislative and regulatory
changes require active industry support, the Coalition has served a valuable purpose in gathering feedback on the dynamics
of producer licensing issues, such as the level of support for minimum professional licensing standards including
background check requirements.
As Chair of the Producer Licensing Coalition in 2008, Commissioner Sevigny suggested the Coalition concentrate on the
needs of particular states and offer assistance and guidance based on state-specific dynamics and areas of noncompliance.
For instance, a state insurance department struggling with eliminating excessive limited lines of authority will require the
support of specific sectors of its local industry in order to propose legislation.
The peer-to-peer outreach of the producer licensing assessment provided NAIC members with an inventory of remaining
compliance issues. In many cases, the Commissioner and Department were strongly in favor of making the identified
changes, but were either unsuccessful in efforts to pass legislation or did not include proposals in legislative packages
because of active opposition or simple indifference from one or more sectors of their producer licensing industry.
The Coalition outreach effort was intended to take this grassroots initiative to the next level. In keeping with the general
recognition that, at all levels of government, constituency support is often a key ingredient to successful legislative change,
it made sense to engage industry representatives in how and whether they can support certain state-specific producer
licensing legislation. The Coalition leveraged the valuable information gained through the producer licensing assessments in
order to have a better understanding of each state’s needs in terms of (1) full PLMA adoption, (2) reciprocity, (3) uniformity
compliance, and (4) streamlining business entity licensing, appointments and electronic processing. This background
information proved extremely helpful not only as the outreach team developed recommendations to bring to each state, but
to facilitate a positive and productive dialogue with Commissioners and their staff.
B. Outreach Team Approach
The Coalition outreach initiative was conducted in a similar manner to the producer licensing assessments in that outreach
teams were formed and assigned to respective states. Each outreach team consisted of a Coalition Commissioner, two
3
producer licensing regulators, and two industry representatives. The following Commissioners participated on outreach
teams: Pennsylvania Commissioner Joel Ario; Idaho Director Bill Deal; Alaska Director Linda Hall; Oklahoma
Commissioner Kim Holland; Ohio Director Mary Jo Hudson; and Iowa Commissioner Susan Voss. The following producer
licensing regulators participated on outreach teams: John Braun (UT); Linda Brunette (AK); Jack Chaskey (NY); Keith
Kuzmich (CA); Rosanne Mead (IA); Anne Marie Narcini (NJ); Barbara Richardson (NH); Bobby Perkins (MS); Treva
Wright-Donnell (KY); and Laurie Wolf (NIPR, formerly ND). The following industry representatives participated on
outreach teams: Nicole Allen (CIAB); William Anderson (NAIFA); Wes Bissett (IIABA); David Eppstein and Patricia
Borowski (PIA); John Fielding (Steptoe & Johnson); Larry Kibbe (Regulatory Affairs Consultant); David Leifer (ACLI);
Deirdre Manna (PCI); Martin Mitchell and Gary Allen (AHIP); Pamela Young (AIA). It should also be noted for states
assigned to PIA, a representative of the local state PIA organization usually participated on the calls.
Each industry representative was given the opportunity to request a particular state assignment. A concerted effort was
made to ensure at least one producer trade organization (i.e., IIABA, PIA, CIAB, NAIFA) was assigned to each state.
Industry representatives were also encouraged to coordinate and communicate concerns about a particular state to the
industry representatives assigned to the state.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. Criteria for Outreach
The outreach effort commenced in early November 2008 with the goal of completing the outreach in advance of the 2009
Commissioners Conference. Forty-two states were targeted for outreach based on criteria applied to each state’s producer
licensing assessment. States were chosen for outreach if their Producer Licensing State Report identified noncompliance with
more than three Uniform Licensing Standards or the state had not yet been certified as reciprocal. States out of compliance on
4
fewer than three standards were added to the list for outreach if they were not compliant with the fingerprinting standard, as
a key purpose of the outreach effort was to find ways to provide support to those states needing or considering fingerprint
legislation.
D. Focus of Outreach Efforts
The outreach effort generally focused on those areas necessary for reciprocity and uniformity in producer
licensing. From a regulatory perspective, Commissioners and producer licensing regulators reviewed whether
states were imposing uniform licensing requirements and provisions for residents, which assures each state that
non-resident producers are subject to similar licensing requirements in their respective home states. From the
producer perspective, industry representatives were looking for general uniformity in licensing requirements and
procedures so as to reduce the administrative costs of compliance. Specifically, the outreach effort focused on the
following areas: (1) state adoption of key PLMA provisions; (2) non-resident licensing requirements potentially
inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements; (3) compliance with certain Uniform Licensing Standards; and
(4) other key licensing areas.
The outreach teams reviewed whether a state had fully and uniformly adopted the following provisions of the
PLMA:
 Section 2 – Definitions, specifically the definitions for home state, insurance producer, negotiate, sell,
solicit, Uniform Application and Uniform Business Entity Application;
 Section 4B(6) – Commercial multistate risk exemption;
 Section 7A – Definitions for the six major lines of authority;
 Section 13D – Commission sharing exemption; and
 Section 16 – Reciprocity.
For each state, the outreach teams examined whether the state had been certified as reciprocal and whether the state imposed
additional requirements on the non-resident outside of Section 8 of the PLMA, such as bond requirements for certain lines of
authority, i.e. surplus lines bond. It was also noted whether a state had retaliatory licensing and/or appointment fees.
With regard to the Uniform Licensing Standards, the outreach teams considered states’ compliance with the following
standards:
 Standard No. 8 – Lines of Authority;
 Standard No. 14b – Background Checks, Fingerprinting;
 Standard No. 15 – NAIC Uniform Application;
 Standard No. 16 – Lines of Authority Issued; and
 Standard No. 18 – Continuation Process.
3 The producer licensing regulators who volunteered a significant amount of their time and expertise to conduct the
producer licensing assessments volunteered again for this outreach effort and were generally assigned to the states where
they conducted on-site assessments.
4 Uniform Licensing Standard No. 14b – Background Checks.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The outreach teams also considered any other Uniform Licensing Standards where the state was significantly out
of compliance.
State processes and procedures in the following six areas were also evaluated:
 Business entity licensing (e.g. branches, affiliations, name approval);
 Individual and business entity appointment process;
 Secretary of State proof of registration requirements, if any;
 Electronic processing issues;
 Requiring an underlying life line of authority as a prerequisite for a variable line of authority; and
 Requiring a letter of clearance in lieu of relying upon information in the State Producer Licensing
Database.
Information to facilitate these focus areas was compiled from several different sources including the state’s producer
licensing statutes, web site, NIPR electronic business rules, and Producer Licensing Assessment Report. Industry was also
asked to provide information and raise concerns for the outreach team’s consideration.
E. Structure of Outreach Efforts
Each outreach team was provided a template with state-specific information in each of the areas mentioned above. In
general, each outreach team had an initial one-hour conference call to discuss the background information and to identify the
priority issues to be discussed with the respective state. During each call, the industry team participants were asked to
identify changes and issues of importance to their members. Part of the discussion included gathering information about past
efforts towards achieving reciprocity and uniformity and the level of historical and current support among local industry for
addressing these issues.
Based on the initial outreach team discussion, an agenda and set of briefing points were provided to the outreach team and the
state’s Commissioner and staff. In general, each outreach team held a one-hour conference call with the state and often times,
had a very interactive, engaging dialogue with the state Commissioner and his or her staff. For each issue identified, the
state’s Commissioner was generally asked if this was an issue for their local industry and what type of support they needed to
effectuate the necessary change. Industry participants were also asked to describe the level of local support from their
respective members to address these issues. The Coalition Commissioner generally also provided an opportunity for industry
members to voice any other concerns or issues not previously raised.
Finally, a summary of the discussion between the outreach team and the outreach state was prepared and provided to the
participants on the outreach call. These state-specific summaries have been compiled and were included in the respective
Commissioner’s materials for the 2009 Commissioner’s Conference.
The specific details of state compliance status and activity cited in this report are subject to change as states introduce
legislation or implement administrative process changes to achieve compliance.
IV. GENERAL OUTCOME OF OUTREACH EFFORTS
A. Impact of Industry Involvement
The outreach program afforded industry members a unique forum to speak directly with Commissioners and key staff about
the most pressing producer licensing issues. Industry had multiple opportunities to highlight their perspectives on the most
important issues for each state to address. The process also resulted in increased industry awareness and
understanding of reciprocity, uniformity and other key issues at the national and local levels.
As part of this effort, national trade associations were encouraged to reach out to their state association chapters and to
either include them in the calls with the state insurance commissioners or represent specific local concerns. The
Professional Insurance Agents (PIA) consistently provided this coordination for the outreach calls. The National
Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors (NAIFA) also contacted their local state associations in preparation for the
outreach calls. This effort to include the state association chapters was a valuable part of the outreach as it gave

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Commissioners, where PIA and NAIFA were members of the outreach team, an opportunity to hear directly from
producers operating in the marketplace. In addition, this effort provided all parties greater insights into what priorities are
important at the state level and how these priorities are the same or vary from the priorities of the national producer
licensing trade associations.
Industry trade associations were helpful in prioritizing the implementation of licensing standards. As part of this
prioritization, industry trade associations were willing to work with the states to simplify or eliminate certain licensing
requirements, but did not routinely offer solutions or proactively commit to target additional resources for the
implementation issues agreed by both regulators and industry to be priorities. For example, the issue of fingerprinting
producer applicants was raised on many state calls with a number of states expressing the need for legislative changes
coupled with opposition from state producer associations.
While the implementation of a fingerprint requirement for resident producer applicants would be a major step toward
achieving full licensing reciprocity, which is a priority for industry, the trade associations generally did not offer support for
any proposed legislation in the states wanting to pursue full implementation of a fingerprint requirement. Some readily
acknowledged their members oppose passage of this requirement in the respective states. The NAIC membership has
offered a compromise position, which has met with some degree of support from producer licensing trade associations, by
suggesting that states implement fingerprinting on a prospective basis thus eliminating the need for currently licensed
producers to undergo a fingerprint requirement.
In addition, the outreach teams found that some issues identified as problematic at the national level, such as business entity
licensing, were not identified as problematic at the local level. This stemmed from varying perspectives of producers who
hold licenses in one or two states as opposed to the national trade associations, which view the licensing framework from a
broader, national perspective. For example, producers active at the local level frequently opposed eliminating or re-defining
lines of authority due to the administrative adjustments involved, but national trade associations often voiced concern about
inefficiencies resulting from inconsistencies among lines of authority available from state to state.
B. Common Issues among Outreach Teams
The issues most commonly raised by the state outreach teams were:
1. Authorization to fingerprint resident applicants for criminal background checks;
2. Adoption of the major lines of authority separately and as defined in PLMA along with
consolidation of limited lines of authority;
3. Education requirements for both pre-licensing and license continuation; and
4. Simplification of the business entity licensing process.
In general, the outreach calls with the states confirmed that states have worked to make many administrative and regulatory
changes within their control, but continue to struggle with making certain legislative changes.
1. Fingerprinting
The fingerprinting issue was addressed to some degree by at least 27 different state outreach teams. The ultimate uniformity
goal is for all states to have the authority and capability to fingerprint resident applicants and conduct state and federal
criminal background checks. Full implementation would presumably eliminate the fingerprint requirement non-reciprocal
states currently impose upon non-resident applicants. As observed in the Aggregate Report and most outreach summaries, the
primary barrier to this legislative change is lack of support from the state and local industry organizations. Stated reasons for
opposition to the legislation seem to focus on generalized privacy concerns, perceived lack of need and uncertainty about
applicability to existing producers. Many Coalition Commissioners suggested preparing an informational packet about the
NAIC’s Authorization for Criminal Background Check Model and how the electronic fingerprinting process generally works
in states.
2. Major and Limited Lines of Authority
The adoption of the major lines of authority, separately and as defined by PLMA, was addressed to some degree by at least
14 different state outreach teams. The ultimate uniformity goal is for all states to license resident and non-resident producers
based on equivalent lines of authority. For instance, a life license in one state should entitle a producer to sell, solicit and
negotiate to the same extent as a producer holding a life license in another state. Many states would require legislative
changes to harmonize their current lines of authority with the PLMA lines of authority. Some Commissioners already made

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
these changes following the producer licensing assessment, or were including them in their 2009 legislative package. Other
Commissioners stated these changes were not a priority for the Department or their local agent community. This issue is one
where states and their local industry must both assign it a high level of priority in order to achieve success, but also one that
should be kept in the forefront of the discussion among Commissioners to emphasize the need for full implementation and
the resultant benefit to reciprocity.
Consolidating available limited lines of authority into the core limited lines as defined by the Uniform Licensing Standards
was addressed to some degree by at least 23 different state outreach teams. Acknowledging recent clarification to the
uniformity standards, the ultimate uniformity goal is for all states to eliminate disparate and specialized limited lines of
authority in favor of the core limited lines of authority and map additional lines into applicable major lines of authority. In
order to comply with non-resident reciprocity requirements, states are compelled to provide some type of non-resident
limited license to applicants holding non-core limited lines, even though these lines do not synchronize with the limited lines
offered to its resident producers. In many outreach calls, the Commissioners indicated their willingness to eliminate
additional limited lines but they faced challenges from sectors of their local industry strongly in favor of particular
specialized lines such as industrial fire and dental. Like the major lines of authority issue, further progress is dependent upon
the support of the industry to effectuate these changes. Further discussion by the NAIC membership on ways to streamline
limited lines should also be pursued.
3. Pre-licensing and Continuing Education Requirements
Minimum hours of education for pre-licensing and/or continuing education were addressed to some degree by 21 different
outreach teams. Consistent with the findings of the on-site assessment process, there is a high level of understanding of the
Uniform Licensing Standards in this area. The ultimate uniformity goals are 20 hours per line of authority for states
requiring pre-licensing education, zero hours for states not requiring pre-licensing education and 24 hours of continuing
education for all major lines of authority, to include 3 hours of ethics training. The outreach calls validated the assessment
findings regarding the reasons for noncompliance. Commissioners value the need for consistency in these areas but
universally contend with resistance to change among local industry. Lack of local support primarily takes the form of
opposition to lowering the minimum hours required. Likewise, industry participants at the national level characterized the
importance of state-to-state consistency in these areas as dependent on the local level of interest.
4. Business Entity Licensing
The business entity licensing process was addressed to some degree by 25 different outreach teams. The ultimate goal for the
business entity licensing issues is simplification and standardization, a matter which the NARAB (EX) Working Group is
currently evaluating for purposes of developing a recommendation. During the outreach efforts, industry advocated that
particular states eliminate administratively burdensome requirements upon business entities, especially non-resident business
entities. Some of these requirements included licensing branch locations, listing or tracking of affiliated producers, and prior
approval of legal or assumed names. The outreach teams also encouraged states to fully utilize NIPR’s resident and non-
resident business entity licensing functionality including the recommendation to eliminate requirements that cause all
business entity applications filed through NIPR to pend or defer to the insurance department.
C. Common Issues among Industry Trade Associations
The most common issues raised by industry, in addition to the issues identified above, included:
1. Full and uniform adoption of all provisions of the PLMA;
2. Full licensing reciprocity among all states; and
3. Elimination of the Secretary of State registration requirement for non-resident applicants.
1. Full and Uniform Adoption of PLMA
Full and uniform adoption of the Producer Licensing Model Act was addressed to some degree by 24 different
outreach teams. The ultimate goal of complete PLMA adoption for both states and industry is for all states to have
the same or similar laws with regard to key licensing definitions, qualifications, exemptions and requirements. With
regard to specific PLMA provisions, industry members were strong proponents for states to adopt PLMA Section
4B(6) permitting the commercial multistate risk exemption and PLMA Section 13D permitting a commission-
sharing exemption. Industry members also strongly advocated for states to amend appointment laws and associated
practices to be completely consistent with the appointment process specified in PLMA Section 16. It was with
regard to these types of changes that industry members most often indicated their willingness to actively support

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
legislative change in the particular state.
2. Potential Reciprocity Issues
Potential reciprocity concerns were addressed to some degree by 31 different outreach teams. The ultimate goal of full
reciprocity is for all states to license non-residents on a reciprocal basis and not impose additional requirements outside those
permitted under GLBA. Outreach teams made a concerted effort to work with the remaining non- reciprocal states to find
support for eliminating additional requirements such as bond and pre-licensing requirements on non-resident surplus lines
producers. Outreach teams also noted potential GLBA reciprocity issues in light of the recommendations and work of the
current NARAB (EX) Working Group. These issues included at least 22 states requiring a non-resident to obtain an
underlying life license as a prerequisite to obtaining a variable license and states requiring non-resident business entities to
submit articles of incorporation or additional certifications. Industry generally offered to provide needed support to eliminate
these additional requirements.
3. Confirmation of Secretary of State Registration
Whether states require Secretary of State proof of foreign corporation registration as a prerequisite to licensure was addressed
to some degree by 9 different outreach teams. As stated earlier, the NAIC has made a concerted and successful effort to
encourage all members to eliminate this as a prerequisite to licensing. In many outreach calls, this issue was raised in terms
of confirming or commending that this requirement had been eliminated by the Commissioner and the department.
Industry offered whatever support necessary to help achieve elimination of this Secretary of State check altogether. Further,
industry also indicated they would be lobbying state legislatures to enact a provision exempting foreign business entities from
registering with the Secretary of State when seeking a non-resident insurance license.
D. Recommendations for Next Steps
The outreach process illustrated that states have already implemented changes based upon the feedback received from their
on-site producer licensing assessment in early 2008. Many states provided assurances during the outreach calls to continue
working toward implementation of the Uniform Licensing Standards. In summary, states have implemented most of the
Uniform Licensing Standards that could be implemented through administrative changes or promulgation of regulations. At
the same time, states continue to seek support from the national trade associations to implement remaining changes.
Producer licensing remains a critical strategic initiative of the NAIC membership in 2009 and the focus of the newly-
created Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force. This outreach effort has produced additional constructive information that can
be used by the Task Force, its working groups, interested parties and the Producer Licensing Coalition members in
determining how best to effectuate meaningful changes and recommendations. Suggested areas for focused discussion and
action in 2009 include:
Producer Licensing Task Force
1. Monitor progress on late 2008 recommendations to NIPR, which included:

 Working closely with NAIC Market Regulation Division and Producer Licensing Working Group to
identify areas in states’ electronic business rules that do not appear to comply with reciprocity or
uniformity standards;
 Development of uniform set of electronic processing standards (business rules) to facilitate “true
uniformity” versus “virtual uniformity”;
 Central location for submission of company contract information (i.e., appointments/contracts database);
 Coordination and/or tracking of multi-state insurance examination;
 Central location for submission of national criminal background check status information; and
 Central location to submit continuing education and pre-licensing course information.
 Work closely with NIPR to encourage full utilization by all states and producers of NIPR products and
services including individual and business entity resident and non-resident licensing, Address Change
Requests, Attachments Warehouse, and Administrative Reporting (when available).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
2. Finalize the evaluation of the key findings and issues regarding disparate business entity licensing laws, regulations and
practices identified in the state producer licensing assessments by comparing the administrative burdens with the
consumer protections arising from the licensing of business entities. Provide policymaking recommendations for
simplifying and standardizing the business entity licensing process, considering all options ranging from elimination of
the licensing of business entities to elimination of components of the process such as licensing by line of authority or
by each branch location.
3. Develop a strategy to implement fingerprinting in all states, establish the suggested deadline for implementation and
identify what additional resources from state insurance regulators, industry and consumer groups will be committed to
this effort.
NARAB Working Group
1. Finalize the evaluation of the reciprocity standard developed by the NAIC’s 2002 NARAB (EX) Working Group and
make final recommendations for revisions or additions to the standard to address the issues identified in the Aggregate
Report, including the various state requirements that are imposed upon non-residents but may not have been
specifically addressed in the 2002 reciprocity standard. Provide a recommended plan for accomplishing the
certification process for states regarding any revisions or additions to the 2002 reciprocity standard.
2. Conduct additional outreach with the five remaining jurisdictions (CA, FL, NY, PR, WA) that have not met the
licensing reciprocity mandates of GLBA to identify specific barriers for these jurisdictions implementing licensing
reciprocity; obtain specific detail from the industry representatives of the Producer Licensing Coalition regarding what
solutions and resources they are willing to provide to address these specific barriers; and obtain specific detail
regarding what solutions and resources the jurisdictions that have not satisfied the reciprocity mandates of GLBA will
provide to address the specific barriers.
Producer Licensing Working Group
1. Develop uniform guidelines for background check reviews.
2. Provide ongoing maintenance and review of reciprocity guidelines for continuing education providers, including state
review and approval of courses, with particular attention to continuing education provided over the Internet.
3. Provide input and feedback to NAIC/NIPR staff regarding the development of electronic licensing applications, such as
a centralized filing point for notification of administrative/criminal actions and Personalized Information Capture
System (PICS) alerts for state regulators.
4. Serve as informal focus group with NAIC staff for the development and delivery of a State Licensing Handbook
training for state insurance departments.
NAIC/Industry Producer Licensing Coalition
1. Continue to serve as the forum for NAIC membership and industry to exchange views, opinions and ideas on producer
licensing priorities, such as professional standards of producers, state licensing laws, state administrative procedures
and federal legislation.
2. Follow up on 2008 and 2009 state assessment reports to communicate reform priorities to the Commissioners for
consideration of 2009 reform legislation.
3. Continue to pursue national producer trades’ endorsement of professional licensing standards, in follow up to
November 2008 letter from Commissioner Sevigny.
4. Continue discussions on ways to further improve processes the industry believes are administratively burdensome to
producers, including the appointment process, the examination/testing process and ways to encourage state and local
industry organizations to actively support full adoption of the major lines of authority and elimination of non-core
limited lines of authority.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Identify the Uniform Licensing Standards that are not priorities for industry and do not impede the implementation of
licensing reciprocity, such as pre-licensing education or waivers/exemptions from continuing education, to ensure the
appropriate priority of these standards when expending resources on licensing reforms.
V. OVERALL RESULTS OF PRODUCER LICENSING ASSESSMENT AND OUTREACH

EFFORTS
The producer licensing assessment and recent outreach efforts have yielded the most accurate and complete picture to date
of the status of uniformity and reciprocity compliance among the states. Through the assessment, six additional states were
formally certified as meeting the NAIC’s reciprocity standard. Each state also received a candid, peer-to-peer assessment of
their compliance with the uniformity standards and other key areas of producer licensing reform and modernization. The
assessment provided a roadmap for states to implement legislative, regulatory and administrative process changes.
Throughout this process, many states indicated their intent to leverage the assessment findings to push for legislation to
become compliant with NAIC standards.
Prior to the producer licensing assessment, states self-reported whether their laws, regulations and processes complied with
NAIC uniformity standards. The assessment was a comprehensive independent effort to provide peer review and a review
by the NAIC Legal Division as to whether state’s laws and regulations constitute compliance with NAIC standards. A
uniformity chart was included in each state’s Producer Licensing Assessment Report to illustrate the state’s compliance
both before and after the on-site assessment. It was not uncommon for states to change status from noncompliant to
compliant, or vice versa, when they walked through the standards with the review team.
In September 2008, the NAIC updated the states’ uniformity charts based on information provided by each state confirming
a change in process or state law. For instance, the producer licensing assessment found several states were not fully utilizing
the NAIC’s uniform applications for resident and non-resident license applicants. Many states made changes soon after the
assessment, which often moved them into compliance for this standard. This Fall 2008 update showed positive movement in
18 of the 38 Uniform Licensing Standards meaning that at least one, and in many cases more than one state, reported
achieving compliance with one or more additional standards since their assessment. Out of the 45 states reporting updates, a
total of 18 states reported a collective 41 positive compliance changes.
In conjunction with the outreach effort, states’ compliance status has again been updated, moving the “check mark” from
noncompliant to compliant. Appendix II provides a current aggregated uniformity compliance chart. While the outreach
effort noted and commended several states for introducing currently pending legislation to bring them into compliance, a
change in state compliance status will be reflected once legislation is enacted.
The current aggregated uniformity compliance chart reflects a net total of 98 instances where states moved from
noncompliant to compliant in the past year. Specific changes are outlined in Appendix II and include:
 Five additional states comply with the uniformity standard of 24 hours of continuing education for
all major lines, including three hours of ethics training;
 Eight additional states perform background checks on resident applicants against NAIC RIRS and
SAD information;
 Three additional states have authority to require fingerprinting;
 Eight additional states utilize the NAIC Uniform Applications;
 Seven additional states issue the major lines of authority independently and consistently with the
PLMA definitions;
 Six additional states comply with the uniformity standard limiting the available exemptions from
continuing education; and
 Six additional states comply with the uniformity standard specifying the appropriate number and
definitions of limited lines of authority.
The chart also documents eight other uniformity standards where one or two additional states became compliant. In total,
the chart illustrates an overall compliance rate of 84% with the NAIC Uniform Licensing Standards.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
VI. CONCLUSION
The tremendous amount of improvement in compliance with Uniform Licensing Standards demonstrates the effectiveness of
the dedicated proactive efforts of NAIC members and industry, both Producer Licensing Coalition members and local-
level producer representatives, toward meaningful, targeted producer licensing reform. The on- site assessment process was
characterized as providing a roadmap for legislative and regulatory changes necessary to achieve complete reciprocity and
uniformity. Using this roadmap, the outreach project was a vehicle for leveraging regulator and industry expertise to identify
priority issues. The outreach effort built upon the factual basis provided by the assessments and assisted states in crystallizing
their specific needs, whether, for example, to enlist industry support for legislative proposals or to revise business rules to
accurately reflect Department practice.
Industry involvement was the key feature of the outreach process that propelled it beyond the assessment program. Industry
participation enabled concrete gains in identifying and garnering support for further steps toward uniformity and streamlined
licensing processes. The outreach process also highlighted areas where states receive inconsistent messages from national
industry groups and local industry representatives. The Coalition acknowledges and deeply appreciates the extensive efforts
and collaborative spirit demonstrated by the industry participants. It is also important to recognize the continued
contributions of the Coalition Commissioners and producer licensing regulators who dedicated their valuable time to assist
their fellow states and share their tremendous expertise.
As a result of the outreach process, states have an even better gauge on where they stand in relation to producer licensing
goals, the specific steps needed to accomplish the goals and the industry and fellow regulator support available to help realize
the goals. Consistent with the aggregate assessment report issued one year ago, this report is intended to assist the NAIC
leadership and membership in further defining the roadmap for reform in 2009 and in evaluating options for the future of
state-based producer licensing regulation.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX I
CE
ERTIFICATION OF STATES FO OR PRODUCER LICENSING
L REECIPROCITY
- Forty-seven jurisd AIC as having met the reciprocity manndates of the Gram
dictions are now reccognized by the NA mm-Leach-Bliley
Act (GLBA).
DC
Certified Reciprocal
R (47) Non-Certtified Reciprocal (55)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX II
W:\Mar09\TF
F\PLTF\Coalition\Producer Outreach
O Reporrt 3-16-09 finaal w.logo.doc

162
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix P
OGRESS REP
PRO PORT TO ME EMBERSHIP
ON PRODUUCER LICEN NSING
STATE ASSESSMEN NTS
arch 27, 2010
Ma
Overvview of NAIC/I
/Industry Prod
ducer Licensingg Coalition Ou
utreach Effortts
II. INTR
RODUCTION
TThis report pro

ovides an updatte on all aspeccts of the NAIC C’s producer liicensing strategy, including tthe work of thhe Producer
LLicensing (EX)) Task Force, NARAB (EX)) Working Gro oup, the Produucer Licensingg (D) Working Group and thhe National
IInsurance Prodducer Registry to address thee key findingss and recommeendations arisiing from the 22008 Producerr Licensing
AAssessment, a comprehensivee, membership p-wide on-site assessment off each state’s llaws and proceesses. It also pprovides an
ooverview of thee NAIC/Industtry Producer Liicensing Coalittion and its 20 08 and 2009 reegulator/industtry team outreaach efforts,
ggeneral outcom
mes of this effort and recomm mended next steeps for continuued progress annd momentum. The report deemonstrates
thhe tremendouss progress maade by the meembers, both individually
i annd collectivelyy, since the N
NAIC first unddertook the
pproducer licenssing strategic initiative in May
M 2007 to further
fu achievee compliance w with NAIC reciprocity and uniformity
sstandards and im
mproving the licensing
l proceess for residentt and non-residdent producers across the natiion.
TThe Producer Licensing

L Coaalition, which is a joint grouup of Commisssioners, produucer licensing regulators, annd industry
rrepresentatives, has completeed a second an nnual round ofo outreach to several state iinsurance depaartments for ppurposes of
iddentifying thee support need ded to achievee remaining prroducer licenssing reforms. IIndustry tradee representativees had the
oopportunity to actively
a engage Commission ners and their sttaff on issues oof concern to thheir members. This interactivve dialogue
ccontinues to highlight areas requiring
r suppoort from the in
ndustry and leggislature for suuccessful impleementation, annd provides
thhe opportunityy for the respective Departmments to gauge the level of inndustry supporrt, indifferencee or oppositionn to certain
rreform efforts. This report sum
mmarizes thesee efforts and prrovides recomm mendations forr areas of focus in 2010.
III. SUMM
MARY OF 20
009 ACTION ITEMS
I
A. Overview of
o Producer Licensing
L Assessment
IIn Fall 2007, thhe NAIC, at th he request of the membersh hip, with the suupport of the C Coalition, andd with the assisstance of a
ddedicated team m of producer licensing reegulators, com mpleted a meembership-widee, comprehennsive producerr licensing
aassessment. In three short mo onths, 12 state insurance regu ulators, along with ten NAIC C staff, dividedd into teams of three and
cconducted on-ssite visits to 50 states, the District
D of Colu umbia and Puuerto Rico to rreview certain components oof a state’s
pproducer licenssing laws, practtices and proceesses. This effo
ort also involveed significant ppreparation by the state’s liceensing staff
aas well as activ
ve participation
n by the Comm missioners and their
t senior deppartment officiials.
IIn February 20008, the NAIC published

p the Producer
P Licen nsing Assessmeent Aggregate Report of Finddings (Aggregaate Report)
wwhich outlined the key findin ngs, conclusionns and recomm mendations for nnext steps. Thee Aggregate R
Report providedd a national
ppicture of the state of produ ucer licensing and identified d those areas of success ass well as roaddblocks in achhieving full
rreciprocity and uniformity compliance. It allso recommend ded areas for taargeted improvvement. The Agggregate Reporrt provided
thhe groundwork k for several significant projeects and initiatiives assigned bby the NAIC Executive (EX) Committee.
B. Implementtation of Aggrregate Report Recommendaations
1. Producer Licensing
L Task
k Force
TTo provide addditional focus and C appointed a new Producerr Licensing

a prioritizatiion to produceer licensing effforts, the NAIC
((EX) Task Forcce in 2009. Th he Task Force members serv ved as the coree group of leadders championiing the NAIC’’s producer
liicensing reform
m initiatives, including
i the oversight of various
v groups responsible fo
for producer licensing reform
ms in 2009

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(e.g., NAIC/Industry Producer Licensing Coalition, NARAB (EX) Working Group and Producer Licensing Working Group).
The specific priorities and accomplishments for each these groups are outlined below.
In addition to coordinating the activities of the various working groups, the Task Force focused its attention on the
simplification of business entity licensing. The issues for the simplification of business entity licensing have been prioritized
and discussions continue on how best to simplify the business entity licensing process while retaining the necessary
consumer protections. The Task Force has ruled out the option of eliminating the business entity license; however, the
following range of options is still being considered: (1) eliminate the licensing of business entities by line of authority; (2)
eliminate the requirement that the Designated Responsible Producer hold the same lines of authority as the business entity;
(3) eliminate the requirement for a business entity to track and list each producer affiliated with it; (4) eliminate the licensing
or registration of each branch location of a business entity; and (5) eliminate the filing of organizational documents; and (6)
eliminating the prior approval of assumed names.
In conjunction with the electronic implementation of the NAIC/NIPR Attachments Warehouse, the Task Force adopted a
model bulletin to facilitate the use of the NAIC/NIPR Attachments Warehouse. The Attachments Warehouse is described in
more detail in the National Insurance Producer Registry section of this Report.
2. NARAB Working Group
One of the significant initiatives stemming from the producer licensing assessment in 2008 was to reconstitute the NARAB
(EX) Working Group to evaluate whether certain non-reciprocal states were eligible for reciprocity certification based on
changes to their laws and regulations governing non-resident licensing. Through this effort, the number of reciprocal
jurisdictions was increased to from 40 to 47. The Working Group also considered whether certain state requirements imposed
upon non-residents and not necessarily addressed in the NAIC’s 2002 reciprocity certification report have an impact on the
reciprocity requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. Recognizing that both the producer licensing industry and
producer licensing regulation have significantly evolved and modernized since 2002, the NAIC members willingly and
voluntarily undertook this effort to carefully scrutinize possible additional reciprocity issues that exist today.
The effort to update the NAIC’s reciprocity standard culminated in the development of the Report of the NARAB Working
Group on Continuing Compliance with the Reciprocity Requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. This report
summarized the Working Group’s determination of how certain issues affect reciprocity and appropriately updates and
strengthens the NAIC’s reciprocity standard. The NARAB Working Group and Producer Licensing Task Force adopted the
Report during the 2009 Summer National Meeting, and the Executive Committee and Plenary subsequently adopted the
Report during the 2009 Fall National Meeting. The Report incorporated key sections of the 2002 report in making findings on
13 specific state licensing practices considered permissible under GLBA’s tenets on non-resident producer licensing
reciprocity and on 10 practices found to be inconsistent with reciprocity. The Report made no determination about an
individual state’s continuing status as a reciprocal jurisdiction. The Working Group understood that some of its findings may
require states to undertake legislative, administrative or procedural charges in order to maintain status as a reciprocal
jurisdiction under the updated standard.
The NARAB Working Group developed a formal process for evaluating whether states will be considered reciprocal under
the updated standard. That process, similar to the approach taken for the 2002 reciprocity certification, incorporates the
following steps: (1) states complete a Reciprocity Checklist in order to self-evaluate and self-certify whether they are
reciprocal under the updated standard; (2) the checklists are posted to the NAIC Web site to allow for a 30-day interested
party comment period; and (3) the NARAB Working Group will work with the NAIC Legal Division in reviewing the
checklists to determine whether a state may be re-certified as reciprocal. The Working Group distributed the checklists to all
states in October 2009. The Working Group requested states to submit completed checklists as soon as possible, but noted
that states may not wish to do so prior to making any necessary statutory, administrative or procedural changes. Therefore,
the Working Group’s timeline for completing the checklist review proposed a deadline of July 1, 2010, while allowing for an
extension to July 1, 2011 for those states whose legislatures will not meet in 2010. The July 1, 2010 deadline is consistent
with the Working Group’s goal of preparing a report on the re-certification of states for consideration at the 2010 Summer
National Meeting.
As of March 15, 2010, 22 states returned completed Reciprocity Checklists. Consistent with the Working Group’s formal
evaluation process, those checklists have been posted to the NAIC Web site on a dedicated page accessible from the NARAB
Working Group page. The NAIC Legal Division has notified interested regulators and interested parties as completed
checklists are added, and all stakeholders are provided 30 days for the submission of written comments. Several comment
letters have been posted, and states have been notified directly of any interested party comments. The Working Group will

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
continue working with states to ensure timely and expeditious completion of checklists and resolution of any potential
reciprocity issues.
3. Producer Licensing Working Group
In 2009, the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group focused on the simplification of limited line licensing, particularly: (1)
the establishment of a limited line that encompasses several insurance products where the business of insurance is ancillary to
the business of the person offering the product; (2) the licensing requirements of individuals selling limited line insurance
products; and (3) the fingerprinting of individuals selling limited line insurance products.
The main focus of continued debate is whether to include the specific lines of authority, including some of the core limited
lines such as travel and crop insurance, within the definition of the ancillary line of authority. Some states believe the core
limited lines should be excluded because many states recognize these core limited lines as separate lines of authority. Other
states believe the core limited lines of travel and car rental should be included in the definition to ensure any licensing
requirements for the ancillary line of authority also apply to these core limited lines. The Working Group has not resolved
what the licensing requirements should be for the ancillary line of authority nor what, if any, fingerprint requirements should
apply to individuals selling limited line insurance products. The working group will continue its study of these issues in 2010.
In addition to limited line licensing issues, the Producer Licensing Working Group adopted Uniform Criminal History and
Regulatory Actions Background Review Guidelines. When all jurisdictions are compliant with the NAIC’s Uniform
Licensing Standards, including fingerprinting requirements, the ultimate goal is for each jurisdiction to defer to the resident
state for licensing determinations wherever possible. For all jurisdictions to have a comfort level with these licensing
determinations, a uniform process of review is necessary. The Working Group believes if all jurisdictions implement these
guidelines, in most situations, non-resident states will be able to defer to the resident state’s licensing decision. The uniform
standards in this area call for all jurisdictions to conduct a uniform background check including: (1) asking the questions on
the NAIC Uniform Application; (2) reviewing RIRS and SAD data; and (3) fingerprinting resident applicants for both a state
and federal criminal history background check.
4. National Insurance Producer Registry
In 2009, the National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR) continued its long-term goal of being the one-stop shopping
solution for producers and companies by expanding its products and services. In Fall 2009, NIPR released its latest licensing
tool with the implementation of Phase II of the Attachment Warehouse, expanded functionality for the Reporting of Actions
(ROA). The Warehouse electronically receives, stores, and shares licensing-related documents with the states. Once
documents are uploaded to the Warehouse, states receive an electronic notice alerting them to check the Warehouse for the
required documents. Released in Fall 2008, Phase I of the Warehouse allowed applicants to submit supporting documents in
response to “yes” answers to background questions on the NAIC Uniform Application. Phase I was well-received by the
states and industry, as evidenced by more than 7,300 supporting licensing documents being submitted to the Warehouse in
the first 18 months. Phase II of the Warehouse allows a producer to electronically file required reports of administrative,
criminal or civil actions to states within 30 days. The ROA function of the Warehouse makes it much easier to file the
documents electronically in a centralized location and report to multiple states at one time, instead of faxing or mailing
documents to the various states. To date, there have been 139 ROA submissions.
Another significant accomplishment for NIPR is the number of electronic Address Change Requests (ACR) processed. Since
the initial release of the ACR product in July 2007, NIPR has processed over 1,767,134 address changes.
Lastly, another area of focus this year was NIPR’s expansion of on-line licensing options with an emphasis on
implementation of business entity licensing and resident licensing/renewals. Considerable progress was achieved, with many
more products being added for several states. As of March 22, 2010, states-in-production totals for NIPR products are:
 Non-Resident Licensing for Individuals – 49 states;
 Non-Resident Licensing for Business Entities – 42 states;
 Non-Resident Renewals for Individuals – 46 states;
 Non-Resident Renewals for Business Entities – 35 states;
 Resident Licensing for Individuals – 24 states;
 Resident Licensing for Business Entities – 24 states;
 Resident Licensing Renewals for Individuals – 24 states;
 Resident Licensing Renewals for Business Entities – 25 states;
 Appointment Renewals – 9 states;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Electronic Funds Transfer for State Fees – 49 states;

 Address Change Requests – all states; and
 Attachments Warehouse:
Phase I - Background Supporting Documentation – all states
Phase II - Reporting of Actions – 49 states
5. Producer Licensing Coalition
In June 2007, the NAIC/Industry Producer Licensing Coalition was formed as a partnership of regulators and national trade
organizations, to focus and facilitate producer licensing uniformity initiatives. In 2009, the Coalition was comprised of 11
Commissioners and 13 national trade associations, including American Council of Life Insurers; American Insurance
Association; America’s Health Insurance Plans; Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers; CPCU Society; Independent
Insurance Agents & Brokers of America; LIMRA; Million Dollar Roundtable; National Alliance; National Association of
Insurance and Financial Advisors; National Association of Health Underwriters; National Association of Mutual Insurance
Companies; Professional Insurance Agents; Society of Financial Service Professionals; and Property Casualty Insurers
Association of America.
The Coalition has served as an exchange of useful information, opinions and ideas between regulators and industry
representatives. Often times, this exchange has turned into an action item for the industry or regulators, whether to solicit
feedback or support from their respective members or to develop a proposed solution to an identified issue. The Coalition has
led the state assessment process since late 2007, and every participant of the Coalition’s outreach effort – Coalition
Commissioners, producer licensing regulators and representatives of industry organizations – have volunteered many hours
and dedicated their expertise to promote the NAIC’s goals and licensing standards and assist states in achieving full
reciprocity and uniformity.
III. OVERVIEW OF PRODUCER OUTREACH EFFORT
A. Impetus for Outreach
Under the leadership of 2009 NAIC President Roger Sevigny, the NAIC’s producer licensing strategy has raised the
awareness of challenges in achieving meaningful producer licensing reform. The results of the producer licensing assessment
confirmed many of the remaining legislative and regulatory changes require active industry support, and the Coalition has
served a valuable purpose in engaging industry trade representatives in the reform process.
The peer-to-peer outreach of the producer licensing assessment provided NAIC members with an inventory of remaining
compliance issues. In many cases, the Commissioner and Department were strongly in favor of making the identified
changes, but were either unsuccessful in efforts to pass legislation or did not include proposals in legislative packages
because of active opposition or simple indifference from their producer licensing industry. Recognizing that constituency
support is often the key ingredient to successful legislative change, industry representatives have been engaged in the
outreach process and discussions of areas where industry can support certain state-specific producer licensing legislation. The
Coalition leveraged the valuable information gained through the producer licensing assessments in order to have a better
understanding of each state’s needs in terms of (1) full PLMA adoption, (2) reciprocity (3) uniformity compliance, and (4)
streamlining business entity licensing, appointments and electronic processing. This background information proved
extremely helpful not only as the outreach team developed recommendations to each state, but to facilitate a positive and
productive dialogue with Commissioners and their staff in terms of achieving the NAIC’s uniformity and reciprocity
standards.
B. Outreach Team Approach
The Coalition outreach initiative was conducted in a similar manner to the producer licensing assessments in that outreach
teams were formed and assigned to respective states. Each outreach team consisted of a Coalition Commissioner, two
producer licensing regulators,1 and two industry representatives. The following Commissioners participated on outreach
teams: Pennsylvania Commissioner Joel Ario; Idaho Director Bill Deal; Alaska Director Linda Hall; Oklahoma
Commissioner Kim Holland; Ohio Director Mary Jo Hudson; Tennessee Commissioner Leslie Newman; New Hampshire
Commissioner Roger Sevigny; and Iowa Commissioner Susan Voss. The following producer licensing regulators participated
1
The producer licensing regulators who volunteered a significant amount of their time and expertise to conduct the producer
licensing assessments volunteered again for this outreach effort and were generally assigned to the states where they
conducted on-site assessments.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
on outreach teams: Linda Brunette (AK); Jack Chaskey (NY); Keith Kuzmich (CA); Anne Marie Narcini (NJ); Tom
O’Meara (IA); Barbara Richardson (NH); Bobby Perkins (MS); Karen Vourvopoulos (OH); Treva Wright-Donnell (KY); and
Laurie Wolf (NIPR, formerly ND). The following industry representatives were assigned to on outreach teams: Nicole Allen
(CIAB); William Anderson (NAIFA); Wes Bissett (IIABA); David Eppstein (PIA); John Fielding (Steptoe & Johnson);
Larry Kibbe (Regulatory Affairs Consultant); David Leifer (ACLI); Rey Becker (PCI); Marty Mitchell (AHIP); and Pamela
Young (AIA).
Each industry representative was given the opportunity to request a particular state assignment. A concerted effort was made
to ensure at least one producer trade organization (i.e., IIABA, PIA, CIAB, NAIFA) was assigned to each state. Industry
representatives were also encouraged to coordinate and communicate concerns about a particular state to the industry
representatives assigned to the state.
C. Criteria for Outreach
The outreach effort commenced in December 2009 with the goal of completing the outreach in advance of the 2010
Commissioners Conference. Thirty-six states were targeted for outreach based on whether each state has a full legislative
session in 2010 and based on the criteria by which states were targeted for the previous round of outreach. States were
targeted for the previous round of outreach if their Producer Licensing State Report identified noncompliance with more than
three Uniform Licensing Standards or the state had not yet been certified as reciprocal. States out of compliance on fewer
than three standards were added to the list for outreach if they were not compliant with the fingerprinting standard,2 as a key
purpose of the outreach effort was to find ways to provide support to those states needing or considering fingerprint
legislation.
D. Outreach Process
The outreach effort continued to focus on those areas necessary for reciprocity and uniformity in producer licensing, as well
as streamlining of business entity licensing and electronic processing. The outreach teams were tasked with obtaining updates
to the information gathered during the previous year’s outreach effort. Specifically, the outreach effort focused on the
following areas: (1) state adoption of key PLMA provisions;3 (2) non-resident licensing requirements potentially inconsistent
with GLBA reciprocity requirements; (3) compliance with certain Uniform Licensing Standards;4 and (4) policy and
procedure in the following six areas:
 Business entity licensing (e.g. branches, affiliations, name approval);
 Individual and business entity appointment process;
 Secretary of State proof of registration requirements, if any;
 Electronic processing issues;
 Requiring an underlying life line of authority as a prerequisite for a variable line of authority; and
 Requiring a letter of clearance in lieu of relying upon information in the NAIC’s State Producer Licensing Database.
In order to gather updates to the information collected during the previous outreach effort, an agenda and written summary of
each state’s previous outreach report was provided to the outreach team and the state’s Commissioner and staff. Each
outreach team held a conference call to facilitate direct engagement among Commissioners, regulators, and industry
representatives. During each call, the following agenda items were covered:
 Updates on the priority issues identified in the previous year’s outreach report;
 Highlight any 2009 legislative activity not already discussed and legislative agenda for 2010;
 Alert Commissioner and producer licensing staff to deadlines associated with the ongoing assessment of continuing
compliance with the reciprocity requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act;
 Review new Uniform Licensing Standards, specifically surplus lines examinations, commercial multi-state risk
exemption and commission sharing exception from PLMA; and
 Any additional points raised by the Commissioner or industry participants.
2
Uniform Licensing Standard No. 14C – Background Checks.
3
The PLMA provisions reviewed for each state were Section 2 (definitions), Section 4B(6) (commercial multi-state risk
exemption), Section 7A (major lines of authority), Section 13D (commission sharing exemption), and Section 16
(reciprocity).
4
The Uniform Licensing Standards reviewed for each state were No. 8 (lines of authority examinations), No. 14C
(fingerprinting, background checks), No. 15 (NAIC Uniform Application), No. 16 (lines of authority issued), No. 18
(continuation process), No. 37 (surplus lines examination), No. 38 (PLMA commercial multi-state risk exemption), No. 39
(PLMA commission sharing provision).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The discussion included gathering information about past efforts towards achieving reciprocity and uniformity and the level
of historical and current support among local industry for addressing these issues. For each issue identified, the state’s
Commissioner was generally asked if the issue has received attention from their local industry and what type of support they
needed to effectuate the necessary change. Industry participants were also asked to describe the level of local support from
their respective members to address these issues. The Coalition Commissioner generally also provided an opportunity for
industry members to voice any other concerns or issues not previously raised.
Lastly, a summary of the discussion between the outreach team and the state was prepared and provided to the Commissioner
and participating staff on the outreach call. These state-specific summaries have been compiled and will be available for
industry representatives immediately following the 2010 Spring National Meeting.
The specific details of state compliance status and activity cited in this report are subject to change as states introduce
legislation or implement administrative process changes to achieve compliance.
IV. GENERAL OUTCOME OF OUTREACH EFFORTS
A. Impact of Industry Involvement
The outreach program afforded industry members a unique forum to speak directly with Commissioners and key staff about
the most pressing producer licensing issues. Industry had multiple opportunities to highlight their perspectives on the most
important issues for each state to address. The process continues to result in increased industry awareness and understanding
of reciprocity, uniformity and other key issues at the national and local levels.
To further enhance local industry awareness of national priorities, national trade associations were encouraged to reach out to
their state association chapters and to either include them in the calls with the state insurance commissioners or represent
specific local concerns. The Professional Insurance Agents (PIA) excelled at this assignment by bringing local
representatives to most, if not all, calls assigned as well as additional calls for states with a strong PIA presence. The
Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America and National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors also
heeded this request with good results. Including the local association chapters was a valuable part of the outreach as it gave
Commissioners an opportunity to hear directly from producers operating in the marketplace. In addition, this effort provided
all parties greater insights into what priorities are important at the state level and how these priorities are the same or vary
from the priorities of the national producer licensing trade associations.
The outreach teams found that some issues identified as problematic at the national level, such as business entity licensing,
were not identified as problematic at the local level. This stemmed from varying perspectives of producers who hold licenses
in one or two states as opposed to the national trade associations, which view the licensing framework from a broader,
national perspective. For example, producers active at the local level frequently opposed eliminating or re-defining lines of
authority due to the administrative adjustments involved, but national trade associations often voiced concern about
inefficiencies resulting from inconsistencies among lines of authority available from state to state.
While the implementation of a fingerprint requirement for resident producer applicants would be a major step toward
achieving full licensing reciprocity, which is a priority for industry, the trade associations generally did not identify
fingerprinting as a top priority. At times industry participants offered mild support but could not accommodate fingerprinting
in the current year’s agenda or stated further education was necessary before pursuing full implementation of a fingerprint
requirement. Some readily acknowledged their members oppose passage of this requirement in the respective states. Key
questions raised by local industry include the impact on producers already licensed, potential costs and the logistics of
recording the fingerprints.
Specific issues of concern to industry participants were consistent with those raised in the previous year’s outreach efforts.
1. Streamlined business entity licensing. This is a common issue among the outreach teams and is discussed at length
in the next section of this Report.
2. Full and uniform adoption of all provisions of PLMA. This issue was addressed to some degree by every outreach
team, because states were advised of new Uniform Licensing Standards requiring two of the most important and
least enacted provisions: the commercial multi-state risk exemption in § 4B(6) and the commission sharing
provision in § 13D. Industry participants also strongly advocated for states to amend appointment laws and
associated practices to be completely consistent with the appointment process specified in PLMA Section 16. It was
with regard to these types of changes that industry members most often indicated their willingness to actively
support legislative change in the particular state.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
3. Full licensing reciprocity among all states. Potential reciprocity concerns were addressed to some degree by all
outreach teams, because states were alerted about the ongoing assessment of continuing compliance with the
reciprocity requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act being conducted by the NARAB Working Group.
Outreach teams made a concerted effort to work with the remaining non-reciprocal states to find support for
eliminating additional requirements such as bond and pre-licensing requirements on non-resident surplus lines
producers. Industry generally offered to provide needed support to eliminate these additional requirements.
4. Elimination of the Secretary of State registration requirement for non-resident applicants. Whether states require
Secretary of State proof of foreign corporation registration as a prerequisite to licensure was addressed to some
degree by 9 different outreach teams. As stated earlier, the NAIC has made a concerted and successful effort to
encourage all members to eliminate this as a prerequisite to licensing. In many outreach calls, this issue was raised
in terms of confirming or commending that this requirement had been eliminated by the Commissioner and the
department. Industry offered whatever support necessary to help achieve elimination of this Secretary of State check
altogether. During this round of outreach, it was unclear whether industry has made progress in the goal articulated
last year to lobby state legislatures to enact a provision exempting foreign business entities from registering with the
Secretary of State when seeking a non-resident insurance license.
B. Common Issues among Outreach Teams
The issues most commonly raised by the state outreach teams were:
1. Authorization to fingerprint resident applicants for criminal background checks; and
2. Simplification of the business entity licensing process.
In general, the outreach calls with the states confirmed that states have worked to make many administrative and regulatory
changes within their control, but continue to struggle with making certain legislative changes.
1. Fingerprinting
The ultimate uniformity goal is for all states to have the authority and capability to fingerprint resident applicants and
conduct state and federal criminal background checks. Full implementation would presumably eliminate the fingerprint
requirement non-reciprocal states currently impose upon non-resident applicants. As observed in the Aggregate Report and
most state outreach reports, the primary barrier to this legislative change is lack of support from the state and local industry
organizations. Stated reasons for opposition to the legislation continue to focus on generalized privacy concerns, perceived
lack of need and uncertainty about applicability to existing producers.
Given the difficulties individual states face with implementing a fingerprint requirement, a federal solution may be more
appropriate. The National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers Act (H.R. 2554), known as NARAB II, would not
affect uniformity issues with resident licensing, but it could solve the major consumer protection issue of fingerprinting in
every state, for those producers who elect to join the national association the bill would establish. The NAIC has supported
this legislation as appropriately targeted and limited federal legislation that helps the states achieve the objective of increased
uniformity in non-resident producer licensing. The current iteration of NARAB II legislation maintains state regulator control
over the NARAB Board of Directors and, thus, over the non-resident licensing process without compromising important
consumer protections and state revenues.
2. Business Entity Licensing
The simplification and standardization of the business entity licensing process and the creation of uniform licensing standards
for business entities continues to be priority issue. During the outreach efforts, industry advocated that particular states
eliminate administratively burdensome requirements upon business entities, especially non-resident business entities. Some
of these requirements included licensing branch locations, listing or tracking of affiliated producers, and prior approval of
legal or assumed names. The outreach teams also encouraged states to fully utilize NIPR’s resident and non-resident business
entity licensing functionality, including the recommendation to eliminate requirements that cause all business entity
applications filed through NIPR to pend or defer to the insurance department.
C. Recommendations for Next Steps
The outreach process illustrated that states continue to implement changes based upon the feedback received from their on-
site producer licensing assessment in early 2008 and follow-up in early 2009. In fact, Coalition research shows that 55% of
producer licensing legislation introduced in 2009 – 17 of 31 bills introduced in 24 states – was successfully enacted.
Consistent with the prior year, states have implemented most of the Uniform Licensing Standards that could be implemented
through administrative changes or promulgation of regulations. States are aware of and taking steps to address potential

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
reciprocity issues that have been highlighted by the NARAB Working Group. At the same time, states continue to seek
support from the national trade associations to implement remaining changes.
Producer licensing remains a key strategic initiative of the NAIC membership in 2010 and the focus of the Producer
Licensing (EX) Task Force created in early 2009. This outreach effort has produced additional constructive information that
can be used by the Task Force, its working groups, interested parties and the Producer Licensing Coalition members in
determining how best to effectuate meaningful changes and recommendations. Suggested areas for focused discussion and
action in 2010 include:
Producer Licensing Task Force
1. Monitor progress on recommendations to NIPR, which include the following: (1) work closely with the NAIC Market
Regulation Division and the Producer Licensing Working Group to identify areas in the states’ electronic business rules
that do not appear to comply with reciprocity or uniformity standards; (2) develop a uniform set of electronic processing
standards (business rules) to facilitate “true” uniformity vs. “virtual” uniformity; (3) create a central location for the
submission of company contract information (i.e., appointments/contracts database); (4) coordinate and/or track multi-
state insurance examinations; (5) create a central location for the submission of national criminal background-check
status information; and (6) create a central location for the submission of continuing-education and pre-licensing course
information.
2. In conjunction with the Producer Licensing Coalition, work closely with the NIPR to encourage full utilization by all
states and producers of NIPR products and services, including individual and business entity resident and non-resident
licensing, address change requests, Attachments Warehouse and reporting of administrative actions.
3. Finalize the evaluation of the key findings and issues regarding disparate business entity licensing laws, regulations and
practices identified in the state producer licensing assessments by comparing the administrative burdens with the
consumer protections arising from the licensing of business entities, and provide policymaking recommendations for
simplifying and standardizing the business entity licensing process, considering all options ranging from elimination of
the licensing of business entities to elimination of components of the process, such as licensing by line of authority or by
each branch location.
4. Finalize a strategy plan to implement fingerprinting in all states, the suggested deadline for implementation and identify
what additional resources from state insurance regulators, the industry and consumer groups could be committed to this
effort.
5. Facilitate roundtable discussions at each national meeting with the state producer licensing directors for the exchange of
views, opinions and ideas on producer-licensing activities in the states and at the NAIC.
NARAB Working Group
1. Complete the state reciprocity recertification based on the Working Group’s 2009 reciprocity report and adopt a final
report for recertification of the states’ compliance with the reciprocity mandates of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act.
Producer Licensing Working Group
1. Review the process for examination development and develop uniform standards for the delivery of examinations,
updating of examinations and passage rate for examinations.
2. Finalize the review of limited-line licensing issues, with particular focus on the following: (1) the establishment of a
limited line that encompasses several insurance products where the business of insurance is ancillary to the business of
the person offering the product; (2) the licensing requirements of individuals selling limited-line insurance products; and
(3) the fingerprinting of individuals selling limited-line insurance products.
3. Continue to provide oversight and ongoing updates, as needed, to the State Licensing Handbook.
4. In response to inquiries about the states’ adoption and interpretation of the Producer Licensing Model Act (#205) and
uniform licensing standards (ULS), provide updates to the frequently asked questions document regarding the model act
and guidance on practices to implement all of the ULS.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
5. Provide ongoing maintenance and review of reciprocity guidelines and uniform application forms for continuing-
education providers and state review and approval of courses.
6. Provide input and feedback to NAIC/NIPR staff regarding the development of electronic-licensing applications, such as
a centralized filing point for notification of administrative/criminal actions and Personalized Information Capture System
(PICS) alerts for state insurance regulators.
7. Serve as an informal focus group with NAIC staff for the development and delivery of a State Licensing Handbook
training class for state insurance departments.
NAIC/Industry Producer Licensing Coalition
1. Continue to serve as the forum for the NAIC membership and industry to exchange views, opinions and ideas on
producer-licensing priorities, such as professional standards of producers, state licensing laws, state administrative
procedures and federal legislation.
2. Continue discussions on ways to further improve processes the industry believes are administratively burdensome to
producers, including the appointment process, the examination/testing process and ways to encourage state and local
industry organizations to actively support full adoption of the major lines of authority and elimination of non-core
3. Continue to track state legislative initiatives to implement uniform and reciprocal licensing standards and coordinate
regulator and industry support for such initiatives.
V. OVERALL RESULTS OF PRODUCER LICENSING ASSESSMENT AND OUTREACH EFFORTS
The producer licensing assessment and recent outreach efforts have yielded the most accurate and complete picture to date of
the status of uniformity and reciprocity compliance among the states. Prior to the producer licensing assessment, states self-
reported whether their laws, regulations and processes complied with NAIC uniformity standards. The assessment was a
comprehensive independent effort to provide peer review and a review by the NAIC Legal Division as to whether state’s laws
and regulations constitute compliance with NAIC standards. A uniformity chart was included in each state’s Producer
Licensing Assessment Report to illustrate the state’s compliance both before and after the on-site assessment. It was not
uncommon for states to change status from noncompliant to compliant, or vice versa, when they walked through the
standards with the review team.
In September 2008, the NAIC updated the states’ uniformity charts based on information provided by each state confirming a
change in process or state law. With the slight modifications and clarifications made to the Uniform Licensing Standards, the
Uniform Licensing Standards increased from 38 to 43. For example, the background check standard was further segmented
with three subpoints to provide greater clarity regarding state compliance. In addition, there was greater clarity given to the
standards for state adoption of the major lines of authority and the core limited lines of authority. The current update shows
positive movement in 22of the 43 Uniform Licensing Standards meaning that at least one, and in many cases more than one
state, reported achieving compliance with one or more additional standards since their assessment.
Appendix II provides a current aggregated uniformity compliance chart. While the outreach effort noted and commended
several states for introducing currently pending legislation to bring them into compliance, a change in state compliance status
will be reflected once legislation is enacted.
The current aggregated uniformity compliance chart reflects a net total of 129 instances where states moved from
noncompliant to compliant in the past year. This does not include instances of state compliance with the five new uniform
licensing standards. Specific changes are outlined in Appendix II and include:
 Five additional states comply with the uniformity standard of 24 hours of continuing education for all major
lines, including three hours of ethics training;
 Seven additional states perform background checks on resident applicants against NAIC RIRS and SAD
information;
 Nine states have passed legislation and will implement a fingerprint requirement in 2010;
 Thirteen additional states utilize the NAIC Uniform Applications;
 Seven additional states issue the major lines of authority independently and consistently with the PLMA
definitions;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 Nine additional states comply with the uniformity standard limiting the available exemptions from continuing
education; and
 Six additional states comply with the uniformity standard specifying the appropriate number and definitions of
The chart also documents eight other uniformity standards where one or two additional states became compliant. In total, the
chart illustrates an increase of overall compliance with the NAIC Uniform Licensing Standards from 80% in 2009 to 86% in
2010.
VI. CONCLUSION
The tremendous amount of improvement in compliance with Uniform Licensing Standards demonstrates the effectiveness of
the dedicated proactive efforts of NAIC members and industry, both Producer Licensing Coalition members and local-level
producer representatives, toward meaningful, targeted producer licensing reform. The on-site assessment process was
characterized as providing a roadmap for legislative and regulatory changes necessary to achieve complete reciprocity and
uniformity. Using this roadmap, the outreach project was a vehicle for leveraging regulator and industry expertise to identify
priority issues. The outreach effort built upon the factual basis provided by the assessments and assisted states in crystallizing
their specific needs, whether, for example, to enlist industry support for legislative proposals or to revise business rules to
accurately reflect Department practice.
As a result of the outreach process, states have an even better gauge on where they stand in relation to producer licensing
goals, the specific steps needed to accomplish the goals and the industry and fellow regulator support available to help realize
the goals. Consistent with the aggregate assessment report issued one year ago, this report is intended to assist the NAIC
leadership and membership in further defining the roadmap for reform in 2010 and in evaluating options for the future of
state-based producer licensing regulation.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX
A I
CE
ERTIFICATION OF STATES FO OR PRODUCER LICENSING
L REECIPROCITY
- Forty-seven jurisd AIC as having met the reciprocity manndates of the Gram
dictions are now reccognized by the NA mm-Leach-Bliley
Act (GLBA).
DC
Certified Reciprocal
R (47) Non-Certtified Reciprocal (55)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Pending Change
Regulation Rule
Not Compliant
Not Compliant
Dept. Process
March 2009
March 2010
March 2009
March 2010
UNIFORM LICENSING STANDARDS
Compliant
Compliant
LAW
-Compliance Chart-
*Updated March 23, 2010*
Licensing Qualification Standards

1 Age - 18 51 51 1 1 1
2 Citizenship 51 52 2 0 1
3 Education 51 51 1 1
Pre-Licensing Education Training Standards for Resident Applicants
4 Hours Required 30 40 22 12 10 3 1 1
5 Training Method 44 47 8 5 2 2
6 Verification of Completion 52 52 0 0
7 Waiver/Exemption 33 45 19 7 9 1 3
Producer Licensing Test Standards For Resident Applicants
8 Lines of Authority 33 41 19 11 9 1 3
9 Waiver/Exemption 35 42 17 10 3 2
10 Exam Content/Subject Area Standards 52 52 0 0
11 Testing Administration Requirements 52 52 0 0
12 Failure of Exam/Retesting 52 52 0 0
Integrity/Personal Qualifications/ Background Checks Standards
13 Integrity/Personal Standards 48 48 4 4 3
14A Background Checks - Uniform Application *(New Standard) NA 40 NA 9 1
14B Background Checks - RIRS / SPLR and SAD 44 51 2 1
14C(1) Background Checks - Fingerprinting State/Federal 16 16 36 36 27 9
14C(2) Background Checks - Statewide Criminal History *(New Standard) NA 24 NA 28 22 6
Application for Licensure/License Structure Standards
15 Uniform Application 31 44 21 8 3 1 1
16A Six Major Lines of Authority 34 41 16 11 4
16B Core Limited Lines 34 35 16 17 3
17 License Term 42 44 7 8 5 1 2 1
18 Continuation Process 23 29 16 23 17 4 6 3
19 Enforcement 48 51 1 1 1
20 Fee 51 51 1 1 1
Appointment Process Standards
21 Process 45 48 7 4 3 1
22 Appointment Renewal Cycle 51 51 1 1 1 1
Continuing Education Requirements Standards For Resident Producers
23 Credit Required 27 32 25 20 15 4 1 1
24 Term of Compliance 37 39 15 13 10 2 1 2
25 Lines of Authority 44 47 8 5 4 2
26 Subject Area Requirements 30 36 22 16 10 6
27 Repeating of CE Courses 45 49 7 3 1 1 1
28 CE Study Method 51 52 1 0 1
29 Verification of Completion 50 50 2 2 2
30 Waiver/Exemption 24 33 28 19 16 2 1
31 Course Approval Standards and Process 46 49 6 3 2 1
32 Advertising CE Programs 45 49 7 3 1 1
Limited Lines Uniformity Standards
33 Definitions of Core Limited Licenses 25 31 27 21 17 3 5
34 Testing Requirement Resident Applicants 50 50 2 7 1
35 CE Requirement Resident Producers 40 41 12 11 9 1 1 2
Surplus Lines Standards
36 Surplus Line Standards 49 50 3 2 1
37 Surplus Line Exam *(New Standard) NA 52 NA 0
Commercial Lines Multi-State Exemption Standard
38 Commercial Line Multiple Exemption *(New Standard) NA 44 NA 6
Commission Sharing Standard
39 Commission Sharing *(New Standard) NA 38 NA 9

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix Q
NAIC MODEL BULLETIN

September 10, 2006
DATE: (INSERT DATE)

TO: ALL INSURERS AND INSURANCE PRODUCERS WITH A PROPERTY LINE OF AUTHORITY
FROM: (INSERT NAME AND TITLE)
RE: FLOOD INSURANCE TRAINING REQUIREMENTS FOR INSURANCE PRODUCERS WITH A PROPERTY LINE
OF AUTHORITY SELLING THROUGH THE NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM (NFIP)
Section 207 of the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004 requires all producers selling flood insurance policies under the
NFIP to be properly trained and educated about the NFIP to ensure producers may best serve their clients.
The Act1 directs the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, in cooperation with the insurance industry,
State insurance regulators, and other interested parties to establish minimum training and education requirements for all
insurance agents who sell flood insurance policies. FEMA and state-approved continuing education providers are developing
courses related to the NFIP. An insurance producer who sells flood insurance may satisfy the minimum training and
education requirements by completing a course related to the NFIP, which may be approved for three hours of continuing
education credit by the (insert state insurance department name). The failure to comply with this continuing education
requirement may jeopardize the producer’s authority to write insurance through the NFIP.
All (insert state name) licensed resident insurance producers who sell federal flood insurance policies must comply with the
minimum training requirements of section 207 of the flood insurance reform act of 2004, and basic flood education as
outlined at 70 Fed. Reg., 52117 (Sept. 1, 2005) (to be codified at ** C.F.R. pt.******)2, or such later requirements as are
published by FEMA.
Licensed insurers shall demonstrate to the commissioner, upon request, that their licensed and appointed producers who sell
federal flood insurance policies have complied with the minimum federal flood insurance training requirements.
(INSERT COMMISSIONER NAME)

(INSERT STATE NAME)
(INSERT DATE OF ISSUANCE)
1
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On June 30, 2004, the President signed the Bunning-Bereuter-Blumenauer Flood
Insurance Reform Act of 2004 (Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004), Pub. L. 108-264. Section 207 of the Flood Insurance
Reform Act of 2004 states:
The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency shall, in cooperation with the insurance industry, State
insurance regulators, and other interested parties: (1) Establish minimum training and education requirements for all
insurance agents who sell flood insurance policies, and (2) Not later than 6 months after the date of enactment of this
Act, publish these requirements in the Federal Register, and inform insurance companies and agents of the
requirements.
2
This notice describes FEMA’s implementation of section 207 of the Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2004. As required by
the Act, FEMA has coordinated with the State insurance regulators, the insurance industry, and other interested parties. Input
received from these organizations emphasizes the value of working through the State insurance departments to avoid
establishing conflicting or burdensome training requirements upon insurance agents. While implementing the minimum
training requirements required by section 207, FEMA has been mindful of the Senate Report language, (S. REP. NO. 108–
262, at 4 & 9 (2004)), which cautions: In some cases, states may already have requirements to ensure that agents are well
versed in the flood insurance program. Where possible, FEMA should work to make sure that agents are not burdened with
inconsistent state and federal training and education requirements. In addition, where possible, FEMA should work to
implement the training requirements through the states, which already have continuing education processes in place.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix R
Model Bulletin on Long-term Care Continuing Education/Training
MODEL BULLETIN
DATE: [Insert Date]
TO: All Licensed Insurers Writing Long-Term Care Insurance

All Resident Insurance Producers Authorized to Sell, Solicit or Negotiate Long-Term Care Insurance
All Approved Continuing Education Providers
State LTC Partnership Program
FROM: [Insert Name & Title]
RE: Producer Training – Policies Issued Under Qualified State Long-Term Care Insurance Partnership
(“Qualified Partnership”)
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, Pub. L. 109-171 (“the DRA”) allows for the expansion of Qualified Partnerships. The
DRA and the State Medicaid Director’s Letter (SMDL #06-019) dated July 27, 2006, issued by Centers for Medicare &
Medicaid Services, require the [Insert Name of Insurance Department or Insurance Commissioner] to provide assurance that
any producer who sells, solicits or negotiates “a policy under a Partnership receives training and demonstrates an
understanding of Partnership policies and their relationship to public and private coverage to long-term care.”
Accordingly, an individual may not sell, solicit or negotiate long-term care insurance unless the individual is authorized as an
insurance producer for accident and health or sickness [include other lines of authority as applicable] and has completed a
one-time training course by or before July 1, 2008 [or substitute an alternate date at least one year after the legislation
becomes effective] and ongoing training every 24 months thereafter.
Insurers providing LTC insurance shall obtain verification that the producer receives such training, maintain records subject
to the state’s record retention requirements and make that verification available to the [Insert Name of Insurance
Commissioner] upon request. The one time training course shall be no less than 8 hours and the ongoing training shall be no
less than 4 hours. Training shall cover the following topics: long-term care insurance, long-term care services, Qualified
Partnerships, and the relationship between Qualified Partnerships and other public and private coverage of long-term care.
The satisfaction of these training requirements in any state shall be deemed to satisfy the training requirements in [Insert
Name of State]. These training requirements may be approved as continuing education courses under [insert reference to
applicable state law or regulation].
(INSERT COMMISSIONER NAME)

(INSERT COMMISSIONER TITLE)
(INSERT STATE NAME)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix S
NAIC PRODUCER LICENSING MODEL ACT
Table of Contents

Section 4. Exceptions to Licensing
Section 5. Application for Examination
Section 7. License
Section 8. Nonresident Licensing
Section 9. Exemption From Examination
Section 10. Assumed Names
Section 11. Temporary Licensing
Section 12. License Denial, Non-Renewal or Revocation
Section 13. Commissions
Section 14. Appointments [OPTIONAL]
Section 15. Notification to Insurance Commissioner of Termination
Section 16. Reciprocity
Section 18. Compensation Disclosure
This Act governs the qualifications and procedures for the licensing of insurance producers. It simplifies and organizes some
statutory language to improve efficiency, permits the use of new technology and reduces costs associated with issuing and
renewing insurance licenses.
This Act does not apply to excess and surplus lines agents and brokers licensed pursuant to Section [refer to state excess and
surplus lines statutes] except as provided in Section 8 and Section 16B of this Act.
Drafting Note: It is recommended that any statute or regulation inconsistent with this Act be repealed or amended.
Drafting Note: This Act also requires a report to the insurance commissioner of the termination of a producer by an insurer,
whether with or without cause.
A. “Business entity” means a corporation, association, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability
partnership, or other legal entity.
B. “Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the United States in which an insurance
producer maintains his or her principal place of residence or principal place of business and is licensed to act as an
insurance producer.
C. “Insurance” means any of the lines of authority in [insert reference to appropriate section of state law].
D. “Insurance producer” means a person required to be licensed under the laws of this state to sell, solicit or negotiate
insurance.
E. “Insurer” means [insert reference to appropriate section of state law].

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
F. “License” means a document issued by this state’s insurance commissioner authorizing a person to act as an
insurance producer for the lines of authority specified in the document. The license itself does not create any
authority, actual, apparent or inherent, in the holder to represent or commit an insurance carrier.
G. “Limited line credit insurance” includes credit life, credit disability, credit property, credit unemployment,
involuntary unemployment, mortgage life, mortgage guaranty, mortgage disability, guaranteed automobile
protection (gap) insurance, and any other form of insurance offered in connection with an extension of credit that is
limited to partially or wholly extinguishing that credit obligation that the insurance commissioner determines should
be designated a form of limited line credit insurance.
H. “Limited line credit insurance producer” means a person who sells, solicits or negotiates one or more forms of
limited line credit insurance coverage to individuals through a master, corporate, group or individual policy.
I. “Limited lines insurance” means those lines of insurance defined in [insert reference to state specific limited line
statute] or any other line of insurance that the insurance commissioner deems necessary to recognize for the
purposes of complying with Section 8E.
J. “Limited lines producer” means a person authorized by the insurance commissioner to sell, solicit or negotiate
limited lines insurance.
K. “Negotiate” means the act of conferring directly with or offering advice directly to a purchaser or prospective
purchaser of a particular contract of insurance concerning any of the substantive benefits, terms or conditions of the
contract, provided that the person engaged in that act either sells insurance or obtains insurance from insurers for
purchasers.
L. “Person” means an individual or a business entity.
M. “Sell” means to exchange a contract of insurance by any means, for money or its equivalent, on behalf of an
insurance company.
N. “Solicit” means attempting to sell insurance or asking or urging a person to apply for a particular kind of insurance
from a particular company.
O. “Terminate” means the cancellation of the relationship between an insurance producer and the insurer or the
termination of a producer’s authority to transact insurance.
P. “Uniform Business Entity Application” means the current version of the NAIC Uniform Business Entity Application
for resident and nonresident business entities.
Q. “Uniform Application” means the current version of the NAIC Uniform Application for resident and nonresident
producer licensing.
A person shall not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance in this state for any class or classes of insurance unless the person is
licensed for that line of authority in accordance with this Act.
Section 4. Exceptions to Licensing
A. Nothing in this Act shall be construed to require an insurer to obtain an insurance producer license. In this section,
the term “insurer” does not include an insurer’s officers, directors, employees, subsidiaries or affiliates.
B. A license as an insurance producer shall not be required of the following:
(1) An officer, director or employee of an insurer or of an insurance producer, provided that the officer, director
or employee does not receive any commission on policies written or sold to insure risks residing, located or
to be performed in this state and:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(a) The officer, director or employee’s activities are executive, administrative, managerial, clerical or a
combination of these, and are only indirectly related to the sale, solicitation or negotiation of
insurance; or
(b) The officer, director or employee’s function relates to underwriting, loss control, inspection or the
processing, adjusting, investigating or settling of a claim on a contract of insurance; or
(c) The officer, director or employee is acting in the capacity of a special agent or agency supervisor
assisting insurance producers where the person’s activities are limited to providing technical advice
and assistance to licensed insurance producers and do not include the sale, solicitation or negotiation
of insurance;
(2) A person who secures and furnishes information for the purpose of group life insurance, group property and
casualty insurance, group annuities, group or blanket accident and health insurance; or for the purpose of
enrolling individuals under plans; issuing certificates under plans or otherwise assisting in administering
plans; or performs administrative services related to mass marketed property and casualty insurance; where
no commission is paid to the person for the service;
(3) An employer or association or its officers, directors, employees, or the trustees of an employee trust plan, to
the extent that the employers, officers, employees, director or trustees are engaged in the administration or
operation of a program of employee benefits for the employer’s or association’s own employees or the
employees of its subsidiaries or affiliates, which program involves the use of insurance issued by an insurer,
as long as the employers, associations, officers, directors, employees or trustees are not in any manner
compensated, directly or indirectly, by the company issuing the contracts;
(4) Employees of insurers or organizations employed by insurers who are engaging in the inspection, rating or
classification of risks, or in the supervision of the training of insurance producers and who are not
individually engaged in the sale, solicitation or negotiation of insurance;
(5) A person whose activities in this state are limited to advertising without the intent to solicit insurance in this
state through communications in printed publications or other forms of electronic mass media whose
distribution is not limited to residents of the state, provided that the person does not sell, solicit or negotiate
insurance that would insure risks residing, located or to be performed in this state;
(6) A person who is not a resident of this state who sells, solicits or negotiates a contract of insurance for
commercial property and casualty risks to an insured with risks located in more than one state insured under
that contract, provided that that person is otherwise licensed as an insurance producer to sell, solicit or
negotiate that insurance in the state where the insured maintains its principal place of business and the
contract of insurance insures risks located in that state; or
(7) A salaried full-time employee who counsels or advises his or her employer relative to the insurance interests
of the employer or of the subsidiaries or business affiliates of the employer provided that the employee does
not sell or solicit insurance or receive a commission.
Drafting Note: Persons who provide general insurance advice in connection with providing other professional services such
as legal services, trust services, tax and accounting services, financial planning and investment advisory services are not
deemed to be soliciting the sale of insurance under this Act. Sections 3 and 4 of this Act are intended to address all persons
meeting the definition of “insurance producer” as defined in Title III, Section 336, of Public Law No. 106-102 (the “Gramm-
Leach-Bliley Act”).
Section 5. Application for Examination
A. A resident individual applying for an insurance producer license shall pass a written examination unless exempt
pursuant to Section 9. The examination shall test the knowledge of the individual concerning the lines of authority
for which application is made, the duties and responsibilities of an insurance producer and the insurance laws and
regulations of this state. Examinations required by this section shall be developed and conducted under rules and
regulations prescribed by the insurance commissioner.
B. The insurance commissioner may make arrangements, including contracting with an outside testing service, for
administering examinations and collecting the nonrefundable fee set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state
law or regulation].
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
C. Each individual applying for an examination shall remit a nonrefundable fee as prescribed by the insurance
D. An individual who fails to appear for the examination as scheduled or fails to pass the examination, shall reapply for
an examination and remit all required fees and forms before being rescheduled for another examination.
A. A person applying for a resident insurance producer license shall make application to the insurance commissioner on
the Uniform Application and declare under penalty of refusal, suspension or revocation of the license that the
statements made in the application are true, correct and complete to the best of the individual’s knowledge and
belief. Before approving the application, the insurance commissioner shall find that the individual:
(2) Has not committed any act that is a ground for denial, suspension or revocation set forth in Section 12;
(3) Where required by the insurance commissioner, has completed a prelicensing course of study for the lines
of authority for which the person has applied;
Drafting Note: Paragraph (3) would apply only to those states that have prelicensing education requirements.
(4) Has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation]; and
(5) Has successfully passed the examinations for the lines of authority for which the person has applied.
B. A business entity acting as an insurance producer is required to obtain an insurance producer license. Application
shall be made using the Uniform Business Entity Application. Before approving the application, the insurance
commissioner shall find that:
(1) The business entity has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation; and
(2) The business entity has designated a licensed producer responsible for the business entity’s compliance
with the insurance laws, rules and regulations of this state.
Drafting Note: Subsection B is optional and would apply only to those states that have a business entity license requirement.
C. The insurance commissioner may require any documents reasonably necessary to verify the information contained
in an application.
D. Each insurer that sells, solicits or negotiates any form of limited line credit insurance shall provide to each individual
whose duties will include selling, soliciting or negotiating limited line credit insurance a program of instruction that
may be approved by the insurance commissioner.
Section 7. License
A. Unless denied licensure pursuant to Section 12, persons who have met the requirements of Sections 5 and 6 shall be
issued an insurance producer license. An insurance producer may receive qualification for a license in one or more
of the following lines of authority:
(1) Life—insurance coverage on human lives including benefits of endowment and annuities, and may include
benefits in the event of death or dismemberment by accident and benefits for disability income.
(2) Accident and health or sickness—insurance coverage for sickness, bodily injury or accidental death and
may include benefits for disability income.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(3) Property—insurance coverage for the direct or consequential loss or damage to property of every kind.
(4) Casualty—insurance coverage against legal liability, including that for death, injury or disability or damage
to real or personal property.
(5) Variable life and variable annuity products—insurance coverage provided under variable life insurance
contracts and variable annuities.
(6) Personal lines—property and casualty insurance coverage sold to individuals and families for primarily
noncommercial purposes.
(7) Credit—limited line credit insurance.
(8) Any other line of insurance permitted under state laws or regulations.
B. An insurance producer license shall remain in effect unless revoked or suspended as long as the fee set forth in
[insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation] is paid and education requirements for resident individual
producers are met by the due date.
C. An individual insurance producer who allows his or her license to lapse may, within twelve (12) months from the
due date of the renewal fee, reinstate the same license without the necessity of passing a written examination.
However, a penalty in the amount of double the unpaid renewal fee shall be required for any renewal fee received
after the due date.
D. A licensed insurance producer who is unable to comply with license renewal procedures due to military service or
some other extenuating circumstance (e.g., a long-term medical disability) may request a waiver of those
procedures. The producer may also request a waiver of any examination requirement or any other fine or sanction
imposed for failure to comply with renewal procedures.
Drafting Note: References to license “renewal” should be deleted in those states that do not require license renewal.
E. The license shall contain the licensee’s name, address, personal identification number, and the date of issuance, the
lines of authority, the expiration date and any other information the insurance commissioner deems necessary.
F. Licensees shall inform the insurance commissioner by any means acceptable to the insurance commissioner of a
change of address within thirty (30) days of the change. Failure to timely inform the insurance commissioner of a
change in legal name or address shall result in a penalty pursuant to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
G. In order to assist in the performance of the insurance commissioner’s duties, the insurance commissioner may
contract with non-governmental entities, including the National Association of Insurance Commissioner (NAIC) or
any affiliates or subsidiaries that the NAIC oversees, to perform any ministerial functions, including the collection
of fees, related to producer licensing that the insurance commissioner and the non-governmental entity may deem
appropriate.
Section 8. Nonresident Licensing
A. Unless denied licensure pursuant to Section 12, a nonresident person shall receive a nonresident producer license if:
(1) The person is currently licensed as a resident and in good standing in his or her home state;
(2) The person has submitted the proper request for licensure and has paid the fees required by [insert
appropriate reference to state law or regulation];
(3) The person has submitted or transmitted to the insurance commissioner the application for licensure that the
person submitted to his or her home state, or in lieu of the same, a completed Uniform Application; and
(4) The person’s home state awards nonresident producer licenses to residents of this state on the same basis.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Drafting Note: In accordance with Public Law No. 106-102 (the “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act”) states should not require any
additional attachments to the Uniform Application or impose any other conditions on applicants that exceed the information
requested within the Uniform Application.
B. The insurance commissioner may verify the producer’s licensing status through the Producer Database maintained
by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, its affiliates or subsidiaries.
C. A nonresident producer who moves from one state to another state or a resident producer who moves from this state
to another state shall file a change of address and provide certification from the new resident state within thirty (30)
days of the change of legal residence. No fee or license application is required.
D. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a person licensed as a surplus lines producer in his or her home
state shall receive a nonresident surplus lines producer license pursuant to Subsection A of this section. Except as to
Subsection A, nothing in this section otherwise amends or supercedes any provision of [refer to state excess and
surplus lines statutes].
E. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act, a person licensed as a limited line credit insurance or other type of
limited lines producer in his or her home state shall receive a nonresident limited lines producer license, pursuant to
Subsection A of this section, granting the same scope of authority as granted under the license issued by the
producer’s home state. For the purposes of Section 8E, limited line insurance is any authority granted by the home
state which restricts the authority of the license to less than the total authority prescribed in the associated major
lines pursuant to Section 7A(1) through (6).
Section 9. Exemption from Examination
A. An individual who applies for an insurance producer license in this state who was previously licensed for the same
lines of authority in another state shall not be required to complete any prelicensing education or examination. This
exemption is only available if the person is currently licensed in that state or if the application is received within
ninety (90) days of the cancellation of the applicant’s previous license and if the prior state issues a certification that,
at the time of cancellation, the applicant was in good standing in that state or the state’s Producer Database records,
maintained by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, its affiliates or subsidiaries, indicate that the
producer is or was licensed in good standing for the line of authority requested.
B. A person licensed as an insurance producer in another state who moves to this state shall make application within
ninety (90) days of establishing legal residence to become a resident licensee pursuant to Section 6. No prelicensing
education or examination shall be required of that person to obtain any line of authority previously held in the prior
state except where the insurance commissioner determines otherwise by regulation.
Section 10. Assumed Names
An insurance producer doing business under any name other than the producer’s legal name is required to notify the
insurance commissioner prior to using the assumed name.
Section 11. Temporary Licensing
A. The insurance commissioner may issue a temporary insurance producer license for a period not to exceed one
hundred eighty (180) days without requiring an examination if the insurance commissioner deems that the temporary
license is necessary for the servicing of an insurance business in the following cases:
(1) To the surviving spouse or court-appointed personal representative of a licensed insurance producer who
dies or becomes mentally or physically disabled to allow adequate time for the sale of the insurance
business owned by the producer or for the recovery or return of the producer to the business or to provide
for the training and licensing of new personnel to operate the producer’s business;
(2) To a member or employee of a business entity licensed as an insurance producer, upon the death or
disability of an individual designated in the business entity application or the license;
(3) To the designee of a licensed insurance producer entering active service in the armed forces of the United
States of America; or

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(4) In any other circumstance where the insurance commissioner deems that the public interest will best be
served by the issuance of this license.
B. The insurance commissioner may by order limit the authority of any temporary licensee in any way deemed
necessary to protect insureds and the public. The insurance commissioner may require the temporary licensee to
have a suitable sponsor who is a licensed producer or insurer and who assumes responsibility for all acts of the
temporary licensee and may impose other similar requirements designed to protect insureds and the public. The
insurance commissioner may by order revoke a temporary license if the interest of insureds or the public are
endangered. A temporary license may not continue after the owner or the personal representative disposes of the
business.
Section 12. License Denial, Nonrenewal or Revocation
A. The insurance commissioner may place on probation, suspend, revoke or refuse to issue or renew an insurance
producer’s license or may levy a civil penalty in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law] or any
combination of actions, for any one or more of the following causes:
(1) Providing incorrect, misleading, incomplete or materially untrue information in the license application;
(2) Violating any insurance laws, or violating any regulation, subpoena or order of the insurance commissioner
or of another state’s insurance commissioner;
(4) Improperly withholding, misappropriating or converting any monies or properties received in the course of
doing insurance business;
(5) Intentionally misrepresenting the terms of an actual or proposed insurance contract or application for
insurance;
(6) Having been convicted of a felony;
(7) Having admitted or been found to have committed any insurance unfair trade practice or fraud;
(8) Using fraudulent, coercive, or dishonest practices, or demonstrating incompetence, untrustworthiness or

financial irresponsibility in the conduct of business in this state or elsewhere;
(9) Having an insurance producer license, or its equivalent, denied, suspended or revoked in any other state,
province, district or territory;
(10) Forging another’s name to an application for insurance or to any document related to an insurance
transaction;
(11) Improperly using notes or any other reference material to complete an examination for an insurance license;
(12) Knowingly accepting insurance business from an individual who is not licensed;
(14) Failing to pay state income tax or comply with any administrative or court order directing payment of state
income tax.
B. In the event that the action by the insurance commissioner is to nonrenew or to deny an application for a license, the
insurance commissioner shall notify the applicant or licensee and advise, in writing, the applicant or licensee of the
reason for the denial or nonrenewal of the applicant’s or licensee’s license. The applicant or licensee may make
written demand upon the insurance commissioner within [insert appropriate time period from state’s administrative
procedure act] for a hearing before the insurance commissioner to determine the reasonableness of the insurance

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
commissioner’s action. The hearing shall be held within [insert time period from state law] and shall be held
pursuant to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
C. The license of a business entity may be suspended, revoked or refused if the insurance commissioner finds, after
hearing, that an individual licensee’s violation was known or should have been known by one or more of the
partners, officers or managers acting on behalf of the partnership or corporation and the violation was neither
reported to the insurance commissioner nor corrective action taken.
D. In addition to or in lieu of any applicable denial, suspension or revocation of a license, a person may, after hearing,
be subject to a civil fine according to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
E. The insurance commissioner shall retain the authority to enforce the provisions of and impose any penalty or remedy
authorized by this Act and Title [insert appropriate reference to state law] against any person who is under
investigation for or charged with a violation of this Act or Title [insert appropriate reference to state law] even if the
person’s license or registration has been surrendered or has lapsed by operation of law.
Section 13. Commissions
A. An insurance company or insurance producer shall not pay a commission, service fee, brokerage or other valuable
consideration to a person for selling, soliciting or negotiating insurance in this state if that person is required to be
licensed under this Act and is not so licensed.
B. A person shall not accept a commission, service fee, brokerage or other valuable consideration for selling, soliciting
or negotiating insurance in this state if that person is required to be licensed under this Act and is not so licensed.
C. Renewal or other deferred commissions may be paid to a person for selling, soliciting or negotiating insurance in
this state if the person was required to be licensed under this Act at the time of the sale, solicitation or negotiation
and was so licensed at that time.
D. An insurer or insurance producer may pay or assign commissions, service fees, brokerages or other valuable
consideration to an insurance agency or to persons who do not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance in this state, unless
the payment would violate [insert appropriate reference to state law, i.e. citation to anti-rebating statute, if
applicable].
Section 14. Appointments [Optional]
A. An insurance producer shall not act as an agent of an insurer unless the insurance producer becomes an appointed
agent of that insurer. An insurance producer who is not acting as an agent of an insurer is not required to become
appointed.
B. To appoint a producer as its agent, the appointing insurer shall file, in a format approved by the insurance
commissioner, a notice of appointment within fifteen (15) days from the date the agency contract is executed or the
first insurance application is submitted. An insurer may also elect to appoint a producer to all or some insurers
within the insurer’s holding company system or group by the filing of a single appointment request.
Drafting Note: The group appointment provision of Subsection B is only applicable in jurisdictions that have implemented
an electronic appointment process.
C. [Optional] Upon receipt of the notice of appointment, the insurance commissioner shall verify within a reasonable
time not to exceed thirty (30) days that the insurance producer is eligible for appointment. If the insurance producer
is determined to be ineligible for appointment, the insurance commissioner shall notify the insurer within five (5)
days of its determination.
D. An insurer shall pay an appointment fee, in the amount and method of payment set forth in [insert appropriate
reference to state law or regulation], for each insurance producer appointed by the insurer.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
E. [Optional] An insurer shall remit, in a manner prescribed by the insurance commissioner, a renewal appointment fee
in the amount set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation].
Drafting Note: This act designates as optional the section on appointments of producers by insurers. That designation
recognizes that some states do not require the formal appointment of a producer before business can be conducted with an
insurer or multiple insurers.
Section 15. Notification to Insurance Commissioner of Termination
A. Termination for Cause. An insurer or authorized representative of the insurer that terminates the appointment,
employment, contract or other insurance business relationship with a producer shall notify the insurance
commissioner within thirty (30) days following the effective date of the termination, using a format prescribed by
the insurance commissioner, if the reason for termination is one of the reasons set forth in Section 12 or the insurer
has knowledge the producer was found by a court, government body, or self-regulatory organization authorized by
law to have engaged in any of the activities in Section 12. Upon the written request of the insurance commissioner,
the insurer shall provide additional information, documents, records or other data pertaining to the termination or
activity of the producer.
B. Termination Without Cause. An insurer or authorized representative of the insurer that terminates the appointment,
employment, or contract with a producer for any reason not set forth in Section 12, shall notify the insurance
commissioner within thirty (30) days following the effective date of the termination, using a format prescribed by
the insurance commissioner. Upon written request of the insurance commissioner, the insurer shall provide
additional information, documents, records or other data pertaining to the termination.
Drafting Note: Those states that do not require formal appointments may delete any reference to appointments in
Subsections A and B above.
C. Ongoing Notification Requirement. The insurer or the authorized representative of the insurer shall promptly notify
the insurance commissioner in a format acceptable to the insurance commissioner if, upon further review or
investigation, the insurer discovers additional information that would have been reportable to the insurance
commissioner in accordance with Subsection A had the insurer then known of its existence.
D. Copy of Notification to be Provided to Producer.
(1) Within fifteen (15) days after making the notification required by Subsections A, B and C, the insurer shall
mail a copy of the notification to the producer at his or her last known address. If the producer is terminated
for cause for any of the reasons listed in Section 12, the insurer shall provide a copy of the notification to
the producer at his or her last known address by certified mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid or
by overnight delivery using a nationally recognized carrier.
(2) Within thirty (30) days after the producer has received the original or additional notification, the producer
may file written comments concerning the substance of the notification with the insurance commissioner.
The producer shall, by the same means, simultaneously send a copy of the comments to the reporting
insurer, and the comments shall become a part of the insurance commissioner’s file and accompany every
copy of a report distributed or disclosed for any reason about the producer as permitted under Subsection F.
E. Immunities
(1) In the absence of actual malice, an insurer, the authorized representative of the insurer, a producer, the
insurance commissioner, or an organization of which the insurance commissioner is a member and that
compiles the information and makes it available to other insurance commissioners or regulatory or law
enforcement agencies shall not be subject to civil liability, and a civil cause of action of any nature shall not
arise against these entities or their respective agents or employees, as a result of any statement or
information required by or provided pursuant to this section or any information relating to any statement
that may be requested in writing by the insurance commissioner, from an insurer or producer; or a
statement by a terminating insurer or producer to an insurer or producer limited solely and exclusively to
whether a termination for cause under Subsection A was reported to the insurance commissioner, provided

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
that the propriety of any termination for cause under Subsection A is certified in writing by an officer or
authorized representative of the insurer or producer terminating the relationship.
(2) In any action brought against a person that may have immunity under Paragraph (1) for making any
statement required by this section or providing any information relating to any statement that may be
requested by the insurance commissioner, the party bringing the action shall plead specifically in any
allegation that Paragraph (1) does not apply because the person making the statement or providing the
information did so with actual malice.
3) Paragraph (1) or (2) shall not abrogate or modify any existing statutory or common law privileges or
immunities.
F. Confidentiality
(1) Any documents, materials or other information in the control or possession of the department of insurance
that is furnished by an insurer, producer or an employee or agent thereof acting on behalf of the insurer or
producer, or obtained by the insurance commissioner in an investigation pursuant to this section shall be
confidential by law and privileged, shall not be subject to [insert open records, freedom of information,
sunshine or other appropriate phrase], shall not be subject to subpoena, and shall not be subject to discovery
or admissible in evidence in any private civil action. However, the insurance commissioner is authorized to
use the documents, materials or other information in the furtherance of any regulatory or legal action
brought as a part of the insurance commissioner’s duties.
(2) Neither the insurance commissioner nor any person who received documents, materials or other
information while acting under the authority of the insurance commissioner shall be permitted or required
to testify in any private civil action concerning any confidential documents, materials, or information
subject to Paragraph (1).
(3) In order to assist in the performance of the insurance commissioner’s duties under this Act, the insurance
commissioner:
(a) May share documents, materials or other information, including the confidential and privileged
documents, materials or information subject to Paragraph (1), with other state, federal, and
international regulatory agencies, with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, its
affiliates or subsidiaries, and with state, federal, and international law enforcement authorities,
provided that the recipient agrees to maintain the confidentiality and privileged status of the
document, material or other information;
(b) May receive documents, materials or information, including otherwise confidential and privileged
documents, materials or information, from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, its
affiliates or subsidiaries and from regulatory and law enforcement officials of other foreign or
domestic jurisdictions, and shall maintain as confidential or privileged any document, material or
information received with notice or the understanding that it is confidential or privileged under the
laws of the jurisdiction that is the source of the document, material or information; and
(c) [OPTIONAL] May enter into agreements governing sharing and use of information consistent
with this subsection.
Drafting Note: The language in Paragraph 3(a) assumes the recipient has the authority to protect the applicable
confidentiality or privilege, but does not address the verification of that authority, which would presumably occur in the
context of a broader information sharing agreement.
(4) No waiver of any applicable privilege or claim of confidentiality in the documents, materials, or
information shall occur as a result of disclosure to the commissioner under this section or as a result of
sharing as authorized in Paragraph (3).
(5) Nothing in this Act shall prohibit the insurance commissioner from releasing final, adjudicated actions
including for cause terminations that are open to public inspection pursuant to [insert appropriate reference
to state law] to a database or other clearinghouse service maintained by the National Association of

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Insurance Commissioners, its affiliates or subsidiaries of the National Association of Insurance

Commissioners.
G. Penalties for Failing to Report. An insurer, the authorized representative of the insurer, or producer that fails to
report as required under the provisions of this section or that is found to have reported with actual malice by a court
of competent jurisdiction may, after notice and hearing, have its license or certificate of authority suspended or
revoked and may be fined in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law].
Section 16. Reciprocity
A. The insurance commissioner shall waive any requirements for a nonresident license applicant with a valid license
from his or her home state, except the requirements imposed by Section 8 of this Act, if the applicant’s home state
awards nonresident licenses to residents of this state on the same basis.
B. A nonresident producer’s satisfaction of his or her home state’s continuing education requirements for licensed
insurance producers shall constitute satisfaction of this state’s continuing education requirements if the nonresident
producer’s home state recognizes the satisfaction of its continuing education requirements imposed upon producers
from this state on the same basis.
Drafting Note: States are encouraged to eliminate any licensing and appointment retaliatory fees. In accordance with Public
Law No. 106-102 (the “Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act”) states should not require nonresident fees that are so disparate from the
resident fees that they impose a barrier to entry. Such fees would be prohibited under Public Law 106-102.
A. A producer shall report to the insurance commissioner any administrative action taken against the producer in
another jurisdiction or by another governmental agency in this state within thirty (30) days of the final disposition of
the matter. This report shall include a copy of the order, consent to order or other relevant legal documents.
B. Within thirty (30) days of the initial pretrial hearing date, a producer shall report to the insurance commissioner any
criminal prosecution of the producer taken in any jurisdiction. The report shall include a copy of the initial
complaint filed, the order resulting from the hearing and any other relevant legal documents.
Section 18. Compensation Disclosure
A. (1) Where any insurance producer or any affiliate of the producer receives any compensation from the
customer for the placement of insurance or represents the customer with respect to that placement, neither
that producer nor the affiliate shall accept or receive any compensation from an insurer or other third party
for that placement of insurance unless the producer has, prior to the customer’s purchase of insurance:
(a) Obtained the customer’s documented acknowledgment that such compensation will be received by
the producer or affiliate; and
(b) Disclosed the amount of compensation from the insurer or other third party for that placement. If
the amount of compensation is not known at the time of disclosure, the producer shall disclose the
specific method for calculating the compensation and, if possible, a reasonable estimate of the
amount.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to an insurance producer who:
(a) Does not receive compensation from the customer for the placement of insurance; and
(b) In connection with that placement of insurance represents an insurer that has appointed the
producer; and
(c) Discloses to the customer prior to the purchase of insurance:
(i) That the insurance producer will receive compensation from an insurer in connection
with that placement; or

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(ii) That, in connection with that placement of insurance, the insurance producer represents
the insurer and that the producer may provide services to the customer for the insurer.
Drafting Note: In states where no appointment is required, the phrase “that has contractually authorized the producer to act
as its legal agent” may be substituted for “that has appointed the producer.”
B. A person shall not be considered a “customer” for purposes of this section if the person is merely:
(1) A participant or beneficiary of an employee benefit plan; or
(2) Covered by a group or blanket insurance policy or group annuity contract sold, solicited or negotiated by
the insurance producer or affiliate.
C. This section shall not apply to:
(1) A person licensed as an insurance producer who acts only as an intermediary between an insurer and the
customer’s producer, for example a managing general agent, a sales manager, or wholesale broker; or
(2) A reinsurance intermediary.
D. For purposes of this section:
(1) “Affiliate” means a person that controls, is controlled by, or is under common control with the producer.
(2) “Compensation from an insurer or other third party” means payments, commissions, fees, awards,
overrides, bonuses, contingent commissions, loans, stock options, gifts, prizes or any other form of
valuable consideration, whether or not payable pursuant to a written agreement.
(3) “Compensation from the customer” shall not include any fee or similar expense as provided in [insert
reference to statutory provisions or regulations] or any fee or amount collected by or paid to
the producer that does not exceed an amount established by the commissioner.
(4) “Documented acknowledgement” means the customer’s written consent obtained prior to the customer’s
purchase of insurance. In the case of a purchase over the telephone or by electronic means for which
written consent cannot reasonably be obtained, consent documented by the producer shall be acceptable.
E. This section shall take effect [insert date].
Drafting Note: States that are considering the licensing of business entities should reference Section 6B of the NAIC’s
Producer Licensing Model Act and the Uniform Application for Business Entity License/Registration, which address the
licensing of a business entity acting as an insurance producer.
The insurance commissioner may, in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law], promulgate reasonable
regulations as are necessary or proper to carry out the purposes of this Act.
If any provisions of this Act, or the application of a provision to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, the
remainder of the Act, and the application of the provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held
invalid, shall not be affected.
This Act shall take effect [insert date].
Note: A minimum of six months to one year implementation time for proper notice of changes, fees and procedures is
recommended.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix T
P
Professional Licensing
L Standards Recomm
mendations
D
DATE: 08
May 29, 200
T
TO: NAIC Officcers and the Market Regulatio
on & Consumeer Affairs (D) C
Committee
F
FROM: Anne Mariee Narcini, Chaiir of the Produccer Licensing W
Working (D) G
Group
R
RE: Professionaal Licensing Staandards Recom
mmendations
DDuring the NA AIC Spring Naational Meeting g, the NAIC Officers

O formaally requested the Producer Licensing (D D) Working
GGroup to evalu uate the key finndings and issu ues regarding the uniform liicensing standaards and provide a recommeendation by
thhe 2008 Summ mer National Meeting
M identiifying the onees that should be consideredd professional licensing stanndards (i.e.,
sstandards that provide
p the bassic requirementts for engagingg in the profess ion).
P
Process for Co
ompletion of Charge
C
TTo fulfill this charge,

c the Working Group so olicited public comment at thhe 2008 Springg National Meeeting and a smmall team of
rregulators from m Alaska, Disttrict of Colum mbia, Kentucky y, New Jerseyy, Pennsylvaniaa and Utah m met by conferennce call to
ddiscuss the tassk. The group concluded thaat the professiional licensingg standards ouutlined in the request are standards
pproducers shou uld satisfy to sell, solicit and
d negotiate insuurance. Furtheermore, the staandards represeent the knowleedge, skills
aand conduct neecessary both to t commence acting
a as a pro
oducer and to mmaintain a basic level of proofessional know
wledge and
aabilities to conttinue to engagee in the businesss.
TThe conclusion
ns of the focus group were prresented to Wo
orking Group m
members and iinterested partiies at the interiim meeting
oof the Workingg Group on April
A 30, 2008. Additional pu
ublic commennt was requesteed; however, iinterested partiies did not
pprovide any com
mments.
Professional Standards
P
TThe Working Group has concluded that most m of the apppropriate stanndards are alrready containeed within thee Uniform
LLicensing Stanndards adoptedd by the NAIC C in Decemberr 2002. The Unniform Licensing Standards address the professional
sstandards for en
ntry and continnuation of liceensure for prod
ducers, as well as administrattive standards for regulators to achieve
uuniformity and increased efficciencies.
In summary the suggested prrofessional stan ndards are seg

gmented into foour broad cateegories: (1) leggal authority too enter into
ccontracts; (2) education
e and initial testing for minimumm competency, (3) backgrounnd checks for moral charactter and (4)
oongoing commitment to profeessional conducct.
L
Legal Authority
y
A
All Producers must
m be 18 yeaars of age. Thiss is a required standard
s for enntry into the proofession since a person must be of
m
majority age to execute a contract.
A m be a Uniteed States citizeen or have legaal work authorizzation if he/shee is not a Uniteed States citizeen. This
All producers must
sstandard addressses the requireement for all prroducers to hav
ve the authorityy to lawfully w
work in the Uniited States.
E
Education and Testing
AAll producers must

m pass an ex xamination thaat is monitored and independeently proctoredd with adequatee supervision. T
This
sstandard addressses the measurrement of the minimum
m subjeect matter expeertise to engagge in the profession.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Working Group members want to emphasize that a high school diploma and prelicensing education should not be
required to obtain a producer license. While individual insurance companies may establish such standards as a condition of
employment, the Working Group concluded that demonstrating sufficient knowledge to engage in the business of insurance
is accomplished by successfully passing the home state examination.
While the Uniform Licensing Standards do not require states to require prelicensing education for applicants, the Uniform
Licensing Standards do address the desire for uniformity among the states by requiring any state with a prelicensing
education requirement to have 20 hours per major line of authority.
Background Checks
All producers should undergo a background check that includes fingerprinting.
All producers should complete a uniform application for licensure that includes standard background check questions.
All producers should adhere to the integrity and personal qualifications outlined in Section 12 of the NAIC’s Producer
Licensing Model Act.
These three standards specifically address the fitness of character, professional competence and worthiness for licensure. It
should also be noted that the background questions are a part of the license continuation/renewal process and assure
continued fitness for licensure.
Ongoing Commitment to Professional Conduct
All producers should adhere to the integrity and personal qualifications defined in Section 12 of the NAIC’s Producer
Licensing Model Act.
All producers should complete a uniform renewal form application for licensure that includes standard background check
questions.
All producers should satisfy twenty-four hours of continuing education for all major lines of authority with three (3) of the
twenty-four hours covering ethics. Fifty minutes shall equal one hour of CE. Due to ongoing change in insurance products,
policy forms and laws, continuing education is a basic requirement to maintain the level of professional standard necessary to
continue selling, soliciting and negotiating insurance. Ongoing ethics education helps assure continued fitness for licensure
and serves as a consumer protection.
Conclusion and Next Steps
The Working Group believes these standards provide the basic foundation for individuals to distinguish themselves from the
general public as insurance professionals. The basic elements of legal authority, testing, background checks and continuing
education are common elements for other professionals, such as securities brokers, real estate agents and attorneys.
Because insurance regulators want to ensure the highest level of consumer protection and a high degree of professionalism
among those individuals selling, soliciting and negotiating insurance, insurance regulators firmly believe the producer
community should openly embrace and support these standards. The open support of these standards will confirm the
professionalism of the producer community. At the same time, the failure to support these standards raises serious concerns
about the ongoing commitment of the producer community to a high level of professionalism commonly found in other
professions.
To this end, the Working Group will be distributing a letter to the key producer trade associations within the next 30 days
asking if they support the standards outlined in this memo. The key producer trade associations include the Council of
Insurance Agents & Brokers, the Independent Insurance Agents & Brokers of America, the National Association of Insurance
& Financial Professionals and the Professional Insurance Agents.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix U
PUBLIC ADJUSTER LICENSING MODEL ACT
Table of Contents

Section 5. Resident License
Section 8. Nonresident License Reciprocity
Section 9. License
Section 10. Apprentice Public Adjuster License [Optional]
Section 11. License Denial, Nonrenewal, or Revocation
Section 12. Bond or Letter of Credit
Section 14. Public Adjuster Fees
Section 15. Contract Between Public Adjuster and Insured
Section 16. Escrow or Trust Accounts
Section 18. Standards of Conduct of Public Adjuster
This Act governs the qualifications and procedures for the licensing of public adjusters. It specifies the duties of
and restrictions on public adjusters, which include limiting their licensure to assisting insureds in first party claims.
Drafting Note: It is recommended that any statute or regulation inconsistent with this Act be repealed or amended.
Drafting Note: This Act also requires a report to the insurance commissioner of any action in another jurisdiction against
either the public adjuster license or licensee.
A. “Apprentice public adjuster” means the one who is qualified in all respects as a public adjuster except as
to experience, education and/or training.
B. “Business entity” means a corporation, association, partnership, limited liability company, limited
liability partnership or other legal entity.
C. “Catastrophic disaster” according to the Federal Response Plan, means an event that results in large
numbers of deaths and injuries; causes extensive damage or destruction of facilities that provide and
sustain human needs; produces an overwhelming demand on state and local response resources and
mechanisms; causes a severe long-term effect on general economic activity; and severely affects state,
local and private sector capabilities to begin and sustain response activities. A catastrophic disaster shall
be declared by the President of the United States or the Governor of the state or district in which the
disaster occurred.
D. “Fingerprints” for the purposes of this act, means an impression of the lines on the finger taken for
purpose of identification. The impression may be electronic or in ink converted to electronic format.
E. “Home state” means the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the United States in which the
public adjuster’s principal place of residence or principal place of business is located. If neither the state

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
in which the public adjuster maintains the principal place of residence nor the state in which the public
adjuster maintains the principal place of business has a substantially similar law governing public
adjusters, the public adjuster may declare another state in which it becomes licensed and acts as a public
adjuster to be the ‘home state.’
F. “Individual” means a natural person.
G. “Person” means an individual or a business entity.
H. “Public adjuster” means any person who, for compensation or any other thing of value on behalf of
the insured:
(1) Acts or aids, solely in relation to first party claims arising under insurance contracts that insure
the real or personal property of the insured, on behalf of an insured in negotiating for, or
effecting the settlement of, a claim for loss or damage covered by an insurance contract;
(2) Advertises for employment as an public adjuster of insurance claims or solicits business or
represents himself or herself to the public as an public adjuster of first party insurance claims
for losses or damages arising out of policies of insurance that insure real or personal property;
or
(3) Directly or indirectly solicits business, investigates or adjusts losses, or advises an insured
about first party claims for losses or damages arising out of policies of insurance that insure
real or personal property for another person engaged in the business of adjusting losses or
damages covered by an insurance policy, for the insured.
I. “Uniform individual application” means the current version of the National Association of Insurance
Commissioners (NAIC) Uniform Individual Application for resident and nonresident individuals.
J. [Optional] “Uniform business entity application” means the current version of the National Association
of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Uniform Business Entity Application for resident and nonresident
business entities.
Drafting Note: Subsection J is optional and would apply only to those states that have a business entity license
requirement.
Drafting Note: If any term is similarly defined in a relevant section of the state’s insurance code, do not include the
definition of the term in this Act or, in the alternative, reference the statute: “[term] is defined in [insert appropriate
reference to state law or regulation].”
A. A person shall not act or hold himself out as a public adjuster in this state unless the person is licensed as
a public adjuster in accordance with this Act.
B. A person licensed as a public adjuster shall not misrepresent to a claimant that he or she is an adjuster
representing an insurer in any capacity, including acting as an employee of the insurer or acting as an
independent adjuster unless so appointed by an insurer in writing to act on the insurer’s behalf for that
specific claim or purpose. A licensed public adjuster is prohibited from charging that specific claimant a
fee when appointed by the insurer and the appointment is accepted by the public adjuster.
C. A business entity acting as a public adjuster is required to obtain a public adjuster license. Application
shall be made using the Uniform Business Entity Application. Before approving the application, the
insurance commissioner shall find that:
(1) The business entity has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or
regulation; and
(2) The business entity has designated a licensed public adjuster responsible for the business
entity’s compliance with the insurance laws, rules and regulations of this state.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Drafting Note: Subsection C is optional and would apply only to those states that have a business entity license
requirement.
D. Notwithstanding subsection A through C, a license as a public adjuster shall not be required of the
following:
(1) An attorney-at-law admitted to practice in this state, when acting in his or her professional
capacity as an attorney;
(2) A person who negotiates or settles claims arising under a life or health insurance policy or an
annuity contract;
(3) A person employed only for the purpose of obtaining facts surrounding a loss or furnishing
technical assistance to a licensed public adjuster, including photographers, estimators, private
investigators, engineers and handwriting experts;
(4) A licensed health care provider, or employee of a licensed health care provider, who prepares
or files a health claim form on behalf of a patient; or
(5) A person who settles subrogation claims between insurers.
A. A person applying for a public adjuster license shall make application to the commissioner on the
appropriate uniform application or other application prescribed by the commissioner. ]
B. The applicant shall declare under penalty of perjury and under penalty of refusal, suspension or
revocation of the license that the statements made in the application are true, correct and complete to the
best of the applicant’s knowledge and belief.
C. In order to make a determination of license eligibility, the insurance commissioner is authorized to

require fingerprints of applicants and submit the fingerprints and the fee required to perform the
criminal history record checks to the state identification
bureau (or state department of justice public state agency) and the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI)
for state and national criminal history record checks; the insurance commissioner shall require a criminal
history record check on each applicant in accordance with this Act. The insurance commissioner shall
require each applicant to submit a full set of fingerprints in order for the insurance commissioner to
obtain and receive National Criminal History Records from the FBI Criminal Justice Information
Services Division.
(1) The insurance commissioner may contract for the collection, transmission and resubmission of
fingerprints required under this section. If the commissioner does so, the fee for collecting,
transmitting and retaining fingerprints shall be payable directly to the contractor by the person.
The insurance commissioner may agree to a reasonable fingerprinting fee to be charged by the
contractor.
(2) The insurance commissioner may waive submission of fingerprints by any person that has
previously furnished fingerprints and those fingerprints are on file with the Central Repository
of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC), its affiliates or subsidiaries.
(3) The insurance commissioner is authorized to receive criminal history record information in lieu
of the [insert reference to Department of Justice/Public Safety Agency] that submitted the
fingerprints to the FBI.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(4) The insurance commissioner is authorized to submit electronic fingerprint records and necessary
identifying information to the NAIC, its affiliates or subsidiaries for permanent retention in a
centralized repository. The purpose of such a centralized repository is to provide insurance
commissioners with access to fingerprint records in order to perform criminal history record
checks.
Drafting Note: The FBI requires that fingerprints be submitted to the state Department of Law Enforcement, Public Safety
or Criminal Justice for a check of state records before the fingerprints are submitted to the FBI for a criminal history check.
The FBI recommends all fingerprint submissions to be in an electronic format. The FBI has approved the language in Section
4 (C ) to authorize a state identification bureau to submit fingerprints on behalf of its applicants in conjunction with licensing
and employment.
Rather, the state may want to amend its relevant insurance producer statute to include public adjusters.
Drafting Note: This provision does not permit the sharing of criminal history record information with the NAIC or other
insurance commissioners as such sharing of information is prohibited by 28 CFR 20.33.
Section 5. Resident License
A. Before issuing a public adjuster license to an applicant under this section, the commissioner shall find that
the applicant:
(1) Is eligible to designate this state as his or her home state or is a nonresident who is not eligible for
a license under Section 8;
(2) Has not committed any act that is a ground for denial, suspension or revocation of a license as set
forth in Section 11;
(3) Is trustworthy, reliable, and of good reputation, evidence of which may be determined by the
commissioner;
(4) Is financially responsible to exercise the license and has provided proof of financial responsibility
as required in Section 12 of this Act;
(5) Has paid the fees set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation]; and
(6) Maintains an office in the home state of residence with public access by reasonable appointment
and/or regular business hours. This includes a designated office within a home state of residence.
B. In addition to satisfying the requirements of Subsection A, an individual shall
(1) Be at least eighteen (18) years of age; and
(2) Have successfully passed the public adjuster examination.
(3) Designate a licensed individual public adjuster responsible for the business entity’s compliance
with the insurance laws, rules, and regulations of this state; and
(4) Designate only licensed individual public adjusters to exercise the business entity’s license.
Drafting Note: Subsection C is optional and would apply only to those states that have a business entity license requirement.
C’s PLMA Section 6B
C. The commissioner may require any documents reasonably necessary to verify the information contained in
the application.
A. An individual applying for a public adjuster license under this act shall pass a written examination unless
exempt pursuant to Section 7. The examination shall test the knowledge of the individual concerning the
duties and responsibilities of a public adjuster and the insurance laws and regulations of this state.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Examinations required by this section shall be developed and conducted under rules and regulations
prescribed by the commissioner.
B. The commissioner may make arrangements, including contracting with an outside testing service, for
administering examinations and collecting the nonrefundable fee set forth in [insert appropriate reference to
state law or regulation].
C. Each individual applying for an examination shall remit a non-refundable fee as prescribed by the
D. An individual who fails to appear for the examination as scheduled or fails to pass the examination, shall
reapply for an examination and remit all required fees and forms before being rescheduled for another
examination.
A. An individual who applies for a public adjuster license in this state who was previously licensed as a public
adjuster in another state based on an public adjuster examination shall not be required to complete any
prelicensing examination. This exemption is only available if the person is currently licensed in that state or
if the application is received within twelve (12) months of the cancellation of the applicant’s previous
license and if the prior state issues a certification that, at the time of cancellation, the applicant was in good
standing in that state or the state’s producer database records or records maintained by the NAIC, its
affiliates, or subsidiaries, indicate that the public adjuster is or was licensed in good standing.
B. A person licensed as a public adjuster in another state based on an public adjuster examination who moves
to this state shall make application within ninety (90) days of establishing legal residence to become a
resident licensee pursuant to Section 5. No prelicensing examination shall be required of that person to
obtain a public adjuster license.
C. An individual who applies for a public adjuster license in this state who was previously licensed as a public
adjuster in this state shall not be required to complete any prelicensing examination. This exemption is only
available if the application is received within twelve (12) months of the cancellation of the applicant’s
previous license in this state and if, at the time of cancellation, the applicant was in good standing in this
state.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act , it may not be necessary to adopt this section.
Section 8. Nonresident License Reciprocity
A. Unless denied licensure pursuant to Section 11, a nonresident person shall receive a nonresident public
adjuster license if:
(1) The person is currently licensed as a resident public adjuster and in good standing in his or her
home state;
(2) The person has submitted the proper request for licensure, has paid the fees required by [insert
appropriate reference to state law or regulation] [NAIC’s PLMA Section 8A(2)], and has provided
proof of financial responsibility as required in Section 12 of this Act;
(3) The person has submitted or transmitted to the commissioner the appropriate completed
application for licensure; and

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(4) The person’s home state awards nonresident public adjuster licenses to residents of this state on
the same basis.
B. The commissioner may verify the public adjuster’s licensing status through the producer database
maintained by the NAIC, its affiliates, or subsidiaries.
C. As a condition to continuation of a public adjuster license issued under this section, the licensee shall
maintain a resident public adjuster license in his or her home state. The nonresident public adjuster license
issued under this section shall terminate and be surrendered immediately to the commissioner if the home
state public adjuster license terminates for any reason, unless the public adjuster has been issued a license
as a resident public adjuster in his or her new home state. Notification to the state or states where
nonresident license is issued must be made as soon as possible, yet no later that thirty (30) days of change
in new state resident license. Licensee shall include new and old address. A new state resident license is
required for nonresident licenses to remain valid. The new state resident license must have reciprocity with
the licensing nonresident state(s) for the nonresident license not to terminate.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the PLMA, it may not be necessary to adopt this section. Rather, the state may want
to amend its relevant insurance producer statute to include public adjusters.
Section 9. License
A. Unless denied licensure under this Act, persons who have met the requirements of this Act shall be issued a
public adjuster license.
B. A public adjuster license shall remain in effect unless revoked, terminated or suspended as long as the
request for renewal and fee set forth in [insert appropriate reference to state law or regulation] is paid and
any other requirements for license renewal are met by the due date.
C. The licensee shall inform the commissioner by any means acceptable to the commissioner of a change of
address, change of legal name, or change of information submitted on the application within thirty (30)
days of the change.
D. A licensed public adjuster shall be subject to [cite state’s Unfair Claims Settlement Act and state’s Trade
Practices and Fraud sections of the Insurance Code].
E. A public adjuster who allows his or her license to lapse may, within twelve (12) months from the due date
of the renewal, be issued a new public adjuster license upon the commissioner’s receipt of the request for
renewal. However, a penalty in the amount of double the unpaid renewal fee shall be required for the issue
of the new public adjuster license. The new public adjuster license shall be effective the date the
commissioner receives the request for renewal and the late payment penalty.
F. Any public adjuster licensee that fails to apply for renewal of a license before expiration of the current
license shall pay a lapsed license fee of twice the license fee and be subject to other penalties as provided
by law before the license will be renewed. If the Department receives the request for reinstatement and the
required lapsed license fee within sixty (60) days of the date the license lapsed, the Department shall
reinstate the license retroactively to the date the license lapsed. If the Department receives the request for
reinstatement and the required lapsed license fee after sixty (60) days but within one year of the date the
license lapsed, the Department shall reinstate the license prospectively with the date the license is
reinstated. If the person applies for reinstatement more than one year from date of lapse, the person shall
reapply for the license under this Act.
G. A licensed public adjuster that is unable to comply with license renewal procedures due to military service,
a long-term medical disability, or some other extenuating circumstance, may request a waiver of those
procedures. The public adjuster may also request a waiver of any examination requirement, fine, or other
sanction imposed for failure to comply with renewal procedures.
Drafting Note: References to license “renewal” should be deleted in those states that do not require license renewal.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
H. The license shall contain the licensee’s name, city and state of business address, personal identification
number, the date of issuance, the expiration date, and any other information the commissioner deems
necessary.
I. In order to assist in the performance of the commissioner’s duties, the commissioner may contract with
non-governmental entities, including the NAIC or any affiliates or subsidiaries that the NAIC oversees, to
perform any ministerial functions, including the collection of fees and data, related to licensing that the
commissioner may deem appropriate. ]
Section 10. Apprentice Public Adjuster License [Optional]
A. The apprentice public adjuster license is an optional license to facilitate the training necessary to ensure
reasonable competency to fulfill the responsibilities of a public adjuster as defined in [insert state statute].
B. The apprentice public adjuster license shall be subject to the following terms and conditions:
(1) An attestation/certification from a licensed public adjuster (licensee) shall accompany an

application for an initial apprentice public adjuster license assuming responsibility for all actions
of such applicant;
(2) The apprentice public adjuster is authorized to adjust claims in the state that has issued licensure
only;
(3) The apprentice public adjuster shall not be required to take and successfully complete the
prescribed public adjuster examination;
(4) The licensee shall at all times be an employee of a public adjuster and subject to training,
direction, and control by a licensed public adjuster;
(5) The apprentice public adjuster license is for a period not to exceed twelve (12) months, the license
shall not be renewed;
(6) The licensee is restricted to participation in factual investigation, tentative closing and solicitation
of losses subject to the review and final determination of a licensed public adjuster;
(7) Compensation of an apprentice public adjuster shall be on a salaried or hourly basis only; and
(8) The licensee shall be subject to suspension, revocation, or conditions in accordance with [Insert
State Laws].
Section 11. License Denial, Non-renewal or Revocation
A. The commissioner may place on probation, suspend, revoke or refuse to issue or renew a public adjuster’s
license or may levy a civil penalty in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law] or any
combination of actions, for any one or more of the following causes:
(1) Providing incorrect, misleading, incomplete, or materially untrue information in the license
application;
(2) Violating any insurance laws, or violating any regulation, subpoena, or order of the commissioner
or of another state’s insurance commissioner;
(4) Improperly withholding, misappropriating, or converting any monies or properties received in the
course of doing insurance business;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(5) Intentionally misrepresenting the terms of an actual or proposed insurance contract or application
for insurance;
(6) Having been convicted of a felony;
(7) Having admitted or been found to have committed any insurance unfair trade practice or insurance
fraud;
(8) Using fraudulent, coercive or dishonest practices; or demonstrating incompetence,

untrustworthiness or financial irresponsibility in the conduct of business in this state or elsewhere;
(9) Having an insurance license, or its equivalent, denied, suspended, or revoked in any other state,
province, district or territory;
(10) Forging another’s name to an application for insurance or to any document related to an insurance
transaction;
(11) Cheating, including improperly using notes or any other reference material, to complete an
examination for an insurance license;
(12) Knowingly accepting insurance business from an individual who is not licensed but who is
required to be licensed by the commissioner;
(14) Failing to pay state income tax or comply with any administrative or court order directing payment
of state income tax.
B. In the event that the action by the commissioner is to deny an application for or not renew a license, the
commissioner shall notify the applicant or licensee and advise, in writing, the applicant or licensee of the
reason for the non-renewal or denial of the applicant’s or licensee’s license. The applicant or licensee may
make written demand upon the commissioner within [insert appropriate time period from state’s
administrative procedure act] for a hearing before the commissioner to determine the reasonableness of the
commissioner’s action. The hearing shall be held within [insert time period from state law] and shall be
held pursuant to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
C. The license of a business entity may be suspended, revoked or refused if the commissioner finds, after
hearing, that an individual licensee’s violation was known or should have been known by one or more of
the partners, officers or managers acting on behalf of the business entity and the violation was neither
reported to the commissioner nor corrective action taken.
D. In addition to or in lieu of any applicable denial, suspension or revocation of a license, a person may, after
hearing, be subject to a civil fine according to [insert appropriate reference to state law].
E. The commissioner shall retain the authority to enforce the provisions of and impose any penalty or remedy
authorized by this Act and Title [insert appropriate reference to state law] against any person who is under
investigation for or charged with a violation of this Act or Title [insert appropriate reference to state law]
even if the person’s license or registration has been surrendered or has lapsed by operation of law.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act, it may not be necessary to adopt this section. The
state may want to amend its relevant insurance producer statute to include public adjusters.
Section 12. Bond or Letter of Credit
Prior to issuance of a license as a public adjuster and for the duration of the license, the applicant shall secure evidence of
financial responsibility in a format prescribed by the insurance commissioner through a security bond or irrevocable letter of
credit:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
A. A surety bond executed and issued by an insurer authorized to issue surety bonds in this state, which bond:
(1) Shall be in the minimum amount of $20,000;
(2) Shall be in favor of this state and shall specifically authorize recovery by the commissioner on
behalf of any person in this state who sustained damages as the result of erroneous acts, failure to
act, conviction of fraud, or conviction of unfair practices in his or her capacity as a public adjuster;
and
(3) Shall not be terminated unless at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice will have been filed
with the commissioner and given to the licensee.
B. An irrevocable letter of credit issued by a qualified financial institution, which letter of credit:
(1) Shall be in the minimum amount of $20,000;
(2) Shall be to an account to the commissioner and subject to lawful levy of execution on behalf of
any person to whom the public adjuster has been found to be legally liable as the result of
erroneous acts, failure to act, fraudulent acts, or unfair practices in his or her capacity as a public
adjuster; and
(3) Shall not be terminated unless at least thirty (30) days’ prior written notice will have been filed
with the commissioner and given to the licensee.
C. The issuer of the evidence of financial responsibility shall notify the commissioner upon termination of the
bond or letter of credit, unless otherwise directed by the commissioner.
D. The commissioner may ask for the evidence of financial responsibility at any time he or she deems
relevant.
E. The authority to act as a public adjuster shall automatically terminate if the evidence of financial
responsibility terminates or becomes impaired.
A. An individual, who holds a public adjuster license and who is not exempt under Subsection B of this
section, shall satisfactorily complete a minimum of twenty-four (24) hours of continuing education courses,
including ethics, reported on a biennial basis in conjunction with the license renewal cycle.
B. This section shall not apply to:
(1) Licensees not licensed for one full year prior to the end of the applicable continuing education
biennium; or
(2) Licensees holding nonresident public adjuster licenses who have met the continuing education
requirements of their home state and whose home state gives credit to residents of this state on the
same basis.
C. Only continuing education courses approved by the commissioner shall be used to satisfy the continuing
education requirement of Subsection A.
Section 14. Public Adjuster Fees
A. [Optional] A public adjuster may charge the insured a reasonable fee as determined by state law [insert
appropriate reference to state law or regulation].
Drafting Note: This model designates Section 14A as optional. A majority of the states do not require a cap on fees of public
adjusters.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
B. A public adjuster shall not pay a commission, service fee or other valuable consideration to a person for
investigating or settling claims in this state if that person is required to be licensed under this Act and is not
so licensed.
C. A person shall not accept a commission, service fee or other valuable consideration for investigating or
settling claims in this state if that person is required to be licensed under this Act and is not so licensed.
D. A public adjuster may pay or assign commission, service fees or other valuable consideration to persons
who do not investigate or settle claims in this state, unless the payment would violate [insert appropriate
reference to state law, i.e. citation to anti-rebating statute or sharing commission statute, if applicable].
E. [Optional] In the event of a catastrophic disaster, there shall be limits on catastrophic fees, no public
adjuster shall charge, agree to or accept as compensation or reimbursement any payment, commission, fee,
or other thing of value equal to more than ten percent (10%) of any insurance settlement or proceeds. No
public adjuster shall require, demand or accept any fee, retainer, compensation, deposit, or other thing of
value, prior to settlement of a claim.
Drafting Note: This model designates Section 14E, as optional. It is recommended that the states that establish catastrophic
fees utilize the recommended language in this model.
Section 15. Contract Between Public Adjuster and Insured
A. Public adjusters shall ensure that all contracts for their services are in writing and contain the following
terms:
(1) Legible full name of the adjuster signing the contract, as specified in Department of Insurance
records;
(2) Permanent home state business address and phone number;
(3) Department of Insurance license number;
(4) Title of “Public Adjuster Contract”;
(5) The insured’s full name, street address, insurance company name and policy number, if known or
upon notification;
(6) A description of the loss and its location, if applicable;
(7) Description of services to be provided to the insured;
(8) Signatures of the public adjuster and the insured;
(9) Date contract was signed by the public adjuster and date the contract was signed by the insured;
(10) Attestation language stating that the public adjuster is fully bonded pursuant to state law; and
(11) Full salary, fee, commission, compensation or other considerations the public adjuster is to receive
for services.
B. The contract may specify that the public adjuster shall be named as a co-payee on an insurer’s payment of a
claim.
(1) If the compensation is based on a share of the insurance settlement, the exact percentage shall be
specified.
(2) Initial expenses to be reimbursed to the public adjuster from the proceeds of the claim payment
shall be specified by type, with dollar estimates set forth in the contract and with any additional
expenses l first approved by the insured.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(3) Compensation provisions in a public adjusting contract shall not be redacted in any copy of the
contract provided to the commissioner. Such a redaction shall constitute an omission of material
fact in violation of [insert reference to relevant state law].
C. If the insurer, not later than seventy-two (72) hours after the date on which the loss is reported to the
insurer, either pays or commits in writing to pay to the insured the policy limit of the insurance policy, the
public adjuster shall:
(1) Not receive a commission consisting of a percentage of the total amount paid by an insurer to
resolve a claim;
(2) Inform the insured that loss recovery amount might not be increased by insurer; and
(3) Be entitled only to reasonable compensation from the insured for services provided by the public
adjuster on behalf of the insured, based on the time spent on a claim and expenses incurred by the
public adjuster, until the claim is paid or the insured receives a written commitment to pay from
the insurer.
D. A public adjuster shall provide the insured a written disclosure concerning any direct or indirect financial
interest that the public adjuster has with any other party who is involved in any aspect of the claim, other
than the salary, fee, commission or other consideration established in the written contract with the insured,
including but not limited to any ownership of, other than as a minority stockholder, or any compensation
expected to be received from, any construction firm, salvage firm, building appraisal firm, motor vehicle
repair shop, or any other firm which that provides estimates for work, or that performs any work, in
conjunction with damages caused by the insured loss on which the public adjuster is engaged. The word
“firm” shall include any corporation, partnership, association, joint-stock company or person.
E. A public adjuster contract may not contain any contract term that:
(1) Allows the public adjuster’s percentage fee to be collected when money is due from an insurance
company, but not paid, or that allows a public adjuster to collect the entire fee from the first check
issued by an insurance company, rather than as percentage of each check issued by an insurance
company;
(2) Requires the insured to authorize an insurance company to issue a check only in the name of the
public adjuster;
(3) Imposes collection costs or late fees; or
(4) Precludes a public adjuster from pursuing civil remedies.
F. Prior to the signing of the contract the public adjuster shall provide the insured with a separate disclosure
document regarding the claim process that states:
(1) Property insurance policies obligate the insured to present a claim to his or her insurance company
for consideration. There are three (3) types of adjusters that could be involved in that process. The
definitions of the three types are as follows:
(a) “Company adjuster” means the insurance adjusters who are employees of an insurance
company. They represent the interest of the insurance company and are paid by the
insurance company. They will not charge you a fee.
(b) “Independent adjuster” means the insurance adjusters who are hired on a contract basis
by an insurance company to represent the insurance company’s interest in the settlement
of the claim. They are paid by your insurance company. They will not charge you a fee.
(c) “Public adjuster” means the insurance adjusters who do not work for any insurance
company. They work for the insured to assist in the preparation, presentation and
settlement of the claim. The insured hires them by signing a contract agreeing to pay

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
them a fee or commission based on a percentage of the settlement, or other method of

compensation.
(2) The insured is not required to hire a public adjuster to help the insured meet his or her obligations
under the policy, but has the right to do so.
(3) The insured has the right to initiate direct communications with the insured’s attorney, the insurer,
the insurer’s adjuster, and the insurer’s attorney, or any other person regarding the settlement of the
insured’s claim.
(4) The public adjuster is not a representative or employee of the insurer.
(5) The salary, fee, commission or other consideration is the obligation of the insured, not the insurer.
G. The contracts shall be executed in duplicate to provide an original contract to the public adjuster, and an
original contract to the insured. The public adjuster's original contract shall be available at all times for
inspection without notice by the commissioner.
H. The public adjuster shall provide the insurer a notification letter, which has been signed by the insured,
authorizing the public adjuster to represent the insured’s interest.
I. The public adjuster shall give the insured written notice of the insured’s right as provided in [cite the state
consumer protection laws].
J. The insured has the right to rescind the contract within three (3) business days after the date the contract
was signed. The rescission shall be in writing and mailed or delivered to the public adjuster at the address
in the contract within the three (3) business day period.
K. If the insured exercises the right to rescind the contract, anything of value given by the insured under the
contract will be returned to the insured within fifteen (15) business days following the receipt by the public
adjuster of the cancellation notice.
Drafting Note: The details in this section should comply with your state’s consumer protection contract rescission law.
Section 16. Escrow or Trust Accounts
A public adjuster who receives, accepts or holds any funds on behalf of an insured, towards the settlement of a claim for loss
or damage, shall deposit the funds in a non-interest bearing escrow or trust account in a financial institution that is insured by
an agency of the federal government in the public adjuster’s home state or where the loss occurred.
A. A public adjuster shall maintain a complete record of each transaction as a public adjuster. The records
required by this section shall include the following:
(1) Name of the insured;
(2) Date, location and amount of the loss;
(3) Copy of the contract between the public adjuster and insured;
(4) Name of the insurer, amount, expiration date and number of each policy carried with respect to the
loss;
(5) Itemized statement of the insured’s recoveries;
(6) Itemized statement of all compensation received by the public adjuster, from any source
whatsoever, in connection with the loss;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(7) A register of all monies received, deposited, disbursed, or withdrawn in connection with a
transaction with an insured, including fees transfers and disbursements from a trust account and all
transactions concerning all interest bearing accounts;
(8) Name of public adjuster who executed the contract;
(9) Name of the attorney representing the insured, if applicable, and the name of the claims
representatives of the insurance company; and
(10) Evidence of financial responsibility in a format prescribed by the insurance commissioner.
B. Records shall be maintained for at least five (5) years after the termination of the transaction with an
insured and shall be open to examination by the commissioner at all times.
C. Records submitted to the commissioner in accordance with this section that contain information identified
in writing as proprietary by the public adjuster shall be treated as confidential by the commissioner and
shall not be subject to [insert reference to open record laws] of this state.
Section 18. Standards of Conduct of Public Adjuster
A. A public adjuster is obligated, under his or her license, to serve with objectivity and complete loyalty the
interest of his client alone; and to render to the insured such information, counsel and service, as within the
knowledge, understanding and opinion in good faith of the licensee, as will best serve the insured’s
insurance claim needs and interest.
B. A public adjuster shall not solicit, or attempt to solicit, an insured during the progress of a loss-producing
occurrence, as defined in the insured’s insurance contract.
C. A public adjuster shall not permit an unlicensed employee or representative of the public adjuster to
conduct business for which a license is required under this Act.
D. A public adjuster shall not have a direct or indirect financial interest in any aspect of the claim, other than
the salary, fee, commission or other consideration established in the written contract with the insured,
unless full written disclosure has been made to the insured as set forth in Section 15G .
E. A public adjuster shall not acquire any interest in salvage of property subject to the contract with the
insured unless the public adjuster obtains written permission from the insured after settlement of the claim
with the insurer as set forth in Section 15G.
F. The public adjuster shall abstain from referring or directing the insured to get needed repairs or services in
connection with a loss from any person, unless disclosed to the insured:
(1) With whom the public adjuster has a financial interest; or
(2) From whom the public adjuster may receive direct or indirect compensation for the referral.
Drafting Note: Optional language for Subsection F: “Licensees may not solicit a client for employment between the hours of
pm and am.”
G. The public adjuster shall disclose to an insured if he or she has any interest or will be compensated by any
construction firm, salvage firm, building appraisal firm, motor vehicle repair shop or any other firm that
performs any work in conjunction with damages caused by the insured loss. The word "firm" shall include
any corporation, partnership, association, joint-stock company or individual as set forth in Section 15A(4).
H. Any compensation or anything of value in connection with an insured’s specific loss that will be received
by a public adjuster shall be disclosed by the public adjuster to the insured in writing including the source
and amount of any such compensation.
I. Public adjusters shall adhere to the following general ethical requirements:
(1) A public adjuster shall not undertake the adjustment of any claim if the public adjuster is not
competent and knowledgeable as to the terms and conditions of the insurance coverage, or which
otherwise exceeds the public adjuster’s current expertise;
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(2) A public adjuster shall not knowingly make any oral or written material misrepresentations or
statements which are false or maliciously critical and intended to injure any person engaged in the
business of insurance to any insured client or potential insured client;
(3) No public adjuster, while so licensed by the Department, may represent or act as a company
adjuster, or independent adjuster on the same claim;
Drafting Note: If a state only allows licensure in one class of adjuster licensing, the adjuster may not represent another type
of licensure in any circumstance.
(4) The contract shall not be construed to prevent an insured from pursuing any civil remedy after the
three-business day revocation or cancellation period;
(5) A public adjuster shall not enter into a contract or accept a power of attorney that vests in the
public adjuster the effective authority to choose the persons who shall perform repair work; and
(6) A public adjuster shall ensure that all contracts for the public adjuster’s services are in writing and
set forth all terms and conditions of the engagement.
J. A public adjuster may not agree to any loss settlement without the insured’s knowledge and consent.
A. The public adjuster shall report to the commissioner any administrative action taken against the public
adjuster in another jurisdiction or by another governmental agency in this state within thirty (30) days of
the final disposition of the matter. This report shall include a copy of the order, consent to order, or other
B. Within thirty (30) days of the initial pretrial hearing date, the public adjuster shall report to the
commissioner any criminal prosecution of the public adjuster taken in any jurisdiction. The report shall
include a copy of the initial complaint filed, the order resulting from the hearing, and any other relevant
legal documents.
Drafting Note: If the state has adopted the Producer Licensing Model Act , it may not be necessary to adopt this section.
The commissioner may, in accordance with [insert appropriate reference to state law], promulgate reasonable regulations as
are necessary or proper to carry out the purposes of this Act.
If any provisions of this Act, or the application of a provision to any person or circumstances, shall be held invalid, the
remainder of the Act, and the application of the provision to persons or circumstances other than those to which it is held
invalid, shall not be affected.
This Act shall take effect [insert date]. Provided, however that the provision of Section 4 do not become effective until a state
participates in the NAIC’s central repository for the purpose of obtaining criminal background information.
Drafting Note: A minimum of six months to one-year implementation time for proper notice of changes, fees, and
procedures is recommended.
Chronological Summary of Action (all references are to the Proceedings of the NAIC).
2005 Proc. 2nd Quarter 698 (adopted by parent committee).

2005 Proc. 3rd Quarter 26, 35-49 (amended and adopted by Plenary).
______________________________________________________________________________________________________
NAIC Public Insurance Adjuster Surety Bond Sample

BOND NO.
Know All Persons by These Presents:

That we,
as Principal, whose address is
and
as Surety, being a surety company authorized to do business in the State of re bound to the
Department of Insurance in the sum of $10,000.00 as specified at [ insert reference to state law or regulation]. The
specified sum is payable to the [insert state] Department of Insurance for the use and benefit of any customer of the above
described Principal and as defined by the [insert state] Insurance Code, [insert citation] in acceptable currency of the United
States in accordance with the statutory provision cited above. By this instrument, we jointly and severally firmly bind
ourselves, out heir s, executors, administrators, successors and assigns.
The conditions of the above obligations are:
Whereas the above named Principal has applied to the [insert state] Department of Insurance for a license as a Public
Insurance Adjuster to engage in or continue the business of insurance as a Public Insurance Adjuster in accordance with the
[insert state] Insurance Code;
Now, Therefore, should the Principal discharge losses that result from any final judgment recovered against the Principal by
any customer, this obligation will become void. If this obligation is not void, it remains in full force and effect, subject to the
following conditions:
1. As of , 20 , this bond will be in full force and effect

indefinitely. Continuation or renewal certificates are unnecessary.
2. The surety may, at any time, terminate this bond by submitting written notice to the [insert state] Department of
Insurance thirty (30) days prior to the termination date. The surety, however, remains liable for any defaults under this bond
committed prior to the termination date.
3. In no event will the aggregate liability of the Surety under this bond, for any or all damages to one or more
claimants, exceed the penal sum of this bond.
In Witness Whereof said Principal and Surety have executed this bond this day of
, 20 to be effective the
day of , 20 .
PRINCIPAL
BY
ADDRESS

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix V
REPORT OF THE NARAB WORKING GROUP:

RECOMMENDATION OF STATES CONTINUING TO MEET RECIPROCITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE
GRAMM-LEACH-BLILEY ACT
In another step toward completion of its charges, the NARAB (EX) Working Group has prepared this report of individual
states’ continuing compliance with the producer licensing reciprocity requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
(“GLBA”), 15 U.S.C. § 6751 et seq. GLBA provides that the NAIC shall determine whether the requisite number of states
have achieved reciprocity. The NAIC membership originally determined that the states met the non-resident producer
licensing reciprocity requirements of GLBA in 2002. In total, 47 jurisdictions have been certified as reciprocal under the
2002 reciprocity standard.
As part of a renewed push toward increased reciprocity and uniformity in licensing processes, the Working Group was
assigned the task of reviewing the application of GLBA reciprocity requirements. In 2009, the NAIC membership
established reciprocity criteria that represent a more detailed analysis of certain aspects of the original 2002 reciprocity
standard as well as a review of issues not included specifically in the 2002 report. This enhanced “NAIC Reciprocity
Standard” is more fully discussed in the Working Group’s 2009 report to the membership, which is attached to this report as
Appendix A and incorporated by reference. The NARAB Working Group is further responsible for determining which
states are compliant with this more detailed NAIC Reciprocity Standard and making its report along with recommendations
to its parent task force. As in 2002, the Working Group believes that its process for considering reciprocity issues, as
detailed below, meets the criteria established for affording deference to the NAIC’s reciprocity determination consistent
with 15 U.S.C. § 6751(d)(2). Through this report, the Working Group recommends that 40 jurisdictions be certified for
reciprocity as of October 3, 2011.1
Review Process
This report consists of the Working Group’s analysis of each jurisdiction’s compliance with the revised NAIC Reciprocity
Standard. The analysis relies on a detailed review, performed by the NAIC Legal Division, of each jurisdiction’s current
producer licensing laws, regulations, practices and other state guidance. This review was facilitated by an updated
Reciprocity Checklist designed to capture the NAIC Reciprocity Standard, thereby incorporating key elements of the 2002
and 2009 reports.
The steps involved in each state’s review can be summarized as follows:

(1) States submitted Reciprocity Checklists certifying their practices and any supporting laws and regulations.
(2) Reciprocity Checklists were posted for public comment at

http://www.naic.org/committees_ex_pltf_narabwg_reciprocity.h
tm.
(3) The NAIC Legal Division independently reviewed relevant state statutes, regulations and other formal
guidance, as well as the Reciprocity Checklists, interested party comments, NIPR Business Rules2 and
documentation arising from on-site reviews of each state’s licensing processes.
(4) Secondary Legal Division review, including follow-up with each state for clarification on potential
problem issues and any changes to laws, regulations and practices.
The Working Group's recommendations regarding the reciprocity status of particular states are based solely on the following:
(1) Review and analysis of relevant statutes, regulations and other formal guidance, including NIPR Business
Rules and documentation arising from on-site reviews of each state’s licensing processes;
(2) Certified Reciprocity Checklists submitted to the NAIC by state insurance departments;
(3) Representations made regarding the application and effect of state law by state insurance department
personnel, who have represented they are knowledgeable about the laws and regulations of their respective
states, including the practices and procedures, regarding the licensing of non-resident insurance producers;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(4) Consultations with various state insurance department personnel who are experienced with producer
licensing issues, as well as the NAIC Legal Division and other NAIC and NIPR staff who are generally
knowledgeable about the licensing of insurance producers;
(5) Recommendations of the NARAB Working Group through its previous reports regarding a framework
for interpreting the reciprocity requirements under GLBA; and
(6) Comments submitted by interested parties.
Furthermore, in developing its recommendations, the Working Group has made the following assumptions:
(1) State insurance department personnel have made full disclosure concerning their respective state
producer licensing laws and regulations, all applicable licensing practices and procedures, including but
not limited to those which may be based on internal rules or procedures, and the decisions, orders,
and/or findings of an administrative hearing or court of law, or other action which may be construed as
having the effect of law; and
(2) The laws and regulations reviewed for the purposes, and which form the basis, of the recommendation have
not been repealed, revised or otherwise amended subsequent to its review and analysis, and if such
amendment has occurred, the states would have provided notice to the NARAB Working Group or the NAIC
Legal Division.
By following the described process for each jurisdiction, the Working Group has arrived at a recommendation that 40
jurisdictions presently qualify for re-certification under the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Recommended Reciprocal States
Based on its review, as described and qualified above, the NARAB Working Group recommends to the NAIC membership
that, as of October 3, 2011, the following 40 jurisdictions be certified as reciprocal for purposes of GLBA producer licensing
reciprocity in accordance with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard. Any potential issues arising in the course of reviewing these
states are explained in the section that follows.
Alabama Indiana Mississippi Oregon

Alaska Iowa Montana Rhode Island
Arizona Kansas Nebraska South Carolina
Arkansas Kentucky Nevada South Dakota
Colorado Louisiana New Hampshire Utah
Connecticut Maine New Jersey Vermont
Delaware Maryland North Carolina Virginia
District of Columbia Massachusetts North Dakota West Virginia
Idaho Michigan Ohio Wisconsin
Illinois Minnesota Oklahoma Wyoming
Additional states may added to this total based upon resolution of any potential issues that arose in the course of reviewing
Reciprocity Checklists or submission of materials for review by the NARAB Working Group.
_____________________
1
The NARAB (EX) Working Group approved a report certifying 37 jurisdictions as reciprocal during a conference call on August 15, 2011 and approved
a supplemental report certifying three additional jurisdictions during a conference call on October 3, 2011. The Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force
approved both reports during a conference call on October 19, 2011 and combined those reports into this single report for consideration by the NAIC
Executive Committee and Plenary.
2
NIPR Business Rules are written directions governing the electronic processing of applications for initial licensing and
licensing renewal. Each participating state’s business rules are developed in consultation with producer licensing personnel and are customized to
applicable laws and practices of the jurisdiction.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
State-Specific Results
Alabama
Alabama’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of other
relevant aspects of Alabama’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes the Alabama meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Alaska
Alaska’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of other
relevant aspects of Alaska’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes the Alaska meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Arizona
Arizona responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Arizona stated there is a requirement that all producers who sell,
solicit or negotiate long-term care insurance must complete long-term care training substantially similar to that offered in
Arizona. In its 2009 report, the NARAB Working Group concluded that one-time training and continuing education
requirements imposed in satisfaction of a federal mandate are not inconsistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Arizona’s long-term care training requirement is derived from a federal mandate for state insurance departments to assure
state Medicaid agencies that anyone who sells a long-term care partnership policy receives appropriate training. Therefore,
Arizona’s requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
As a result of the clarification to the above item on its Reciprocity Checklist and following the review of other relevant
aspects of Arizona’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Arizona meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Arkansas
Arkansas responded “yes” to Question A2, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed upon a non-
resident business entity seeking licensure beyond the four requirements included in the PLMA. Arkansas stated there are
statutory requirements to register fictitious names and maintain a registered agent. In subsequent correspondence, Arkansas
explained that this requirement is fulfilled through the application and that an additional submission is not required. With
this clarification, the NARAB Working Group does not believe Arkansas’s practice is inconsistent with reciprocity.
aspects of Arkansas’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Arkansas meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Colorado
Colorado’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
other relevant aspects of Colorado’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working
Group believes Colorado meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Connecticut
Connecticut’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
other relevant aspects of Connecticut’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB
Working Group believes Connecticut meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Delaware
Delaware responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable
life license to also obtain a life license from your state. In subsequent correspondence, Delaware indicated this requirement
has been removed. As a result, Delaware’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Delaware responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum
age requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Delaware stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18
years old. This requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
As a result of the clarifications to the above items on its Reciprocity Checklist and following the review of other relevant
aspects of Delaware’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Delaware meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
District of Columbia
The District of Columbia’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following
the review of other relevant aspects of the District of Columbia’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and
practices, the NARAB Working Group believes the District of Columbia meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Idaho
Idaho responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Idaho further responded that it
has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Idaho’s response to this question.
In subsequent correspondence, Idaho stated it is removing any underlying license requirements on surplus lines applicants
or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. This practice is consistent with the NAIC
Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Idaho’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Idaho meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Illinois
Illinois responded “yes” to Questions A1 and A2, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed upon a
non-resident individual or business entity applicant or producer seeking licensure beyond the four requirements included in
the PLMA. Illinois cited a general producer bond requirement. Illinois subsequently clarified that these requirements are
waived as to non-residents. As a result, this practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Illinois responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable
life license to also obtain a life license from your state. In subsequent correspondence, Illinois stated this requirement has
been removed. As a result, Illinois’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Illinois responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident applicants or producers, and “yes” to Question E3, which asked if non-resident surplus lines
applicants or producers are required to post a bond. In both cases, Illinois cited bond requirements. In subsequent
correspondence, Illinois clarified that these requirements do not apply to non-resident applicants or producers generally or
to non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers. As a result, this practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity
Standard.
Illinois responded "yes" to question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Illinois further responded that it
admitted market. In subsequent clarification, Illinois stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on
surplus lines applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. This practice is
consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Illinois’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Illinois meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Indiana
Indiana responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable
life license to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, Indiana stated this requirement has
been removed. As a result, Indiana’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Indiana responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Indiana further responded that it
has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Indiana’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Indiana confirmed it removed the underlying license requirement for non-resident
surplus lines applicants and producers. As a result, Indiana’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity
Standard.
aspects of Indiana’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Indiana meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Iowa
Iowa’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of other
relevant aspects of Iowa’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes the Iowa meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Kansas
Kansas responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Kansas further responded that it
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Kansas’s response to this question.
In subsequent correspondence, Kansas stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on surplus lines
applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. As a result, Kansas’s practice in this
area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Kansas’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Kansas meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Kentucky
Kentucky responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Kentucky further responded that it
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Kentucky’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Kentucky stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on surplus
lines applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. This practice is consistent with
the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Kentucky’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Kentucky meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Louisiana
Louisiana’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
other relevant aspects of Louisiana’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working
Group believes Louisiana meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Maine
Maine responded “NA” to Question D, which asked if a non-resident producer’s continuing education requirement is met if
the non-resident producer fulfills his or her home state continuing education requirement and the home state also grants such
reciprocity. Because Maine does not impose continuing education requirements on non-residents that otherwise would be
imposed in the absence of reciprocity, this response is not inconsistent with reciprocity.
Maine responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Maine further responded that it
has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is sometimes required to perform the diligent search of
the admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Maine’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Maine stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on surplus
aspects of Maine’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Maine meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Maryland
Maryland responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident applicants or producers. Maryland explained that it has a statute that provides for disciplinary
action against the renewal of a license for any person with a tax delinquency. No additional information is required from the
producer and all verification is performed against a Maryland database. Based on this information, this practice is consistent
with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Maryland responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required
to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Maryland further responded
that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is sometimes required to perform the diligent
search of the admitted market. In explanatory comments, Maryland stated it would not impose any underlying license
requirements on surplus lines applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. This
practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Maryland’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Maryland meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Massachusetts
Massachusetts responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a
variable life license to also obtain a life license from the state. Massachusetts added that if a non-resident state offers a
combined life and variable life annuity license, it would do the same. The NAIC Reciprocity Standard states that it is
inconsistent with reciprocity to require an underlying life license prior to the issuance of a non-resident variable life
licenses. In subsequent correspondence, Massachusetts clarified that its practice is to issue automatically a non-resident life
license to a non-resident variable life applicant without any additional requirements or fees. Because Massachusetts issues
the additional license automatically and without any additional requirements, this practice is not inconsistent with the NAIC
Massachusetts responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust
account requirements for non-resident applicants or producers. In subsequent correspondence, Massachusetts explained that
it imposes an E&O insurance requirement for managing general agents and that this requirement is not imposed on
insurance producers as a matter of course. Because this requirement is not imposed on producers for whom reciprocity is
required, this practice is not inconsistent with reciprocity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
aspects of Massachusetts’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Massachusetts meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Michigan
Michigan responded “yes” to Questions A1 and A2, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed
upon a non-resident individual or business entity applicant or producer seeking licensure beyond the requirements included
in the Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA). Michigan further responded that a criminal background check is required on
all applicants and that it may be necessary to request additional information from an applicant. The NAIC Reciprocity
Standard provides that states may perform background checks or other due diligence without being inconsistent with
reciprocity. Further, in subsequent correspondence, Michigan stated that additional information would be required only in
those circumstances where the background check uncovered negative information for which licensure may be denied, or
where the applicant disclosed negative information on the application and for which the application requests additional
information. Michigan does not require additional information to be submitted as a regular licensure practice. Rather, any
requested information concerns a matter for which licensure may be denied. Michigan’s practice may have the effect of
allowing an applicant to clarify a potentially negative issue and obtain a license. As a result, Michigan’s practice is this area
is not inconsistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Michigan responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident applicants or producers. Michigan explained that the failure to pay the single business tax or
the Michigan business tax or comply with any administrative or court order directing the payment of such tax may provide
the basis for denying licensure to an applicant. Michigan does not request additional information as a regular licensure
practice, but may request clarifying information if an applicant disclosed that such tax was not paid or that the applicant
failed to comply with such orders. Michigan’s practice may have the effect of allowing an applicant to clarify a potentially
negative issue and obtain a license. As a result, Michigan’s practice in this area is not inconsistent with the NAIC
Michigan responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required
to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Michigan further responded
that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the diligent search
of the admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Michigan’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Michigan confirmed that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform
the diligent search of the admitted market. Michigan’s practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Michigan responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum
age requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Michigan stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18
years old. This requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Michigan’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Michigan meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Minnesota
Minnesota responded “yes” to Question A2, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed upon a non-
resident business entity applicant or producer seeking licensure beyond the four requirements included in the PLMA.
Minnesota stated that business entities must designate an individual licensed producer responsible for the business entity’s
compliance with Minnesota laws and regulations. In subsequent correspondence, Minnesota explained that this requirement
is fulfilled through the application and that an additional submission is not required. With this clarification, the NARAB
Working Group does not believe Minnesota’s practice is inconsistent with the reciprocity.
Minnesota responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required
to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Minnesota further responded
that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Minnesota’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Minnesota stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
surplus lines applicants or producers who are licensed for surplus lines in their home states and who do not perform the
diligent search of the admitted market. This practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Minnesota’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Minnesota meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Mississippi
Mississippi responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required
to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Mississippi further responded
that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Mississippi’s response to this
question. Subsequently, Mississippi reported the enactment of a new statutory provision eliminating the underlying general
lines or P&C license requirement if the surplus lines applicant or producer is not required to perform the diligent search of
the admitted market. Mississippi confirmed this exception would apply if the surplus lines producer relies on a diligent
search performed by a producer properly licensed to do so. As revised, Mississippi’s practice is consistent with the NAIC
aspects of Minnesota’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Minnesota meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Montana
Montana responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable
life license to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, Montana stated this requirement had
been removed. As a result, Montana’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Montana responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident applicants or producers. In subsequent correspondence, Montana clarified that it imposed none
of these specific requirements on non-residents.
Montana responded “yes” to Question E3, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers required to post a
bond. In subsequent correspondence, Montana clarified that it does not impose a bond requirement on non-resident surplus
lines applicants or producers.
Montana responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Montana further responded that it
had a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is sometimes required to perform the diligent search of
the admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Montana’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Montana stated it would apply the reciprocity provisions of its producer licensing
code for non-resident surplus lines licensure.
Montana responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. In subsequent correspondence, Montana stated its original response
applied to resident producers and confirmed it did not impose the aforementioned requirements on non-resident applicants.
aspects of Montana’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Montana meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Nebraska
Nebraska responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident applicants or producers. Nebraska indicates that it imposed a financial responsibility
requirement on all viatical settlement brokers and viatical settlement broker entities. Because the NAIC Reciprocity Standard
provides that viatical settlement brokers are not entitled to reciprocity, this practice is not inconsistent with reciprocity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Nebraska responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Nebraska further responded that it
had a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Nebraska’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Nebraska stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on surplus
lines applicants or producers who hold the underlying P&C license in their home state. Because all states require their
resident surplus lines producers to hold resident P&C licenses, this practice is not inconsistent with reciprocity as applied. In
the event another reciprocal jurisdiction eliminated its underlying license requirement for residents while still offering
reciprocity to other jurisdictions, Nebraska’s practice may need to be revisited for consistency with reciprocity.
Nebraska responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Nebraska stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18 years old.
This requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Nebraska’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Nebraska meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Nevada
Nevada responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable life
license to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, Nevada clarified that this requirement has
been removed. As a result, Nevada’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Nevada responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Nevada stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18 years old.
aspects of Nevada’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Nevada meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
New Hampshire
New Hampshire’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the
review of other relevant aspects of New Hampshire’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the
NARAB Working Group believes New Hampshire meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
New Jersey
New Jersey’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
all other aspects of New Jersey’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working
Group believes New Jersey meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
North Carolina
North Carolina responded “yes” to Question A1, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed upon a
non-resident producer seeking licensure beyond the four requirements included in the PLMA. North Carolina stated there is
a requirement that all producers who sell, solicit or negotiate long-term care or Medicare Supplement insurance must obtain
a separate limited lines license in addition to the accident and health or sickness line of authority. In subsequent
correspondence, North Carolina clarified that, if a non-resident producer’s accident and health or sickness license in the
producer’s home state encompasses authority sell, solicit or negotiate long-term care or Medicare Supplement insurance,
North Carolina’s practice is to issue automatically a non-resident long-term care/Medicare Supplement insurance limited
lines license without imposing any further requirements on the non-resident applicant beyond the uniform application and
fee. Because North Carolina issues the additional license automatically and without any additional requirements, this
practice is not inconsistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Also in response to Question A1, North Carolina disclosed that non-resident producers seeking a variable life license are
required to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, North Carolina confirmed that this
requirement had been removed. As a result, North Carolina’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity
Standard.
North Carolina responded “no” to Question C1, which asked if a non-resident license will be granted for at least the same
scope of authority as the non-resident producer applicant’s home state license. North Carolina disclosed the same long-term
care and Medicare Supplement insurance limited lines license requirement discussed above, which is not inconsistent with
North Carolina responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a
variable life license to also obtain a life license from your state. As discussed above, this requirement was subsequently
eliminated, with the result that North Carolina’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
North Carolina responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or
minimum age requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. North Carolina stated there is a requirement that a
producer be 18 years old. This requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
North Carolina responded “yes” to Question F, which asked if there are any post-licensing or other regulatory requirements
on any non-resident producer that limit or condition the non-resident producer’s activities because of such producer’s
residence or place of operations, or that otherwise subject the non-resident producer to different or discriminatory regulatory
requirements than those imposed upon residents. North Carolina stated that every report of surplus lines business placed by
a non-resident producer must be countersigned by a resident license or by a regulatory support organization. In subsequent
correspondence, North Carolina clarified that policy countersignature is not required. Additionally, GLBA § 6751(c)(3)
specifically finds that countersignature requirements imposed on nonresident producers are not deemed to have the effect of
limiting or conditioning a producer’s activities because of its residence or place of operations. As a result, North Carolina’s
practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
As a result of the clarification to the above items on its Reciprocity Checklist and following the review of other relevant
aspects of North Carolina’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes North Carolina meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
North Dakota
North Dakota responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are
required to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. North Dakota further
responded that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the
diligent search of the admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning North
Dakota’s response to this question. In subsequent correspondence, North Dakota stated it would not impose any underlying
license requirements on surplus lines applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market.
This practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of North Dakota’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes North Dakota meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Ohio
Ohio’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of other
relevant aspects of Ohio’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Ohio meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Oklahoma
Oklahoma’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
other relevant aspects of Oklahoma’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working
Group believes Oklahoma meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Oregon
While Oregon responded “no” to Question E1, which asked whether an appointment is required prior to on concurrent with
licensure, Oregon disclosed that an appointment must be secured before transacting business. Because Oregon does not
require an appointment as a pre-licensing requirement and companies, rather than producers, bear the burden of submitting
appointments, this requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Oregon responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Oregon further responded that it
had a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the diligent search of the
admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Oregon’s response to this
question. In subsequent correspondence, Oregon stated it would not impose any underlying license requirements on surplus
Oregon responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Oregon stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18 years old.
aspects of Oregon’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Oregon meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Rhode Island
Rhode Island responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are
required to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Rhode Island further
responded that it had a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is sometimes required to perform the
diligent search of the admitted market. Additionally, an interested party submitted a comment letter concerning Rhode
Island’s response to this question. In subsequent correspondence, Rhode Island confirmed it removed the underlying license
requirement for non-resident surplus lines applicants and producers.
aspects of Rhode Island’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Rhode Island meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
South Carolina
South Carolina responded “no” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a
variable life license to also obtain a life license from the state, but subsequently disclosed that the underlying life license
requirement remained in place. South Carolina later confirmed that the underlying life license requirement was removed for
non-resident variable life applicants. As a result, South Carolina’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC
South Carolina responded “no” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or
minimum age requirements for non-resident producers or applicants, but also disclosed there is a requirement that a
producer be 18 years old. This requirement is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of South Carolina’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes South Carolina meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
South Dakota
South Dakota responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are
required to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. South Dakota further

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
responded that it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the
diligent search of the admitted market. This practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of South Dakota’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes South Dakota meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Utah
While Utah responded “no” to Question A1, which asked if there are any requirements or submissions imposed upon a non-
resident producer seeking licensure beyond the four requirements included in the PLMA, Utah disclosed two practices
concerning its response. First, Utah stated it does not specifically require that the non-resident’s home state also extend
reciprocity to Utah residents. The NARAB Working Group does not believe the lack of this requirement to be inconsistent
with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard. Second, Utah stated that it required the applicant to execute a form whereby the
applicant agrees to be subject to the jurisdiction of the Utah insurance commissioner for that applicant’s activities in Utah.
In subsequent correspondence, Utah explained that this requirement is fulfilled through the application and that an
additional submission is not required. With this clarification, the NARAB Working Group does not believe Utah’s practice
is inconsistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
While Utah responded “yes” to Question D, which asked if a non-resident producer’s continuing education requirement is
met if the non-resident producer fulfills his or her home state continuing education requirement and the home state also
grants such reciprocity, Utah stated it does not require reciprocity from the non-resident’s home state in order for the non-
resident licensee to be deemed to satisfy Utah’s continuing education requirements. Because Utah does not impose
continuing education requirements on non-residents that otherwise would be imposed in the absence of reciprocity, this
response is not inconsistent with reciprocity.
aspects of Utah’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Utah meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Vermont
Vermont responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required to
obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Vermont further responded that
it has a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is always required to perform the diligent search of
the admitted market. This practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
aspects of Vermont’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Vermont meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Virginia
Virginia responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a variable
life license to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, Virginia confirmed this requirement
had been removed through a legislative change that took effect after its Reciprocity Checklist was submitted. As a result,
Virginia’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Virginia responded “no” to Question D, which asked if a non-resident producer’s continuing education requirement is met if
the non-resident producer fulfills his or her home state continuing education requirement and the home state also grants
such reciprocity. Virginia stated non-resident producers are exempt from Virginia continuing education requirements if they
are compliant with home state continuing education requirements and pay the licensing continuation fee to Virginia.
Because Virginia does not impose continuing education requirements on non-residents that otherwise would be imposed in
the absence of reciprocity, this response is not inconsistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Virginia responded “yes” to Question E2, which asked if there are any bond, E&O, deposit, tax clearance or trust account
requirements for non-resident producers. Virginia stated all producers must maintain a fiduciary account for all funds
received. In subsequent correspondence, Virginia explained this requirement is not applied in a manner that requires non-

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
resident producers to establish an account with a Virginia financial institution. As a result, Virginia’s practice in this area is
consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Virginia responded “yes” to Question E5, which asked if there are any training, education, prior experience or minimum age
requirements for non-resident producers or applicants. Virginia stated there is a requirement that a producer be 18 years old.
aspects of Virginia’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group believes
Virginia meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
West Virginia
West Virginia responded “yes” to Question C2, which asked whether a state requires a non-resident applicant seeking a
variable life license to also obtain a life license from the state. In subsequent correspondence, West Virginia stated this
requirement has been removed. As a result, West Virginia’s practice in this area is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity
Standard.
aspects of West Virginia’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes West Virginia meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Wisconsin
Wisconsin’s responses to the Reciprocity Checklist raised no issues requiring specific follow-up. Following the review of
other relevant aspects of Wisconsin’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working
Group believes Wisconsin meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
Wyoming
Wyoming responded “yes” to Question E4a, which asked if non-resident surplus lines applicants or producers are required
to obtain an underlying general lines or P&C license as a condition to surplus lines licensure. Wyoming further responded
that it had a diligent search requirement and that the surplus lines producer is sometimes required to perform the diligent
search of the admitted market; however, Wyoming indicated that an underlying license had been waived through
Memorandum 01- 2010. An interested party submitted a comment letter concerning underlying license requirements
imposed by Wyoming. In subsequent correspondence, Wyoming stated it would not impose any underlying license
requirements on surplus lines applicants or producers who do not perform the diligent search of the admitted market. This
practice is consistent with the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.
As a result of the clarification to the above items on its Reciprocity Checklist and following the review of other relevant
aspects of Wyoming’s non-resident producer licensing laws, regulations and practices, the NARAB Working Group
believes Wyoming meets the NAIC Reciprocity Standard.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
APPENDIX A
REPORT OF THE NARAB WORKING GROUP
CONTINUING COMPLIANCE WITH RECIPROCITY REQUIREMENTS OF THE GRAMM- LEACH-BLILEY ACT
ADOPTED 6-15-09
The purpose of this report is to present to the NAIC membership an updated framework for determining the continuing
compliance of the states with the producer licensing reciprocity requirements of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA), 15
U.S.C. §§ 6751 et seq. This report is also intended to meet the following charge to the NARAB Working Group:
Finalize the evaluation of the reciprocity standard developed by the NAIC’s 2002 NARAB (EX) Working Group and make
final recommendations by the 2009 Summer National Meeting for revisions or additions to the standard to address the issues
identified in the Producer Licensing Assessment Aggregate Report of Findings including the various state requirements that are
imposed upon non-residents but may not have been specifically addressed in the 2002 reciprocity standard.
As detailed herein, the Working Group reviewed several subjects relevant to non-resident producer licensing to determine
their conformity with the 2002 standard. Our conclusions are stated below. In order to have all relevant guidance in one
document, we have reproduced, and thereby reaffirmed, certain conclusions from the 2002 reciprocity standard. To achieve
consistency and clarity, much of the information in this report is re-produced from previous materials.
The Working Group makes no finding concerning continuing compliance of any state with the 2002 standard, as updated and
supplemented today. This report will provide the basis for initiating a formal reassessment of state compliance with the
reciprocity framework.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The specific analysis related to individual topics is detailed below, but the Working Group has determined the following
requirements imposed on non-resident producers or applicants are inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity:
 Fingerprint requirements;
 Requiring a surplus lines producer not required to perform or not performing the diligent search of the
admitted market to obtain an underlying general lines license;
 Surplus lines bonds;
 Requiring the designated responsible producer to be appointed prior to the issuance of a non-resident business
entity license;
 Requiring the business entity to submit articles of incorporation;
 Requiring an underlying life license prior to the issuance of a variable life license;
 Requiring individuals seeking a fraternal license to have a fraternal certificate from a company;
 Requiring the submission of additional information to verify an applicant’s age;
 Offering inconsistent terms of licensure for residents and non-residents; and
 Requiring trust accounts as a condition to licensure or applying trust account requirements against non-residents in
a discriminatory manner;

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Working Group does not believe the following requirements are inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity:
 Performing background checks or other due diligence without requiring additional submissions by the applicant;
 Requiring a surplus lines producer required to perform or performing the diligent search of the admitted market
to obtain an underlying general lines license;
 Appointments not required during the licensing process;
 Requiring the designated responsible producer to be licensed prior to the issuance of a non-resident business
entity license, provided the applications are accepted concurrently;
 Requiring a business entity to register to do business in the state;
 Requesting proof of Secretary of State registration as a prerequisite for business entity licensure;
 Not adopting the major lines of authority definitions of the Producer Licensing Model Act;
 Verifying legal work authorization for non-U.S. citizen applicants;
 Enforcing minimum age requirements;
 Non-discriminatory trust account requirements of general application if not tied to licensure or applied
discriminatorily against non-residents;
 Verifying an applicant for license renewal has paid all undisputed taxes and unemployment insurance contributions;
 Continuing education requirements based on federal mandates; and
 Not offering reciprocal licensing treatment to viatical settlement brokers.
The above lists are, by no means, exhaustive of the licensing and regulatory issues that may impact reciprocity. These are,
however, the issues upon which the NARAB Working Group has opined. As new issues are brought to our attention, we will
analyze such issues under the reciprocity standard described in this report.
BACKGROUND
Following passage of GLBA in 1999, the NAIC established the NARAB Working Group in order to interpret and apply the
producer licensing reciprocity requirements of GLBA, determine which states were compliant therewith, and make a report
with recommendations to that effect. The details of the NARAB provisions of GLBA are stated in the next section of this
report.
On August 8, 2002, the NARAB Working Group adopted the Report of the NARAB Working Group: Certification of States
for Producer Licensing Reciprocity (“2002 Report”), which established a reciprocity framework and recommended that 35
states be certified as reciprocal jurisdictions. Since the adoption of the 2002 Report, 12 additional jurisdictions have been
certified as reciprocal, raising the total number of reciprocal jurisdictions to 47. The NARAB Working Group was disbanded
in September 2002, and the Producer Licensing Working Group (PLWG) became the focal point for uniformity efforts in
producer licensing.
In 2007, the NAIC commenced a producer licensing assessment process intended to review continuing GLBA reciprocity and
compliance with the NAIC’s Uniform Resident Licensing standards. The assessment process included a comprehensive and
searching analysis of state producer licensing procedures involving an initial self-assessment, peer review, and direct
Commissioner or senior insurance department staff engagement. This state-by-state review culminated in the NAIC Producer
Licensing Assessment Aggregate Report of Findings (“Producer Licensing Assessment Report”), which was issued on
February 19, 2008. With respect to reciprocity, the Producer Licensing Assessment Report determined that all states
previously certified as GLBA-compliant remained compliant with the standard established in the 2002 Report. The Producer
Licensing Assessment Report also identified various requirements imposed upon non-residents that were not specifically
addressed within the 2002 Report. The NAIC re-constituted the NARAB (EX) Working Group in order to determine whether

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
these requirements impacted reciprocity. The Working Group, in turn, engaged the NAIC Legal Division to provide legal
analysis of these issues.
On May 23, 2008, the NAIC Legal Division provided the NARAB Working Group with memorandum on “Additional Issues
Identified in Producer Licensing Assessment Report” (“May 2008 Memorandum”). The May 2008 Memorandum provided
recommendations to the NARAB Working Group as to whether the issues noted in the Producer Licensing Assessment
Report impacted reciprocity. By conference call on June 26, 2008, the NARAB Working Group adopted the
recommendations contained within the memorandum. The May 2008 Memorandum noted that the NARAB Working Group
received written comments from regulators and interested parties identifying additional possible reciprocity issues not
addressed in the Producer Licensing Assessment Report. In a legal memorandum dated November 19, 2008 on “Additional
Potential Reciprocity Issues Raised in Written Comments” (“November 2008 Memorandum”) the NAIC Legal Division
analyzed the possible reciprocity impact of these additional items. In some areas, the November 2008 Memorandum provided
a recommendation; in other areas, additional information and study was required. The Working Group’s determination of the
impact of these latter matters upon reciprocity is stated within this report.
In meeting our charge to “make final recommendations by the 2009 Summer National Meeting for revisions or additions to
the [2002 reciprocity] standard,” the NARAB Working Group has utilized the 2002 Report, the Producer Licensing
Assessment Report, the May 2008 Memorandum, the November 2008 Memorandum, regulator and interested party
comments, and other additional research. Our intent is not to establish a new reciprocity standard. Rather, in adopting this
report, we restate and reaffirm the basic analytical framework within the 2002 Report and supplement that reciprocity
standard by applying it to issues not considered by our predecessor working group. The Working Group intends this report to
provide greater clarity to the NAIC’s reciprocity standard. Upon NAIC adoption of this report, the NARAB Working Group
will initiate a formal re-evaluation of state compliance with GLBA reciprocity utilizing the findings of this report in doing so.
NARAB PROVISIONS OF GLBA
GLBA requires that at least 29 jurisdictions meet the uniformity or reciprocity requirements of 15 U.S.C. § 6751 by
November 12, 2002, in order to avoid the preemption of certain state producer licensing laws and the establishment of the
National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers. The NAIC elected to pursue the reciprocity option with uniformity
remaining the long-term goal for non-resident (and resident) producer licensing. Thus, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 6751(a)(2), a
minimum of 29 jurisdictions must have enacted “reciprocity laws and regulations governing the licensure of nonresident
individuals and entities authorized to sell and solicit insurance within those States” by November 12, 2002.
According to the reciprocity standard developed by the 2002 NARAB Working Group and included in the 2002 Report, a
state must satisfy the following four conditions in order to be considered reciprocal for non-resident producer licensing
under 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c) of GLBA:
(1) Permit a producer with a resident license for selling and soliciting insurance in its home state to receive a license
to sell or solicit the purchase of insurance as a non-resident to the same extent that the producer is permitted to
sell or solicit insurance in its home state, if the home state also licenses reciprocally, without satisfying any
additional requirements other than submitting (A) a request for licensure; (B) the application for licensure
submitted to the home state; (C) proof of licensure and good standing in home state; and (D) payment of any
requisite fee;
(2) Acceptance of a producer’s satisfaction of its home state’s continuing education requirements as satisfying
that state’s continuing education requirements, provided that the home state recognizes continuing education
satisfaction on a reciprocal basis;
(3) No requirements are imposed upon any producer to be licensed or otherwise qualified to do business as a
non- resident that have the effect of limiting or conditioning that producer’s activities because of its residence or
place of operations (excepting countersignature requirements); and
(4) Each state meeting (1), (2) and (3) grants reciprocity to residents of all other states that satisfy (1), (2) and (3).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Additionally, the savings provision of Section 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f) provides that state laws or regulations purporting to
regulate insurance producers (including laws on unfair trade practices, consumer protections, and countersignatures) need
not be altered or amended for purposes of satisfying the reciprocity criteria unless that law or regulation is inconsistent with
a specific requirement noted above and only to the extent of the inconsistency. While unfair trade practices and consumer
protection laws are specifically mentioned, these types of laws are afforded no heightened protection and also are subject to
the requirement of consistency with 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c). The savings provision should be construed in such a way as to
allow state laws regulating producers generally to be saved while still achieving the Congressional intent to streamline
licensing procedures and prevent discrimination against non-resident producers.
Under 15 U.S.C. § 6751(d)(1), the NAIC was required to determine whether the requisite number of states achieved
reciprocity. As stated, the earlier NARAB Working Group was assigned the task of interpreting and applying the reciprocity
requirements under GLBA, determining which states were compliant therewith, and making its report along with
recommendations to its parent committee.
The expertise of the state insurance regulators in determining whether states meet reciprocity is recognized under 15 U.S.C.
§ 6751(d)(2). In the event of a legal challenge to the NAIC’s conclusion, 15 U.S.C. § 6751(d)(2) provides that the reviewing
court shall apply the standards set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act. In relevant part, this statute states that a
determination will not be overturned unless it found to be “arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in
accordance with the law.” 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A). Furthermore, case law indicates that a reviewing court will consider three
factors in examining a determination: scope of authority, whether the determination was arbitrary and capricious, and
whether the decision-making process was procedurally valid. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. National Resources Defense Council,
Inc., 467 U.S. 837 (1984); Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402 (1971), overruled on other grounds,
Califano v. Sanders, 430 U.S. 99 (1977). The Working Group believes that its process for considering reciprocity issues in
2002 and today meets the criteria established for affording deference to the NAIC’s reciprocity standard and determinations
of state compliance therewith.
GLBA ANALYSIS OF SPECIFIC ISSUES
In 2002 and today, the NARAB Working Group has analyzed whether states may impose certain requirements on non-
residents and remain compliant with GLBA reciprocity. The Working Group recognizes that many of these requirements
are imposed in good faith as part of a state’s consumer protection regime. Where such requirements appear to go beyond the
letter of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c), the Working Group has considered whether the requirements may be maintained as consistent
with GLBA. In 2002 and today, the Working Group has utilized the expertise of state producer licensing directors, other
interested regulators, the NAIC Legal Division and interested parties in developing a recommendation about the consistency
of these requirements with reciprocity.
Following this introductory section is an issue-by-issue analysis of certain specific issues within the context of GLBA
reciprocity. In some cases, we have re-produced in substantial part the recommendations of our predecessor NARAB
Working Group. In doing so, we intend to reaffirm those findings by incorporating them directly within the report we adopt
today.
A. Fingerprints and Background Checks
The following is re-produced, in substantial part, from the 2002 Report:
The Working Group addressed the issue of the due diligence states may perform in reviewing the qualifications of a non-
resident applicant, including whether states may require fingerprints of non-resident applicants. With respect to state review
of application materials, the Working Group determined that GLBA affords states the opportunity to determine that an
applicant meets a particular state's qualifications for licensure, provided such due diligence required no additional
submissions beyond the items permitted by 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c)(1). Therefore, the Working Group believes that states may
perform background checks or other due diligence without being inconsistent with reciprocity.
During the course of its discussions, the Working Group considered whether fingerprints may be required as a means of
performing an effective review of the applicant's qualifications. Within the context of reciprocity, the principal argument
favoring a fingerprint requirement was that GLBA protected this requirement as an important consumer protection through
application of the savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f), and that fingerprints provide the most effective means of performing

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
a background check. Arguments against fingerprints as a permissible requirement also focused on the savings provision and
questioned whether such a requirement is “consistent” with the provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c).
After careful review, analysis, and extensive debate, the Working Group adopted the position that a fingerprint requirement
for non-resident producer applicants is inconsistent with the reciprocity requirements under GLBA. 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c)(1)
provides that non-resident producers be permitted to receive a license “without satisfying any additional requirements other
than submitting” a request for licensure, the home state application or Uniform Application, proof of licensure and good
standing in the home state, and the payment of required fees. After considering several alternatives for allowing fingerprints
within the GLBA reciprocity formula, the Working Group determined that pre-licensing fingerprint requirements for non-
resident producers constituted an “additional requirement” which is inconsistent with reciprocity under 15 U.S.C. §
6751(c)(1).
B. Surplus Lines Issues
1. Underlying Licensing Requirements for Surplus Lines Producers
In response to comments from interested parties, the Working Group evaluated whether states requiring non-residents to
obtain non-resident general lines producer licenses – namely, property and casualty licenses – as a prerequisite to surplus
lines licensure is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity. This issue was addressed in the 2002 Report, which concluded that
requiring a general lines license relates to regulation of the surplus lines market and was not an additional administrative
requirement being imposed on non-residents. This conclusion was based on the following analysis:
As part of its analysis, the Working Group recognized the unique nature of the surplus lines market, relative to
general lines of authority such as life and property. Surplus lines brokering is a specialized insurance producer
function whereby producers secure insurance coverage generally unavailable from carriers licensed in that
jurisdiction . . . .
Almost all States require resident surplus lines producers to first obtain a license to act as a general lines producer.
Generally, surplus lines producers must first search the admitted market as a prerequisite to searching the
non-admitted market. Thus, both general lines and surplus lines authority are required in order to operate as
a surplus lines producer. In many cases, the rationale for the admitted market prerequisite is generally one of
consumer protection. The surplus lines insurer, being a nonadmitted carrier, is not subject to the jurisdiction of
insurance regulatory authorities in that State. Further, there is typically no guaranty fund coverage for risks insured
in the non-admitted market. Many States require that insureds be notified of these facts.
In the non-resident licensing context, the question is whether a State requirement that non-residents obtain both
general lines and surplus lines authority is an administrative or regulatory requirement. The Working Group
concluded that requiring a general lines license relates to regulation of the surplus lines market and is not an
additional administrative requirement being imposed on non-residents. The general lines license gives the non-
resident producer the authority, otherwise lacking, to search for coverage within the admitted market.
Generally speaking, without this authority, a surplus lines producer would be unable to fulfill his or her duty to first
attempt to place business in the admitted market. Thus, the general lines license gives effect to the surplus lines
license. Many States issue these two licenses in tandem. (Emphasis added.)
Interested parties recently commented that the factual premise upon which the NARAB Working Group reached this
conclusion was flawed. In 2002, the Working Group appeared to have assumed that all surplus lines producers would be
required to conduct diligent searches of the admitted market. Accordingly, the Working Group adopted an approach that
states could require surplus lines producers to obtain an underlying general lines producer license as a condition to licensure
as a non-resident surplus lines producer. Because it appears that all surplus lines producers are not required in all states and in
all situations to conduct the diligent search, we have considered whether states may impose underlying general lines license
requirements upon those non-resident surplus lines producers not conducting the diligent search.
In urging our re-consideration of the factual premise supporting the 2002 Report, the National Association of Professional
Surplus Lines Offices, Ltd. (NAPSLO) pointed to the example of the wholesale business model by which many surplus lines
transactions are accommodated. In this model, surplus lines producers are generally brought into the transaction after a
general lines producer has already made a diligent search of the admitted market and has been unable to obtain traditional
admitted insurance. NAPSLO further argued that the surplus lines producer often is not specifically required under state law
to conduct its own search, such that a general lines license would not be necessary.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The potential reciprocity issue presented by the requirement that a surplus lines producer hold an underlying non-resident
general lines license as a prerequisite to qualify for non-resident surplus lines licensure arises when the non-resident surplus
lines applicant is not required to and does not perform the diligent search of the admitted market in the non-resident state. In
this example, the general lines license requirement could result in the applicant being forced to qualify for a line of authority
not sought – and not needed - from the non-resident state.
In providing a legal analysis of this issue in November 2008, the NAIC Legal Division noted that state laws and practices
varied with respect to diligent search requirements. While many states appeared to permit the general lines producer to
conduct or certify the diligent search, there were some states that required the surplus lines producer to perform the diligent
search.
The Working Group recently surveyed state producer licensing directors and general counsels in order to determine which
states required an underlying general lines license as a condition to licensure as a surplus lines producer and upon whom
states imposed the requirement to conduct the diligent search. The results of this survey indicated a variance among state
laws and practices, such that states appeared to fall into the following broad categories:
(1) States that do not require a non-resident surplus lines producer to obtain an underlying general lines license;
(2) States that require a non-resident surplus lines producer to obtain an underlying general lines license and
specifically require the surplus lines producer to conduct the diligent search of the admitted market; and
(3) States that require a non-resident surplus lines producer to obtain an underlying general lines license but impose
the diligent search requirement upon the underlying producer in the transaction or upon the “producing broker.”
From this analysis, it is apparent that state underlying license and diligent search requirements are not as clear or as uniform
as may have been understood in 2002. In adopting an approach to be utilized as part of an updated and ongoing reciprocity
framework, the Working Group returns to the premise of its 2002 Report; that is, if a non-resident surplus lines producer is
conducting the diligent search of the admitted market, the producer is performing both the surplus lines and general lines
functions. It is not inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity to require the producer to secure authority to act as a general lines
producer prior to performing this function. Provided the general lines producer license was also issued consistently with
reciprocity requirements, the Working Group does not believe such an approach would be inconsistent with GLBA.
Returning to the categories listed above, the Working Group sees no reciprocity issues for states within categories (1) and
(2). Where the state imposes no general lines producer licensing requirement, this issue is not present. Where states require
the surplus lines producer to conduct the diligent search, the Working Group believes that state is justified in imposing an
underlying general lines producer license requirement and that such requirement is not inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity
for reasons stated in the 2002 Report.
For states falling within category (3), the Working Group is concerned about imposing underlying license requirements upon
surplus lines producers who are not required by law or practice to conduct the diligent search. If the surplus lines producer is
not conducting the diligent search, there does not appear to be another justifiable reason for imposing such requirement
consistent with GLBA reciprocity.
The Working Group is mindful that some states may have adopted underlying license requirements for non-resident surplus
lines producers in reliance on the 2002 Report, but we believe this clarification is necessary to preserve a reciprocity
framework consistent with GLBA. For these states, the Working Group notes that we believe it would be consistent with
reciprocity to continue to require underlying licenses for those surplus lines producers actually conducting the diligent
search. For those surplus lines producers not performing the diligent search, we urge states to examine their statutes for
provisions similar to Sections 8D and 16A of the Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA) for authority to waive or otherwise
remove any underlying license requirements. Section 8D of the PLMA provides that “[n]otwithstanding any other provision
of this Act, a person licensed as a surplus lines producer in his or her home state shall receive a nonresident surplus lines
producer license [by satisfying the four requirements listed in Section 8A of the PLMA].” Section 16A of the PLMA states
that “[t]he insurance commissioner shall waive any requirements for a nonresident license applicant with a valid license from
his or her home state, except the requirements imposed by Section 8 of this Act, if the applicant’s home state awards
nonresident licenses to residents of this state on the same basis.” Further, the Working Group is willing to assist in
developing a model bulletin for use by states in explaining any changes in interpretation or application of laws or procedures
necessary to accommodate reciprocity requirements.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
We note our opinion is limited to the issue of underlying license requirements for non-resident surplus lines producers. It
should not be construed to raise questions about a state’s regulation of its surplus lines market through non-discriminatory
application of general regulatory requirements, such as the filing of certifications or attestations about surplus lines
transactions and premium tax reporting.
2. Surplus Lines Bonds
The Working Group examined the use of surplus lines bonds as both a pre- and post-licensing non-resident requirement. As a
pre-licensing requirement, the Working Group determined that a surplus lines bond is inconsistent with reciprocity under
GLBA. A consumer protection justification was not found to be available within the context of reciprocity. The savings
provision is not a broad exemption for laws based upon a valid consumer protection justification. Rather, 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f)
saves laws generally — including those related to consumer protection — provided they do not violate a specific requirement
of the reciprocity provisions of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c). The Working Group determined that a pre-licensing surplus lines bond
is inconsistent with 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c), i.e., a pre-licensing surplus lines bond is an “additional requirement” and, therefore,
states imposing such a requirement do not satisfy reciprocity under 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c)(1).
Likewise, with respect to post-licensing surplus lines bonds, the Working Group determined that these post-licensing
requirements, which condition the use of the license on having such a bond in place, are inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity.
The Working Group found that such a bond would be a de facto licensing requirement due to the inability of the producer to
use the license without first posting a bond.
C. Appointments
1. Appointments and “Agent-Only” States
The Working Group identified states that do not recognize brokering activities in the sense that all producers/“agents” are
agents of the insurer and thus require that producers/“agents” be appointed by an insurer even though such a requirement
ordinarily may not exist for “brokers.” As a general rule, the Working Group believes that appointments are permissible
under GLBA as long as they are not required as part of the licensing process. The “agent-only” states do not require an
appointment as a pre-licensing requirement, thereby avoiding the imposition of an additional requirement to licensure.
Furthermore, appointment requirements are imposed upon companies, rather than producers, thus removing the burden from
the producer seeking licensure. Accordingly, the Working Group did not find the imposition of such an appointment
requirement to be inconsistent with reciprocity.
2. Requiring the Designated Responsible Producer (DRP) to be Licensed or Appointed Prior to the
Issuance of a Non- Resident Business Entity License
The Working Group believes that requiring the DRP to be appointed prior to the issuance of a non-resident business entity
license is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
GLBA does not distinguish between individuals and business entities with respect to the requirements that a reciprocal state
may impose. The general reciprocity framework has been accepted to apply to business entity licensing as well as individual
producer licensing. Therefore, to the extent a state conditions the acceptance of a non-resident business entity application on
an additional submission as to the licensure status of the business entity’s DRP, this practice would be inconsistent with
GLBA reciprocity requirements.
The designation of a licensed producer responsible for the business entity’s compliance with a state’s insurance laws, rules
and regulations stems from Section 6B(2) of the PLMA. This provision requires the commissioner to find the DRP has been
designated “before approving the [business entity’s] application.” The DRP requirement serves to attach responsibility for
regulatory enforcement issues to the individual DRP in addition to the associated business entity. Potential inconsistency
with GLBA reciprocity arises if states inadvertently create a de facto additional submission requirement by barring the
concurrent submission of business entity and DRP applications for licensure. In other words, the practice of requiring the
DRP’s individual application to be submitted and approved separately prior to the business entity’s application creates the
appearance of an impermissible additional submission requirement for the business entity application.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The potential reciprocity issue is remedied when states accept the business entity’s application and the DRP’s individual
application at the same time. Clearly, the individual application must be processed first to ensure that the DRP is, in fact,
licensed. As stated in the Producer Licensing Assessment Report, states should ensure there is a method of concurrent
licensure and work to facilitate the licensing of a business entity and DRP at the same time. While requiring the DRP to be
licensed prior to the issuance of a non-resident business entity license is a potential violation of the GLBA reciprocity
requirements, the NARAB Working Group believes it is easily remedied by attention to the timing with which business
entity and DRP applications are accepted for processing. Accepting business entity and DRP applications concurrently would
be consistent with GLBA reciprocity.
With regard to requiring a business entity’s DRP to be appointed by a carrier prior to the issuance of a non-resident business
entity license, the 2002 Report found that, generally, appointments are permitted under GLBA provided they are not required
as part of the licensing process. There appears to be no statutory or administrative basis for conditioning a business entity’s
licensure on the submission of appointment documentation for an individual producer, especially given that companies rather
than producers are subject to appointment requirements. Therefore, the Working Group believes that requiring the DRP to be
appointed prior to the issuance of a non-resident business entity license is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
D. Non-Resident Business Entity Licensing Issues
1. Requirement for Foreign Corporation to Register with Secretary of State to do Business in

Another State
The Working Group believes that requiring a non-resident business entity to register to do business in the state is not
inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements. The Working Group further believes that requests for proof of Secretary of
State corporate registration as a prerequisite for non-resident business entity licensing is also not inconsistent with GLBA
reciprocity requirements.
This issue was addressed in the 2002 Report, which included the following analysis:
Corporate registration requirements are matters of State corporate law, whereby States require all business entities
(not just those that are insurance-related) to register with the Secretary of State or an equivalent office. The Working
Group believes that such requirements transcend issues of insurance licensing and relate to basic police powers of
States to require registration of business entities. Thus, this requirement is not inconsistent with reciprocity.
No new facts or inconsistencies have been presented in the comments which would lead to the determination that the earlier
conclusion of the 2002 NARAB Working Group was either incorrect or inappropriate. Absent any new information to
consider, the Working Group is not inclined to alter its approach on this issue.
With respect to the practice of requiring proof of foreign corporation registration to do business in another state, we believe
that this also relates to the basic police powers of the states and is not inconsistent with reciprocity. Nevertheless, NAIC
members, the Working Group and PLWG have encouraged states to develop alternative means to verify this registration to
ease the administrative burden on business entity applicants; e.g., direct electronic verification with the Secretary of State.
Continued elimination of requests for proof of Secretary of State corporate registration as a prerequisite for non-resident
business entity licensing was identified in the Producer Licensing Assessment Report as an issue that continues to
necessitate Commissioner-level attention so that progress can be measured and nationwide elimination of this prerequisite
as an insurance department licensing requirement is achieved. Therefore, while this practice is actively being discouraged
by NAIC membership, the NARAB Working Group does not believe it is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
2. Requiring a Non-Resident Business Entity to Submit Articles of Incorporation
The Working Group believes that requiring a non-resident business entity to submit articles of incorporation is inconsistent
with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
Organizational document requirements typically arise in conjunction with the concept of Secretary of State registration. The
NAIC membership has worked actively to address the industry’s concerns in this area, as detailed in the Producer Licensing
Assessment Report. The 2002 Report discussed the reciprocity implications of the requirement to file proof of Secretary of
State registration, concluding such requirements were not inconsistent with reciprocity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
With respect to requirements pertaining to organizational documents required by the insurance regulator independent of
Secretary of State registration requirements, the Working Group believes that documentation of a business entity’s
organizational structure outside of information provided on the NAIC’s Uniform Application for Business Entity Insurance
Producer Licensing/Registration is an additional submission requirement. An organizational documentation requirement for
non-resident entities appears to be aimed at facilitating communication by providing director and officer contact
information to the insurance regulator. This is an administrative aid rather than a consumer protection measure, particularly
because the applicant’s resident state may collect the same information and corporate information is readily available in
most, if not all, states through the Secretary of State or equivalent Web site. The requirement also appears to be imposed by
administrative practice rather than statute or regulation.
It does not appear that the savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f) is available to protect this practice. The savings clause only
protects state requirements that are consistent with the GLBA reciprocity framework. As discussed above, this practice is
not consistent with the reciprocity requirement limiting the documentation that may accompany non-resident producer
license applications; therefore, the practice cannot be preserved pursuant to the savings clause. The Working Group believes
that requiring a non-resident business entity to submit articles of incorporation is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity
requirements.
E. Requirements to Obtain Additional Licenses or Qualifications
1. Requiring an Underlying Life License Prior to the Issuance of a Non-Resident Variable Life License
The Working Group believes that requiring an underlying life license prior to the issuance of a non-resident variable life
license is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
Variable life is a separate line of authority under Section 7A(5) of PLMA. Unlike other major lines of authority, most states
do not have a separate insurance examination for variable life, and applicants must take a life insurance examination in
order to be licensed to sell variable life insurance. As a result, states often require resident applicants to hold both a variable
life and life producer license. Because the same examination qualifies applicants for both lines of authority, the common
assumption is that applicants seek to obtain both licenses provided other qualifications are met. GLBA reciprocity concerns
are raised when a state requires a non-resident variable life applicant to obtain qualifications for a life license or to submit
proof of a valid life license, because this appears to be an additional requirement under 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c). Accordingly,
the Working Group believes it would be inconsistent with reciprocity to require a producer to obtain a life license in order
to sell variable life insurance in a non-resident state.
2. Requiring Individuals Seeking a Fraternal Non-Resident License to Have a Fraternal Certificate

from a Company
The Working Group believes that requiring a non-resident applicant to submit a fraternal certificate is inconsistent with
On its face, a fraternal certificate requirement for non-resident applicants is inconsistent with the GLBA reciprocity
framework. It is documentation required to be submitted in addition to the permitted request for licensure, application, proof
of licensure in good standing and applicable fee. It does not appear that the savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f) is
available to protect this practice because it creates an additional submission requirement inconsistent with the GLBA
reciprocity framework. States with this requirement should consider whether the requirement can be waived as to non-
resident applicants under Section 16A of the PLMA. The Working Group believes that requiring a non-resident applicant to
submit a fraternal certificate is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
F. States Not Adopting the Major Lines of Authority Definitions of the PLMA
GLBA does not impose any requirement that states adopt uniform line of authority definitions. The specific requirement
concerning the scope of license authority is that states “permit a producer that has a resident license for selling or soliciting
the purchase of insurance in its home state to receive a license to sell or solicit the purchase of insurance [in other reciprocal
states] as a nonresident to the same extent that such producer is permitted to sell or solicit the purchase of insurance in its
State.” 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c)(1) (emphasis added). Therefore, GLBA requires not definitional uniformity but that non-
resident producer have the ability to sell or solicit “to the same extent” as permitted in the home state. Presumably, states
have the flexibility to determine how to provide “to the same extent” authority to non-residents. Through the PLWG, states
have established the goal of consistent scopes of authority by developing uniform definitions.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Working Group believes uniform adoption of line of authority (LOA) definitions in Section 7A of the PLMA is the
preferred approach to LOA consistency. In fact, it is important to note that adoption of the PLMA definitions of major
LOAs, as well as definitions of the core limited LOAs, is part of the Uniform Resident Licensing standards. A state’s
compliance status with any specific resident licensing uniform standard, however, does not necessarily translate into a
reciprocity issue. Non-resident licensing reciprocity can be affected by how a state implements the uniform standards.
Inconsistent LOA definitions from state to state could possibly implicate the anti-discrimination element of GLBA
reciprocity: whether any requirement is imposed upon any otherwise qualified non-resident producer that has the effect of
limiting or conditioning the producer’s activities because of the producer’s residence or place of operations. If a difference
in scope of authority between two states results in a producer being required to satisfy additional conditions in a non-
resident state beyond those permitted under the GLBA reciprocity framework, then the LOA definitions, as applied in
practice, may result in a barrier to entry based on the producer’s residence or place of operations.
The Working Group is not aware of specific examples of how LOA definitions have created, in practice, an obstacle to non-
resident licensing. While a lack of definitional uniformity can lead to some difficulty in administering and tracking the
qualifications of producers, the Working Group does not believe that inconvenience necessarily translates into a violation of
reciprocity. To be sure, the potential exists for non-compliance with reciprocity. To avoid such a result, the Working Group
urges states to enact the LOA definitions in Section 7A of the PLMA. For states that have not done so, the Working Group
encourages such states to maintain department procedures to ensure non-residents can, in fact, sell or solicit “to the same
extent” as permitted in the home state. The state assessment reviews indicate that practices are in place to accommodate
minor wording differences in LOA definitions. Likewise, the PLWG has devoted considerable time to mapping and
coordinating state LOAs to avoid any difficulties in practical application. These efforts have been carried through to NIPR
business rules, which also serve to minimize LOA differences. Accordingly, the Working Group does not believe that lack
of LOA definitional uniformity, standing alone, necessarily translates into inconsistency with GLBA reciprocity.
G. Verifying Legal Work Authorization for Non-U.S. Citizens Non-Resident Applicants
The Working Group believes that verifying the legal work authorization for non-resident applicants who are non-U.S.
citizens is not inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
The NAIC Legal Division previously noted that several states that may require non-resident producer license applicants to
provide evidence of a legal work authorization if the non-resident applicant is not a citizen of the U.S. Most states
implemented this practice because of the federal Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996
(the “Welfare Reform Act”), 8 U.S.C. § 1601 et seq., which restricts the eligibility of non-U.S. citizens to receive state and
local benefits. Specifically, Section 1621(c)(1)(A) provides that state or local public benefits are broadly defined to include
any “professional license . . . provided by an agency of a State or local government.” This has been generally interpreted to
include insurance producer licenses.
The Welfare Reform Act does not address the issue of resident and non-resident license applicants, but simply requires the
states to verify work status prior to issuing a license. While some have argued that checking a non-resident producer
application for verification of legal work authority would be an “additional requirement” under GLBA, the Welfare Reform
Act directs states to carry out this requirement. The rules of statutory construction provide that an implied repeal will only be
found where the provisions in the two statutes are in irreconcilable conflict. In the absence of specific authority providing
that GLBA is in conflict with the Welfare Reform Act, it may be inappropriate for the non-resident state insurance regulator
to delegate this responsibility to the non-resident applicant’s state of residence. Therefore, the Working Group believes that
verifying the legal work authorization for non-resident applicants who are non-U.S. citizens is not inconsistent with GLBA
reciprocity requirements.
H. Enforcing/Verifying Minimum Age Requirements for Non-Resident Applicants
The Working Group believes that it is not inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements for states to enforce minimum
age requirements for non-resident applicants; however, the Working Group believes it is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity
for states to verify the age of a non-resident applicant through the submission of additional documentation.
The 2002 Report found that minimum requirements respecting the age of contracting parties in an insurance transaction do
not contravene the spirit or letter of producer licensing reciprocity: “Minimum age requirements are grounded in state
contract law, which allows minors to contract in very limited circumstances.” Age requirements can therefore be

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
characterized as consumer protection laws, which are specifically mentioned under the savings provisions of 15 U.S.C. §
6751(f). Therefore, a state can enforce a minimum age requirement as to a non-resident applicant who is properly licensed
and of minimum age in the applicant’s home state. For example, a state with a minimum age of 21 may decline to issue a
license to a non-resident applicant who is 19 years old, even though the applicant is properly licensed in a home state where
the minimum age is 18.
The question of “verifying,” as opposed to enforcing, minimum age requirements is different. The distinction hinges on
whether a state requires the submission of documentation establishing an applicant’s legal age in addition to the date of birth
collected on the uniform application. As stated previously, 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c) limits the submission requirements that may
be imposed upon non-resident applicants. The savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f) would not necessarily operate to protect
a state requirement inconsistent with these four permitted steps. Therefore, if a state can confirm from either the application
or by other means independent of an additional submission from the applicant that an applicant does not meet the state’s
minimum age requirement, it may deny the issuance of a license. Accordingly, the Working Group believes it is inconsistent
with GLBA reciprocity requirements to require the submission of additional documentation to verify a non-resident
applicant’s age.
I. Requiring Non-Resident Producers to Renew Licensure Annually, while Resident Producers Renew
Biennially
The Working Group believes that offering inconsistent terms of licensure for residents and non-residents is inconsistent with
This requirement does not call for any specific additional submission on the part of the producer, nor is the term of licensure
a specified element of the GLBA reciprocity framework. This requirement implicates the third element of GLBA’s
reciprocity conditions: whether any requirement is imposed upon any otherwise qualified non-resident producer that has the
effect of limiting or conditioning the producer’s activities because of the producer’s residence or place of operations. This
element is traditionally cited as prohibiting residency limitations on the placement of certain business, such as state-funded
projects or statutory funds. However, the effect of the requirement at issue limits the duration of a producer’s license because
of the producer’s place of residence. This would seem to conflict with the anti-discrimination element of the GLBA
reciprocity framework, even though no extra documentation is required to be presented with the renewal/continuation
application.
It does not appear that the savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f) is available to protect this practice because the basis for the
practice appears to be inconsistent with the reciprocity framework even if there is consumer protection or other regulatory
value inherent to this requirement. Therefore, the Working Group believes that offering inconsistent terms of licensure for
residents and non-residents is inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
J. Trust Accounts
The Working Group believes it is inconsistent with reciprocity to impose trust account requirements during the licensing
process or in a discriminatory manner against non-residents, but does not believe trust account requirements of general
application are necessarily inconsistent with reciprocity. The Working Group considered whether specific trust account
requirements identified by the Independent Insurance Agents and Brokers of America (IIABA), as applied to non-resident
producers, are inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements. In written comments, the IIABA urged further
consideration of whether these requirements are consistent with reciprocity: (1) obligating non-resident producers to
maintain trust accounts in a financial institution with an office in the non-resident state; and (2) obligating non-resident
producers to maintain funds related to business generated within the non-resident state in a separate state-specific trust
account. The Producer Licensing Assessment Report and the individual state reports, including the underlying
documentation, do not indicate that these requirements exist in any jurisdiction. Anecdotal information indicates that such
requirements are not enforced as a prerequisite to licensure or through a licensure action.
The 2002 Report included a brief discussion of trust account requirements, but the Report did not specifically address the
requirements raised by IIABA. The 2002 Report indirectly indicated that a requirement as to where a trust account should
be maintained could have some bearing on GLBA reciprocity. Hypothetically, the requirements raised by IIABA could be
inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity if implemented in a way that establishes submission requirements beyond those
permitted by GLBA; e.g., the non-resident producer applicant might be required to submit proof of access to an account at a
financial institution with an office in the non-resident state. It does not appear the savings clause of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f)
would protect such practices. Therefore, if trust account requirements specific to non-residents are imposed as a condition to
licensure, the Working Group believes such requirements would be inconsistent with reciprocity.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Working Group, however, does not believe trust account requirements imposed upon non-residents are inconsistent
with reciprocity as a general rule. If a state imposes on all producers the general requirement to maintain a trust account, the
Working Group believes such requirements would not implicate GLBA reciprocity unless they “limit or condition” the
producer’s activities because of the producer’s residence or place of operation. Thus, the Working Group believes it is
permissible for a state to require a non-resident producer to maintain a trust account somewhere as a general regulatory
requirement unrelated to licensing, but we do not believe it would be consistent with reciprocity to require non-resident
producers to maintain specific trust accounts in the non-resident state.
To the extent states impose trust account requirements as a condition to licensure or otherwise limit or condition the non-
resident producer’s activities because of residence or place of operations, we encourage states to consider utilizing waiver
authority or modifying statutory application to ensure general trust account requirements are applied in a manner consistent
with reciprocity.
K. Verifying an Applicant for a Non-Resident License Renewal Has Paid All Undisputed Taxes and
Unemployment Insurance Contributions
The Working Group believes that a tax verification requirement applicable to non-residents and implemented in such a way
that it does not depend on additional documentation supplied by the applicant is saved under 15 U.S.C. § 6751(f), because it
is not inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
States’ tax clearance practices have been part of the reciprocity analysis since the 2002 Report but a detailed analysis has
not been published. State consideration or verification of information derived from sources other than the applicant does not
trigger the additional submission requirement element of the GLBA reciprocity framework. While GLBA limits the types of
documentation a reciprocal state can require a non-resident applicant to submit, it does not address the information a state
may consider or verify through sources other than the applicant.
This reasoning holds true for tax clearance as implemented in certain states as well as many other conditions of licensure
such as the possible grounds for license denial, nonrenewal or revocation included in Section 12 of the PLMA. The
background questions section of the NAIC Uniform Applications solicits a “yes” or “no” response on most questions and,
with regard to tax clearance, asks for the applicable jurisdiction where a delinquency action exists. Thus, the
implementation of a tax clearance requirement that does not require submission of proof by the applicant is not inconsistent
with GLBA reciprocity. GLBA serves to limit the applicant’s documentation responsibilities and discriminatory state
requirement practices as applied to non-residents; it does not serve to limit the information a state may consider in issuing
or renewing a license.
Accordingly, the Working Group does not believe that a tax verification requirement applicable to non-residents and
implemented in such a way that it does not depend on additional documentation supplied by the applicant is inconsistent
with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
L. One-Time Training and Continuing Education Requirements
The Working Group believes that continuing education requirements based on federal mandates are not inconsistent with
The issue is whether it is permissible to obligate non-residents to complete continuing education on a particular subject
matter or product in order to obtain or renew a license to sell, solicit or negotiate insurance policies involving the specific
subject matter or product. States regularly count specialized subject-matter training toward the total continuing education
requirements applicable to resident producers. Assuming a producer maintains the same scope of licensure in both resident
and non-resident jurisdictions, the potential reciprocity issue arises if the producer is forced to satisfy continuing education
requirements in a non-resident state irrespective of the training completed in the producer’s resident state. In 15 U.S.C.
§ 6751(c)(2), GLBA specifically provides that a reciprocal state must accept a non-resident producer’s satisfaction of the
home state’s continuing education requirements as satisfying the non-resident state’s own continuing education
requirements.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Continuing education requirements specific to crop insurance and long term care partnership, as well as flood insurance,
derive from federal mandates. Similar to the above analysis of the practice of verifying legal work authorization for non-
resident applicants in accordance with a federal mandate, in the absence of any federal directive to the contrary, it appears
that the specialized continuing education requirements described above must stand regardless of any perceived conflict with
the GLBA continuing education element. The federally-mandated training described above is imposed by the federal
government rather than the non-resident state, which arguably removes the training from the reciprocity analysis.
Further, some of the federal mandates were enacted post-GLBA: the flood insurance training requirement in 2004 and the
long-term care training requirement in 2005. The canon of statutory construction known as in pari materia calls for statutes
on the same general subject to be interpreted in harmony with each other whenever possible. The enactment of specific
subject-matter training requirements subsequent to the continuing education reciprocity element of GLBA may be read to
mean that Congress’ intent was to apply the training requirements despite the potential conflict with producer licensing
reciprocity.
Therefore, the Working Group does not believe that continuing education requirements based on federal mandates are
inconsistent with GLBA reciprocity requirements.
M. Viatical Settlements
Two comment letters were received from an interested party dealing with the issue of whether reciprocal treatment should
be afforded viatical settlement brokers. The interested party contended that those states requiring separate licensing for
viatical settlement activities could not be considered reciprocal. Because GLBA includes a broad definition of “insurance
producer” in 15 U.S.C. § 6766, the interested party argued that the term included persons who advise or facilitate viatical or
life settlements, which would thus embrace viatical settlement brokers. Characterizing GLBA as envisioning licensing
reciprocity or uniformity for this broad range of “insurance producers,” the interested party concluded that states requiring
separate viatical settlement licensure are not reciprocal. Additionally, during the Working Group’s meeting on June 10,
2002, a representative of the interested party commented that he did not advocate reciprocity for viatical settlement brokers.
Rather, it was argued that states failed to achieve reciprocity where producers may perform certain services in some states
but require separate licensing to do so in others.
For purposes of the Working Group’s task, this issue is one of reciprocity. The NAIC Legal Division previously examined
the question of which insurance producers were entitled to reciprocity under GLBA. In May 2000, in response to requests
from several state insurance regulators, the Legal Division issued a memorandum on this topic. The memorandum noted
GLBA’s broad definition of “insurance producer,” but reviewed particularly the provisions requiring producer licensing
reciprocity. The standards for achieving reciprocity provided in 15 U.S.C. § 6751(a) and (c) refer only to producers that sell
or solicit the purchase of insurance. Therefore, GLBA only requires that reciprocity be extended to those classes of
producers that sell or solicit insurance. Because they do not sell or solicit the purchase of insurance, viatical settlement
brokers are not entitled to reciprocity regardless of the broad definition of “insurance producer.”
Thus, the Working Group rejected the argument that GLBA entitles viatical settlement brokers to reciprocity in non-resident
producer licensing or otherwise requires states to eliminate requirements that those who engage in viatical settlement
activities be separately licensed to do so.
N. Limited Lines Issues
Consumer Credit Industry Association (CCIA) and World Access urged for special reciprocity and uniformity treatment for
limited lines that are very narrow in scope and resemble service contracts. These issues have been referred to the PLWG for
consideration. Because we are not presented with any specific reciprocity-related issues, the NARAB Working Group offers
no specific comments on whether certain limited lines should be subject to special treatment. The Working Group notes that
GLBA reciprocity applies to limited lines as well as major lines, but we will leave the present issues with the PLWG for
consideration.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
NEXT STEPS
GLBA appears to assume some process exists for measuring continuing compliance by states with the reciprocity mandates
of 15 U.S.C. § 6751(c). Without mandating a particular process, 15 U.S.C. § 6751(e) states, in relevant part, that “[i]f, at
any time, the . . . reciprocity required by subsection[] . . . (c) of this section no longer exists, the provisions of this
subchapter shall take effect 2 years after the date on which such . . . reciprocity ceases to exist, unless the . . . reciprocity
required by those provisions is satisfied before the expiration of that 2-year period.” The NARAB Working Group
understands this provision to mean that, upon a determination by the NAIC that the required level of reciprocity among
states no longer exists, the states would have two years to come back into compliance. If the states failed to do so, the
NARAB entity would be established as set out in 15 U.S.C. §§ 6752-6765.
In adopting this updated reciprocity standard, the NARAB Working Group makes no specific finding about any individual
state’s continuing compliance with GLBA reciprocity requirements. If this updated standard is accepted by the Executive
Committee and Plenary, the Working Group will initiate a process for re-evaluating all states for reciprocity compliance,
likely incorporating some form of checklist and self-certification as was done with the 2002 Report. Our re-evaluation of
state compliance is not intended to raise any issues or concerns about certification of states based on the standards of the
2002 Report. This report is intended to supplement, rather than supersede, the conclusions of the 2002 Report. Because of
the state producer licensing assessments and the consideration of additional issues not raised in 2002, more information is
available to the Working Group. We intend to utilize this information to implement a reciprocity framework that reinforces
and strengthens producer licensing reciprocity.
The Working Group recognizes that some states may need to seek legislative or administrative changes in order to meet an
updated reciprocity standard. Additionally, states may wish to evaluate whether continuing compliance may be achieved
through waiver or other insurance department action. The Working Group is committed to working with NAIC members
and individual states in developing, by the 2009 Fall National Meeting, a detailed process for carrying out a formal
reassessment of producer licensing reciprocity under the updated reciprocity standard described in this report.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix W
UNIFORM CRIMINAL
C H
HISTORY
&
GULATORY ACTIONS
REG A BA
ACKGROUNDD REVIEW G
GUIDELINES
S

2 charges for
f the Producer Licensing Working
W Groupp (PLWG), thee Producer Liccensing Task F Force asked
thhe working group to devellop uniform guidelines
g for background ccheck reviews of producers.. As Uniform Licensing
SStandards, incluuding fingerprrinting requirem ments, are adoppted in all juriisdictions, the uultimate goal iis for each juriisdiction to
ddefer to the ressident state forr licensing deteerminations whherever possibble. For all juriisdictions to hhave a comfortt level with
thhese licensingg determination ns, a uniform process of review appears warranted. Thhe Working G Group believes that if all
juurisdictions im
mplement thesee guidelines, in n most situatioons, nonresideent states will be able to deffer to the residdent state’s
liicensing decisiion.
G
Generally, therre are four situaations when a review of crim
minal history oor regulatory acctions could coome into consiideration in
thhe licensing prrocess:
1. At
A the time of in nitial applicatiion the applicaant is asked bacckground quesstions, NAIC ddatabases are cchecked for
reegulatory actions and the resiident state, if it i has adopted the Uniform L Licensing Stanndards, will finngerprint to
coonduct a state and
a national crriminal backgro ound check.
2. During
D the licen
nsing term the producer musst notify the D Department of aany administraative action takken against
th
he producer in any other jurisdiction or any criminal proseecution in any jjurisdiction wiithin 30 days of the initial
prretrial hearing in accordance with Section 17 of the Produccer Licensing M Model Act (PL LMA).
3. During
D the licen
nsing term som me states that reequire fingerpriinting will receeive
suubsequent arresst and convictiion notification ns from the Staate Departmennt of
Juustice or FBI on n their licenseee.
4. At
A the time of continuation
c orr renewal of thhe license, the licensee is askked updated background queestions and
NAIC
N databasess are checked forf regulatory actions
a that maay have occurreed since the lasst renewal.
AAlthough each h situation may y have slightlyy different proocedures and considerationss, overall the process itself should be
cconsistent to asssure fair and uniform
u handliing of each licensee or appliccant and to alllow for a unifoorm process regardless of
juurisdiction. Th
hese guideliness will address a general uniform process forr considerationn of criminal baackground andd regulatory
aactions that can
n be applicable to each of these circumstancces.
FFor illustration
n and discussioon purposes, reference
r will be made in thhis document tto producer appplications andd licensing
ddecisions; how wever the Worrking Group believes
b that in
n most situatiions, the scoppe of the licennse does not impact the
juurisdiction’s liicense determiination (issue, deny, place on o probation, eetc.). Thereforre we recomm mend these guidelines for
oother license ty
ypes such as adjjusters, surpluss lines agents, title
t agents andd bail bondsmeen.
C
Criminal Histo
ory Background Review
T
The producer Uniform
U Licenssing Standards (ULS) requiree the followingg background reeview for new applicants:1
Standdard 14. Backg ground Check ks: (Standard 14C for resideent only)
Backg ground checks will
w be conduccted through the following thrree steps:
A. Staates will ask annd review the answers
a to the standard backgground questioons contained oon the Uniform
m
Appliccations;
B. Staates will run a check
c against th he NAIC RIRS S/SPLD and 10033 Applicationn; and
C(1). States
S will fing
gerprint their reesident producer applicants aand conduct staate and federal criminal backgground
checkss on new resideent producer ap pplicants; or
1
Note Standard
d 14A and B ap
pply to both ressident and nonresident appliccants while 14C
C is for residennt applicants onnly

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
C(2) If a state lacks the authority or resources to accept and receive data from the FBI, it shall conduct a statewide
criminal history background check through the appropriate governmental agency for new resident producer
applicants until such time as it obtains the appropriate authority.
In order to be fully compliant with standard 14, a state must fingerprint and conduct state and federal criminal
history background checks on their new resident applicants. Although electronic fingerprinting is strongly
encouraged, a state will be compliant with this requirement if the fingerprints are obtained through paper when
electronic means are unavailable.
A state may, but is not required to fingerprint resident producers not previously fingerprinted at the time of
application or when adding additional lines of authority to their license. States shall not fingerprint nonresident
applicants.
At the time of initial application, the applicant is asked the following question:
Have you ever been convicted of a crime, had a judgment withheld or deferred, or are you currently charged with
committing a crime?
“Crime” includes a misdemeanor, felony or a military offense. You may exclude misdemeanor traffic citations or
convictions involving driving under the influence (DUI) or driving while intoxicated (DWI), driving without a
license, reckless driving, or driving with a suspended or revoked license and juvenile offenses. “Convicted”
includes, but is not limited to, having been found guilty by verdict of a judge or jury, having entered a plea of
guilty or nolo contendre, or having been given probation, a suspended sentence or a fine.
The applicant is also asked if the crime is a felony, has he or she applied for a written consent when required by 18 USC 1033
and if so, was the written consent granted. A similar question is asked on the Uniform renewal application; however the
applicant need only answer based on any changes since the last renewal.2
Applicants who respond affirmatively to this question are required to provide a copy of the charging document(s), the official
document(s) which demonstrates the resolution of the charge(s) or any final judgment and a written statement explaining the
circumstances of each incident. If the applicant answers yes to the sub-question regarding any felony convictions requiring a
written consent as required by 18 USC 1033, a copy of the written consent is requested. The working group recommends that
each jurisdiction require such information prior to making a decision regarding licensure.
Upon receipt of this documentation, the Department should consider the nature of the crime committed and the circumstances
surrounding the crime. This information should be compared to the duties requisite to holding an insurance license and any
regulatory requirements or responsibilities that apply to a licensee such as a fiduciary duty. Although this list is not
exhaustive, the following types of crimes may have impact on fitness for licensure and warrant further review:
A conviction which evidences present or potential unfitness to perform the functions authorized under the license in a
manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare including, but not limited to:
1. Crimes involving dishonesty or fraud
2. Convictions involving conduct related to the applicant’s business conduct or profession
3. Crimes involving theft, burglary or robbery
4. Crimes involving breach of trust or breach of fiduciary duties
5. Violent crimes including, but not limited to murder, attempted murder, assault, rape and other sexual
crimes that impact public safety
6. Multiple convictions that demonstrate a repeated disregard for the law
Department staff should review Appendix F the NAIC’s Antifraud (D) Task Force’s Guidelines for State Insurance
Regulators to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994: 18 United States Code Sections 1033 and 1034
for examples of the types of criminal felonies that involve dishonesty or breach of trust.
2
The current draft of changes to the uniform application awaiting adoption by Executive/Plenary includes language that
requires disclosure only if the Department has not been previously advised

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
The Department should also review and consider the applicant’s statement and evidence of rehabilitation. Information to
consider includes, but is not limited to:
1. The nature and severity of the crime(s).

2. The total criminal record of the applicant – is this a single conviction or a pattern of convictions?
3. The age of the applicant at the time of the crime.
4. The length of time that has passed since the incident(s).
5. Whether the applicant has fulfilled the terms of parole or probation.
6. Whether the applicant has satisfied any requirement to make restitution.
7. Whether the crime adversely impacted other person(s).
8. Whether the applicant has been involved with or completed any program to address the underlying circumstances
that may have played a part in conduct that lead to committing the crime (such as rehabilitation, counseling or
community involvement to address social problems).
9. Character references
10. Whether the applicant was given a certificate of good conduct or a pardon to the offense(s) and the timing of such
award (for example, part of a plea bargain or after successful completion of the sentencing requirements).
Once the information and documentation has been reviewed, the Department has several choices. While different
jurisdictions have laws that permit slightly different practices, some options include: Issue the license, deny the application,
issue a probationary license or in situations where a license is already in place, suspend, revoke or refuse to renew the license.
Section 12 of the Producer Licensing Model Act provides guidance for reasons to take action on the application or license.
The primary goal of the review and determination is to assess whether the applicant/licensee is sufficiently rehabilitated such
that he is fit to hold the type of license to be issued. If the determination is that evidence does not exist to show rehabilitation
and the issuing the license could impact public health, safety or welfare, the application will be denied or the license revoked.
In a situation where the documentation demonstrates that either the nature of the crime would not impact the fitness for
licensure or that the applicant is sufficiently rehabilitated to hold a license, the Department will issue the license. If there
may be a question of fitness for all aspects of the license, the Department may consider a probationary license where the
applicant must work under certain constraints for a period of time (e.g. limited scope of duties; periodic reports to the
Department; working under the oversight of another licensee). The Department may also consider issuance of a restricted
license in which the licensee must abide by all laws or their license may be summarily suspended or revoked.
In some situations, such as where the nature of the crime would not normally affect the ability to obtain a license, however
the applicant failed to disclosed the conviction, the Department may issue the license only after payment of a monetary
penalty and all the conditions thereto.
If the license is denied or issued with restrictions, notice should be provided in writing to the applicant or licensee and the
jurisdiction’s appeal rights and procedures, if applicable, should be contained within the notice. In some jurisdictions, the
Department must afford a right to a hearing to the applicant. A statement of issues or accusation is issued in conjunction with
the right to a hearing. Once action is finalized, if the license is denied or limited or if the applicant is fined, the Department
should post the action on the NAIC’s Regulatory Information Retrieval System (RIRS).
Criminal Background and the 1033 Written Consent Process
18 U.S.C. Sec. 1033 makes it a felony crime for a person convicted of a felony involving dishonesty or breach of trust or an
offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1033 to engage in the business of insurance without having first obtained the written consent of the
Commissioner or his or her designee. The NAIC’s Antifraud (D) Task Force has published a document entitled Guidelines
for State Insurance Regulators to the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994: 18 United States Code
Sections 1033 and 1034 (also known as the "1033 Guidelines") that jurisdictions should refer to for standard procedures
regarding 1033 written consent. This document also encourages all jurisdictions to defer to the resident state for the 1033
written consent and, once issued, to honor the written consent in all other nonresident jurisdictions.
Regulatory Actions
At the time of initial application for a producer license, question 2 asks:
2. Have you or any business in which you are or were an owner, partner, officer or director, or member or manager of
limited liability company, ever been involved in an administrative proceeding regarding any professional or occupational
license, or registration?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
“Involved” means having a license censured, suspended, revoked, canceled, terminated; or, being assessed a fine, a
cease and desist order, a prohibition order, a compliance order, placed on probation or surrendering a license to resolve an
administrative action. “Involved” also means being named as a party to an administrative or arbitration proceeding, which is
related to a professional or occupational license. “Involved” also means having a license application denied or the act of
withdrawing an application to avoid a denial. You may EXCLUDE terminations due solely to noncompliance with
continuing education requirements or failure to pay a renewal fee. 3
The uniform producer renewal application asks the licensee to provide updated information on regulatory actions that may
have occurred since the last renewal. If the applicant’s response is affirmative, a written statement identifying the type of
license and explaining the circumstances must be provided, as well as copies of the documents that state the charge(s) and
document the resolution.
When the jurisdiction reviews an applicant or licensee’s history of regulatory actions, it should consider the history in a
manner similar to its treatment of criminal history. Items to consider include but are not limited to:
1. What was the nature of the regulatory action?

2. Does the violation evidence present or potential unfitness to perform the functions authorized under the license in a
manner consistent with the public health, safety and welfare?
3. What license type was subject to the regulatory action and does the conduct directly relate to activities for which the
applicant or licensee would engage in while selling, soliciting or negotiating insurance?
4. What is the total regulatory record of the applicant – is this a single incident or a pattern of violations? Patterns of
violations should not include regulatory action in multiple states as a result of an isolated action in a single state
(such as the domino effect of failure to report a regulatory action within 30 days)
5. The age of the applicant at the time of the administrative action.
6. The length of time that has passed since the incident(s).
7. Whether the action resulted in probation, suspension or revocation of the license and if applicant has fulfilled the
terms of any license suspension or probation.
8. Whether the applicant has satisfied any requirement to make restitution or other terms of the consent agreement or
order from the regulatory agency.
9. Whether the regulatory violation adversely impacted other person(s).
10. Whether the regulatory action involved fraud, dishonesty, breech of trust or fiduciary duty or misappropriation of
premiums or other funds held on behalf of others.
11. Whether the resident state took action against the applicant/licensee.
Like affirmative responses to criminal background questions, once the information and documentation has been reviewed, the
Department has several choices. While different jurisdictions have laws that permit slightly different practices, some options
include: issue the license, deny the application, issue a probationary license or in situations where a license is already in
place, suspend, revoke or refuse to renew the license. Section 12 of the Producer Licensing Model Act provides guidance for
reasons to take action on the application or license. The primary goal of the review and determination is to assess whether the
applicant/licensee is fit to hold the type of license to be issued. If the determination is that evidence does not exist to show
rehabilitation and the issuing the license could impact public health, safety or welfare, the application will be denied or the
license revoked. In a situation where the documentation demonstrates that either the nature of the regulatory action would not
impact the fitness for licensure or that the applicant is sufficiently rehabilitated to hold a license, the Department will issue
the license. If there may be a question of fitness for all aspects of the license, the Department may consider a probationary
license where the applicant must work under certain constraints for a period of time (e.g. limited scope of duties; periodic
reports to the Department; working under the oversight of another licensee). The Department may also consider issuance of a
restricted license in which the licensee must abide by all laws or their license may be summarily suspended or revoked.
In some situations, such as where the nature of the regulatory action would not normally affect the ability to obtain a license,
however the applicant failed to disclosed the action, the Department may issue the license only after payment of a monetary
penalty.
If the license is denied or issued with restrictions, notice should be provided in writing to the applicant or licensee and the
jurisdiction’s appeal rights and procedures, if applicable, should be contained within the notice. In some jurisdictions, the
3
The current draft of changes to the uniform application awaiting adoption by Executive/Plenary clarifies the language to
state “Have you ever been named or involved as a party in an administrative proceeding regarding any professional or
occupational license or registration?”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Department must afford a right to a hearing to the applicant. A statement of issues or accusation is issued in conjunction with
the right to a hearing. Once action is finalized, if the license is denied or limited or if the applicant is fined, the Department
should post the action on the NAIC’s Regulatory Information Retrieval System (RIRS).
Deference to the Resident State
As stated previously, the ultimate goal of all jurisdictions conducting a uniform background check including asking the
questions on the NAIC Uniform application; reviewing RIRS and 1033 Application data and resident states fingerprinting
resident applicants and conducting state and federal criminal history background checks is to provide a process whereby the
nonresident jurisdictions can defer to the resident states for licensing determinations whenever possible. If a nonresident state
becomes aware of a criminal or regulatory action against the applicant or licensee that may affect fitness for licensure, it is
recommended that, if its laws permit, contact should be made with the resident state to confirm that the state was aware of the
background at the time the decision was made to issue the license. If the answer is yes, every attempt should be made to defer
to the resident state’s determination.
It should be noted that there may be situations in which a nonresident state may decline an initial application despite the
applicant having a license in the home state. An example would be, in situations where the crime or regulatory offense
occurred after the home state license is issued, it may, depending on the jurisdiction, be more difficult to deny a renewal or
revoke the license than it is to deny an initial license. There may also be situations where the resident state was not made
aware of certain details that could affect the licensing determination. In such situations it is possible that the nonresident
state may deny the initial application while the resident state initiates appropriate administrative action to revoke the existing
license.
In order to effectively render timely and reasonable licensing determinations in a uniform manner while still providing
appropriate consumer protections, all regulatory jurisdictions are encouraged to communicate with each other and when
warranted, explain the rationale behind licensing determinations. In situations where adverse licensing determinations are
rendered, the regulator should post the information on RIRS or 1033 Application as appropriate, so other jurisdictions are
notified and can take appropriate regulatory action.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix X
Uniform Appointment Process
Uniform Appointment Procedures
1. Any state that requires notice of appointment of an insurance producer acting as an agent of an insurer will adopt the
uniform procedures for notice of appointments/terminations of such producers as soon as is practicable or when that
state adopts the requirements of the NAIC Producer Licensing Model Act.
2. States will encourage electronic filing and will discourage and phase out paper filings no later than January 1, 2004.
Paper filings will be accepted, but will only be accepted upon written request to the state.
3. States will use the new uniform appointment form for paper appointments.
4. States will utilize a billing system for payment by insurers of initial appointments. Each state may elect to bill either
monthly, quarterly or annually. States that are unable to change their laws to switch to a billing system will endeavor
to utilize the banking service offered by NIPR so that the method of payment does not interfere with the use of
electronic process.
5. Insurers shall select the effective date of the initial appointment. The date must be expressed as mm/dd/yyyy. The
appointment shall be continuous until such appointment is terminated. Each state shall establish a fee billing date by
zone or other method. Insurers shall pay the appropriate fee for their appointments as of the billing date. Each state,
if necessary, will enact or promulgate language similar to the following:
An insurer shall, within 15 days from the date the agency contract is executed or the first insurance
application is submitted or longer if specified by state law, after its appointment or termination of its
agency relationship with a producer, notify the commissioner (director) in a format prescribed by the
commissioner (director).
Failure to timely file appointment or termination notifications may subject an insurer to sanctions under (insert
reference to regulation that sets amount).
6. Only one appointment/termination form or transaction shall be required per producer per company. It is the insurer’s
responsibility to verify that the producer is licensed and qualified to sell all products the producer sells for that
insurer. States will strongly consider enacting language which permits, upon a finding of the commissioner
(director), filing appointments/terminations via use of holding company numbers. Appointments may not be
required for insurance agencies. (Each state will determine whether appointments will be required for insurance
agencies.)
7. Terminations for cause may be submitted on the uniform form (or electronically). Additional written documentation
must be submitted to the Insurance Department in accordance with the requirements of (insert appropriate citation to
the state statutory provision based on NAIC Producer Licensing Model Act Section 15). Any information received
by the Insurance Department must remain confidential in accordance with the (insert appropriate citation to the state
statutory provision based on NAIC Producer Licensing Model Act Section 15).
8. Suggested definitions for states to adopt:
Appointment – means a notification filed with the insurance department that an insurer has established an
agency relationship with a producer.
Appointment renewal – Continuation of a company’s existing appointment based on payment of the required
fee without submission of an appointment form.
Termination for cause – means an insurer has ended its agency relationship with a producer for one of the
reasons set forth in (NAIC Producer Model Section 12) or that the producer has been found by a court,
government body, or self-regulatory organization authorized by law to have engaged in any of the activities set
forth in (NAIC Producer Model Section 12).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
9. Appointment renewals – In states that renew appointments, the following procedures shall be used:
States shall provide or publish pre-notice to companies informing them that appointment renewals are
imminent.
At the time for renewal, a state will generate an invoice and may include a renewal list for delivery to each
insurer. States shall work to develop electronic methods to deliver the renewal lists.
The invoice may not be altered, amended or used for appointing or terminating producers.
Payment is due at the insurance department on the prescribed due date.
The only items to be returned to the department or the department’s designee shall be the invoice and the
payment.
States shall establish a dispute resolution process to accommodate errors after the fact.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
P
Part III - Sectiion I – Appendix Y
UNIFO
ORM LICEN
NSING STA
ANDARDS
R
REVISIONS AND
A CLARIF
FICATIONS TO
T THE UNIF
FORM LICEN
NSING STAN
NDARDS
TThe uniform liccensing standarrds, adopted by

y the NAIC in December 20002, were reviseed in Decembeer 2008 based uupon issues
iddentified durin
ng the Producer Licensing Assessments
A conducted in 22007 and 20088. The standardds were reviseed to more
sspecifically add
dress limited liine requiremen
nts in 2010 an
nd 2011. In thee Fall of 2012 the Producer L
Licensing (EX
X) Working
GGroup added neew language to o the standards addressing Teesting and Exam
mination languuage.
T
The standards are broken dow wn into the fo
ollowing broad
d categories (1)) licensing quaalifications staandards; (2) prre-licensing
eeducation requ
uirements; (3) integrity and personal
p backgground checkss; (4) applicattion for licensuure; (5) the apppointment
pprocess; (6) continuing eduucation requireements; (7) limited lines, ((8) surplus linnes, (9) comm mercial lines multi-state
eexemption and (10) commissiion sharing.
L
LICENSING QUALIFICAT
Q TIONS STAN
NDARDS
11. Age:
AApplicant mustt be 18 years off age.
22. Citizenship::
NNo U.S. citizennship is requireed but applicannt must have leegal work authhorization if hee/she is not a U U.S. citizen. Thhe resident
sstate will requirre proof of pro
oper work auth
horization for non-citizens
n at the time of iniitial applicationn. The resident state may
aask for evidencce of current woork authorizatiion if the initiall work papers hhave expired.
33. Education:
NNo high schooll diploma is req
quired.
PRE-LICENSING EDUCATION TRAIN

P NING STAND
DARDS FOR R
RESIDENT A
APPLICANTS
S
44. Hours Requ uired:

NNo pre-licensinng educations is required; ho owever, states that require ppre-licensing edducation shall require 20 hours of pre-
liicensing educaation per majo or line of autho
ority. For exam
mple, an appliicant seeking 2 major lines of authority, ssuch as the
pproperty line and
a the casualty line needs 40 4 hours of pree-licensing eduucation. If a sttate has less oor more hours per line of
aauthority, it wo
ould not be com mpliant with this standard an
nd will need too increase or ddecrease the nuumber of requuired hours.
SStates may waiive pre-licensinng education reequirements forr the variable lline of authoritty. States shall independentlyy determine
thhe content req quirements forr pre-licensingg education. No
N state shall require additiional pre-licennsing educationn for non-
rresident applicaants or non-resident producerrs who change their state of reesidency.
55. Training Meethod:

SStates must acccept classroomm study verifiabble self-study oro a combinatioon of both. Onnline learning m may be a combbination of
vverifiable self-study and classroom study. Classroom sttudy may incluude distance llearning, webiinars, virtual cclasses and
trraditional classsroom teaching
g. States have discretion
d to lim
mit, but may nnot prohibit, verrifiable self stuudy.
66. Verification
n of Completio on:
AApplicant or prre-licensing ed
ducation providder must submiit original certtificate of comp
mpletion or veriification of com
mpletion to
thhe insurance department
d or to
t the testing vendor
v of the applicant’s
a homme state througgh a hard copy submission orr electronic
trransmission.
77. Waiver/Exemption:
SStates must allo
ow for waiver or
o exemption of
o pre-licensing g education if tthe applicant ccan verify he orr she has obtainned certain
vverifiable, reco
ognized professional designaation(s) that reequires educatiion and formaal testing, or a bachelor’s orr advanced
ddegree in insurrance. The follo
owing designaations are exam
mples of those which may bee authorized foor waiver of prre-licensing
eeducation:

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 CEBS, ChFC, CIC, CFP, CLU, FLMI, LUTCF for Life Line of Authority.
 RHU, CEBS, REBC, HIA for Health Line of Authority.
 AAI, ARM, CIC, CPCU for Property and Casualty Lines of Authority.
A bachelor’s degree or advanced degree in insurance would waive/exempt the pre-licensing education for all lines of
authority.
PRODUCER LICENSING TEST STANDARDS FOR RESIDENT APPLICANTS
8. Lines of Authority:
States must adopt the six major lines as defined in the Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA).These are as follows: (1) Life,
(2) Accident and Health or Sickness, (3) Property, (4) Casualty, (5) Variable Life and Variable Annuity Products and (6)
Personal Lines. States must offer a separate test for each major line of authority; however, combination exams may be
offered. States may, but are not required to, waive testing for the Variable Products line. The resident state shall verify an
applicant for Variable Product line has successfully completed the appropriate securities exams and is registered with
FINRA.
No waiver or exemption except for those noted in Section 9 of the PLMA. An individual who applies for an insurance
producer license in this state and who was previously licensed for the same lines of authority in another state shall not be
required to complete any pre-licensing education or examination. This exemption is only available if the person is currently
licensed in that state or if the application is received within ninety (90) days of the cancellation of the applicant’s previous
license and at the time of cancellation, the applicant was in good standing in that state. Verification shall be done via the State
Producer Licensing Database (SPLD) unless data is unavailable.
10. Exam Content and Testing Administration Standards:

States will implement the Producer testing Programs Recommended Best Practices found in Chapter 8 of the NAIC State
Licensing Handbook, attached as an Appendix to these Standards.
Producer Exam Content and Testing Administration Recommended

Best Practices for Regulators
 States should use accepted psychometric methods including job analysis to determine if the examination content falls
within the content domain that a minimally competent candidate of that specific line of authority tested would be
expected to know.
 States should set passing scores (cut scores) and difficulty level using psychometric methods and appropriate Subject
Matter Experts and based on what an entry level producer needs to know.
 States are encouraged to move to one part exams
 States should require the test vendor or other entity responsible for test development, to document the process for
ensuring quality control and validity of the examination including psychometric review and editing and analysis of item
bias or cultural and gender sensitivity.
 To allow for meaningful comparison, all jurisdictions should define first time pass rate as the percentage of candidates
who pass the whole test the first time.
 At least annually, reports regarding exam pass rates, candidate demographics when collected, and number of exams
administered should be made available to the public. Reports should include first-time pass success; and average
scoring by subject area. Whenever possible, the reports should be available by education provider and provided to
those providers
 A state advisory committee consisting of regulators and industry, including, where possible, recently licensed
producers, should annually work with the testing vendor to review the questions on each examination form for
substantive and psychometric requirements. If during any other time any examination results exhibit significant
unexplained deviations, the examination should be reviewed.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
 States should work with testing vendors and approve Candidate Information Bulletins (CIB) that describe the
examinations and examination policies and procedures, and provide sufficient examination content outline and study
references for the candidate to prepare for the examination. Updated editions of the CIB/ Content Outline should be
provided to prelicensing education providers at least six weeks in advance of implementation so that training materials
can be updated.
 Testing should be made available at locations reasonably convenient to residents of all areas of the state, with
registration available online or by telephone and the ability for a candidate to schedule testing within 2- 5 business days
of registration.
 Pass/Fail notices should be issued at exam sites upon taking the exam. The fail notice should break scores out by each
subject area. The state should provide a method to facilitate prompt retesting, while allowing a reasonable time for
candidates to review and prepare for retest.
 States should deliver exams in a secure test center network that employs qualified test proctors.
 States should set clear performance standards for test vendors and require accountability
INTEGRITY/PERSONAL QUALIFICATIONS/BACKGROUND CHECKS STANDARDS
11. Integrity/Personal Qualifications:

At a minimum, as defined in Section 12 the PLMA.
12. Background Checks: (Standard 12C for resident only)

Background checks will be conducted through the following three steps:
 States will ask and review the answers to the standard background questions contained on the Uniform Applications;
 States will run a check against the NAIC RIRS/SPLD and 1033 SDR; and
C(1). States will fingerprint their resident producer applicants for major lines of authority, and crop and where required,
designated responsible producers for limited lines business entities and conduct state and federal criminal
background checks on new resident producer applicants; or
C(2). If a state lacks the authority or resources to accept and receive data from the FBI, it shall conduct a statewide
criminal history background check through the appropriate governmental agency for new resident producer
applicants for major lines of authority, and crop and where required, designated responsible producers for limited
lines business entities until such time as it obtains the appropriate authority.
In order to be fully compliant with standard 14, a state must fingerprint and conduct state and federal criminal history
background checks on their new resident applicants. Although electronic fingerprinting is strongly encouraged, a state will be
compliant with this requirement if the fingerprints are obtained through paper when electronic means are unavailable.
A state may, but is not required to fingerprint resident producers not previously fingerprinted at the time of application or
when adding additional lines of authority to their license. States shall not fingerprint nonresident applicants.
APPLICATION FOR LICENSURE/LICENSE STRUCTURE STANDARDS
13. Application:
States must use the States must use the current version of the NAIC Uniform Application for initial licensing as set forth in
the PLMA. A state which accepts electronic applications shall be considered compliant if it is using the same data fields and
questions contained in the most current version of the NAIC Uniform Application.
14. Lines of Authority Issued:

Six major lines of authority consistent with the definitions found in the NAIC’s PLMA. A state’s definition of a major line
of authority should not expand or reduce the products that can be offered under the major lines defined by PLMA. Each
major line of authority must be offered independently and cannot be offered as a limited line (such as industrial life or fire or
personal lines or auto).

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
A state may require a life license requirement for a resident producer seeking variable products authority. States that adopt
surety as a separate line must designate it as a limited line since surety is typically included within the casualty line of
authority.
If an applicant is in good standing in his or her home state for the line(s) of authority requested, the nonresident state shall
grant the line(s) of authority without further verification of eligibility for the authority. This standard does not limit the state’s
ability to deny the license based on integrity/personal qualifications and background check standards
Core limited lines as defined in Standard 33. If a state elects to offer other non-core limited lines, such as legal expense
insurance or pet insurance, it shall do so in accordance with Standard 37.
15. License Term:

The term of the license shall be perpetual contingent upon payment of fee and completion of resident CE, as set forth in
Subsection 7B of the PLMA.
16. Continuation Process:

Individual licenses will renew/continue on a biennial basis on the licensee’s month of birth or date of birth. Business entity
licenses will continue on a date certain.
States are compliant when using either date of birth or birth month. Birth month is defined as the last date of birth month.
States that need to make changes to become compliant, however, are urged to choose birth month.
States may wish to consider having the year of renewal/continuation based on the year of birth. For example, if the producer
was born in an odd-numbered year, the producer would renew his/her license in odd numbered years. If the producer was
born in an even-numbered year, the producer would renew his/her license in even numbered years.
If a state is only collecting a fee for continuation, no application is required; however, if the state is using an application or
asking questions as part of the renewal/continuation process, the state must use only the most current version of the NAIC
Uniform Application for Producer License Renewal/Continuation. A state shall be considered compliant if the state is using
the same data fields contained in the most current
version of the NAIC Uniform Application.
17. Enforcement:
Denial/revocation and imposition of civil penalties at minimum as established in Section 12 of the PLMA. The state shall
participate in the NAIC attachment warehouse Personal Information Capture System (PICS) alerts or another appropriate
mechanism to monitor actions against existing licensees and take necessary action, when warranted based on the information
obtained through such notifications.
18. Fee:
Non-resident licensing fees must not be so high as to be a barrier to entry as set forth in GLBA.
APPOINTMENT PROCESS STANDARDS
19. Process:
If a state requires appointments, it shall follow the appointment and termination process as defined in the Uniform
Appointment Process or use the NIPR electronic appointment and termination process. In addition, states shall mail a pre-
notice renewal letter or provide electronic notice to companies informing them that appointment renewals are imminent.
(Process and form attached).
20. Appointment Renewal Cycle:

Appointments shall be continuous subject to payment of any applicable fees. Fees must be calculated as of
a date certain.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
CONTINUING EDUCATION REQUIREMENTS STANDARDS FOR RESIDENT PRODUCERS
21. Credit Required:

Twenty-four (24) hours of CE for all major lines of authority with three (3) of the twenty-four hours covering ethics. Fifty
minutes shall equal one hour of CE.
22. Term of Compliance:

The biennial CE compliance period shall coincide with the producer’s license continuation date.
23. Lines of Authority:

CE shall be required for the six (6) major lines of authority contained in the PLMA.
24. Subject Area Requirements:

States may determine the subject area requirements for CE except that 3 of the 24 hours of CE shall be in ethics.
25. Repeating of CE Courses:

Producers may repeat CE courses for credit but will not be permitted to take a course for credit more than once in a license
continuation period.
26. CE Study Method:

States must accept both classroom study, verifiable self-study or a combination of both. On-line learning may be a
combination of verifiable self-study and classroom study. Classroom study may include distance learning, webinars, virtual
classes and traditional classroom. States have discretion to limit, but may not prohibit, verifiable self study.
27. Verification of Completion:

The Producer or CE provider must submit the original certificate of completion or verification of completion to the insurance
department of the producer’s home state through either a hard copy submission or electronic transmission.
None, except as provided in subsection 7D of the PLMA.
A state may not permit any waivers or exemptions except as provided in subsection 7D of the PLMA. States must eliminate
waivers based on age or years in the business on a prospective basis. In so doing, those producers currently licensed and
exempt or eligible for a waiver prior to the elimination of the exemption would remain exempt. A state which has
successfully effectuated such a change shall be considered compliant with this standard. States with waivers for professional
designations should consider allowing CE credits for filed and approved courses used to obtain and maintain professional
designations.
29. Course Approval Standards and Process:

Follow the standards set forth in the CE Reciprocity (CER) Course Filing Form (CER Form and instructions attached).
30. Advertising of CE Programs:

CE hours should not be advertised until state course approval is received; however, if the course is advertised prior to start
approval, the advertisement must clearly state that the course is pending state approval.
LIMITED LINES UNIFORMITY STANDARDS
31. Definitions of Core Limited Lines:

A state shall have nine or fewer limited lines, which include the core limited lines. A state shall adopt definitions for car
rental, credit, crop, and travel that are consistent with the definition of the core limited lines adopted by the NAIC in
Appendix A. The state must have Credit as defined in PLMA.
32. Limited Lines Travel Insurance Standard (adopted 8/16/10)

 Definitions.
• “Limited Lines Travel Insurance Producer” means an insurer designee, such as a managing general underwriter,
managing general agent, or limited lines producer of Travel Insurance.
• “Travel Retailer” means a business entity that offers and disseminates Travel Insurance on behalf and under the
direction of a Limited Line Travel Insurance Producer.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
• “Travel Insurance” means Insurance coverage for personal risks incident to planned travel, including but not limited
to:
• Interruption or cancellation of trip or event;
• Loss of baggage or personal effects;
• Damages to accommodations or rental vehicles;
• Sickness, accident, disability or death occurring during travel.
trips lasting 6 months or longer, including for example, those working overseas as an expatriate or military personnel being
deployed.
 A Travel Retailer may offer and disseminate Travel Insurance under Limited Lines Travel Insurance Producer
business entity (“licensed business entity”) license only, if the Limited Lines Travel Insurance Producer holds a
business entity license and:
• The licensed business entity is clearly identified as the licensed producer on marketing materials and fulfillment
packages distributed by Travel Retailers to customers; identification shall include the entity’s name and contact
information;
• The licensed business entity keeps a register of each Travel Retailer that offers Travel Insurance on the licensed
business entity’s behalf. The register shall include the name and contact information of the Travel Retailer and an
officer or person who directs or controls the Travel Retailer’s operations, and the Travel Retailer’s FEIN number.
The licensed business entity shall also certify that the Travel Retailer registered complies with 18 USC 1033. The
licensed business entity shall submit such Register within 30 days upon request by the state insurance department;
• The licensed business entity has designated one of its employees as a licensed individual producer (a “Designated
Responsible Producer” or “DRP”) responsible for the business entity’s compliance with the insurance laws, rules
and regulations of the state;
• The DRP, president, secretary, treasurer, and any other officer or person who directs or controls the licensed
business entity’s insurance operations comply with the fingerprinting requirements applicable to insurance
producers in the resident state of the business entity;
• The licensed business entity has paid all applicable insurance producer licensing fees as set-forth in applicable state
law; and
• The licensed business entity requires each employee of the Travel Retailer whose duties include offering and
disseminating Travel Insurance to receive a program of instruction or training, which may be subject to review by
the commissioner.
 A Travel Retailer, including its employees, whose activities are limited to offering Travel Insurance on behalf of and
under the direction of a licensed business entity meeting the conditions stated in paragraph A above, is authorized to
do so upon registration by the licensed business entity as described in paragraph A.2.above.
 As the insurer designee, the Limited Lines Travel Insurance Producer is responsible for the acts of the Travel Retailer.
Drafting Note: For purposes of state implementation, states may incorporate Limited Lines Travel Insurance as an
authorized limited line by way of statute, administrative regulation, order, bulletin or similar regulatory action pursuant to the
state statutory authority for designation of limited lines.
33. Crop Limited Lines Standard

Both individuals and business entities selling, soliciting or negotiating crop insurance are required to be licensed. If the state
requires appointments or affiliations for other lines of insurance, they are also required for crop.
34. Testing and Prelicensing Education Requirement Resident Applicants

For crop insurance, states may independently determine the need for or extent of prelicensing education independently, as
well as the content requirements, if prelicensing education is required. States requiring prelicensing education may waive it
upon verification of completion of the RMA required 12 hour structured training program.
There will be no testing requirement for limited lines; although, states may choose to test for certain limited lines, such as
surety, if a limited line, and crop, as long as content is limited to the subject matter. States requiring testing for crop may
waive it upon verification of passing the RMA required basic competency test No state shall require additional pre-licensing
education or testing for nonresident applicants or non-resident producers who change their state of residency.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
35. Standards for Non-Core limited lines:

A state is not required to implement any non-core limited line of authority for which a state does not already require a license
or which is already encompassed within a major line of authority; however states should consider products where the nature
of the insurance offered is incidental to the product being sold to be limited line insurance products. If a state offers non-core
limited lines such as pet insurance or legal expense insurance, it shall do so in accordance with the following licensing
requirements.
A.) A limited line license for non-core limited lines identified by the Insurance Commissioner may be issued to a person
or entity, inclusive of profit and non-profit, who sells solicits, or negotiates the limited line insurance.
B.) A business entity may act as a Limited Line Insurance Producer if it:
(1) Has obtained the Limited Lines Insurance Producer License by submitting the appropriate application form and
paid all applicable fees as set forth in applicable state law;
(2) The business entity has designated an individual Limited Lines Insurance Producer to act as the business entity’s
Designated Responsible Producer (DRP) and who would be responsible for the business entity’s compliance with
insurance laws, rules and regulations of the business entity’s resident state.
(3) The designated individual must meet the requirements for a DRP pursuant to the insurance laws, rules and
regulations of the business entity’s resident state.
(4) The business entity DRP and officers must comply with the fingerprint requirement applicable to insurance
producers in the resident state of the business entity; and
(5) The licensed business entity keeps a register of each employee that offers Insurance on the licensed business
entity’s behalf. The licensed business entity shall also certify that the registered employees comply with 18 USC
1033. The licensed business entity shall submit such Register within 30 days upon request by the state insurance
department.
C. An employee of the limited lines insurance producer business entity that offers and disseminates limited line insurance
on behalf of the business entity and under the direction of a Limited Line Insurance Producer is not required to be
licensed if the employee:
(1.) Receives a program of instruction or training subject to review by the insurance department prior to receiving
permission to operate on behalf of the business entity and under the direction of the DRP; and
(2.) Does not receive a commission or compensation that is dependent on the placement of the insurance product.
D. Individuals who sell, solicit or negotiate insurance or who receive commission or compensation that is dependent on
the placement of the insurance product must obtain a limited line insurance producer license. The individual applicant
must:
(1) Obtain the Limited Lines Insurance Producer License by submitting the appropriate application form and paying all
applicable fees as set forth in applicable state law; and
(2) Receive a program of instruction or training subject to review by the insurance department
E. No prelicensing or testing shall be required for the identified non-core limited lines insurance. All employees offering
the products; individuals licensed to sell, solicit or negotiate; insurance producers and all DRP’s shall receive a
program of instruction.
Definitions for legal expense and pet insurance are provided for guidance and states are encouraged to adopt the same or
substantially similar terms.
States may elect to add a miscellaneous limited line to issue a nonresident license for those nonresidents who have requested
a line of authority outside the major or core limited lines and not offered by the state. A state must issue the nonresident a
license in compliance with GLBA.
36. CE Requirement Resident Producers:

CE will not be required, however, due to federal requirements; states may require CE for Crop authority
SURPLUS LINES STANDARDS
37. Surplus Line Standards:

States shall require an underlying property & casualty license prior to the issuance of a resident surplus lines license.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
38. Surplus Line Exam

States may, but are not required to have a surplus line examination.
COMMERCIAL LINE MULTI-STATE EXEMPTION STANDARD
39. Commercial Line Multiple Exemption

The state must adopt Section 4B (6); of the Producer Licensing Model Act which states:
A person who is not a resident of this state who sells, solicits or negotiates a contract of insurance for commercial property
and casualty risks to an insured with risks located in more than one state insured under that contract, provided that that person
is otherwise licensed as an insurance producer to sell, solicit or negotiate that insurance in the state where the insured
maintains its principal place of business and the contract of insurance insures risks located in that state.
This exemption applies at minimum to admitted business.
COMMISSION SHARING STANDARD
40. Commission Sharing

The state must adopt Section 13D of the Producer Licensing Model Act which states:
An insurer or insurance producer may pay or assign commissions, service fees, brokerages or other valuable consideration to
an insurance agency or to persons who do not sell, solicit or negotiate insurance in this state, unless the payment would
violate [insert appropriate reference to state law (i.e., citation to anti-rebating statute, if applicable)]. Reference to the anti-
rebating statute is not exclusive. It may also refer to other state laws which limit the scope.
APPENDIX A:
LIMITED LINES DEFINITIONS (Originally Adopted on 6/10/02. Amended 8/16/10)
CAR RENTAL – insurance offered, sold, or solicited in connection with and incidental to the rental of rental cars for a
period of [insert relevant time period per state law], whether at the rental office or by pre-selection of coverage in master,
corporate, group or individual agreements that (i) is non-transferable; (ii) applies only to the rental car that is the subject of
the rental agreement; and (iii) is limited to the following kinds of insurance:
 Personal accident insurance for renters and other rental car occupants, for accidental death or dismemberment, and for
medical expenses resulting from an accident that occurs with the rental car during the rental period;
 Liability insurance that provides protection to the renters and other authorized drivers of a rental car for liability
arising from the operation or use of the rental car during the rental period;
 Personal effects insurance that provides coverage to renters and other vehicle occupants for loss of, or damage to,
personal effects in the rental car during the rental period;
 Roadside assistance and emergency sickness protection insurance; or
 Any other coverage designated by the insurance commissioner.
CREDIT – credit life, credit disability, credit property, credit unemployment, involuntary unemployment, mortgage life,
mortgage guaranty, mortgage disability, guaranteed automobile protection insurance, or any other form of insurance offered
in connection with an extension of credit that is limited to partially or wholly extinguishing that credit obligation and that is
designated by the insurance commissioner as limited line credit insurance.
CROP INSURANCE – Insurance providing protection against damage to crops from unfavorable weather conditions, fire or
lightning, flood, hail, insect infestation, disease or other yield-reducing conditions or perils provided by the private insurance
market, or that is subsidized by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation, including Multi-Peril Crop Insurance.
SURETY – Insurance or bond that covers obligations to pay the debts of, or answer for the default of another, including
faithlessness in a position of public or private trust. For purpose of limited line licensing, Surety does not include Surety Bail
Bonds.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
(OPTIONAL) Surety also includes surety insurance as defined in (insert state-specific reference). It is recommended that
surety be eliminated as a core limited line going forward and states considering surety are encouraged to offer it under the
Casualty major line (adopted on 8/16/10)
TRAVEL INSURANCE (Amended 8/16/10)

Means Insurance coverage for personal risks incident to planned travel, including but not limited to:
A. Interruption or cancellation of trip or event;
B. Loss of baggage or personal effects;
C. Damages to accommodations or rental vehicles;
D. Sickness, accident, disability or death occurring during travel.
trips lasting 6 months or longer, including for example, those working overseas as an ex-patriot or military personnel being
deployed.
Recommended Definitions for Certain Non-Core Limited Lines Adopted by NAIC Full Membership in August 2011
(1) “Limited Lines Pet Insurance Producer” means an insurer designee, such as a managing general underwriter,
managing general agent, or limited lines producer of Pet Insurance.
(2) “Pet Insurance” means health insurance coverage including but not limited to coverage for injury, illness, and
wellness, for pets such as birds, cats, dogs, and rabbits.
(3) “Legal Expense Insurance” means a contractual obligation to provide specific legal services, or to reimburse for
specific legal expenses, in consideration of a specified payment for an interval of time, regardless of whether the
payment is made by the beneficiaries individually or by a third person for them, but does not include the provision of,
or reimbursement for, legal services incidental to other insurance coverages.; or consultation or advice in connection
with, or a part of referral services. Legal expenses insurance does not include a retainer agreement directly between
the lawyer and the client, where no third party is at risk.
G:\MKTREG\DATA\Producer Licensing\Uniformity\Uniform Licensing Standards\NAIC Uniform Licensing Standards\2017\Uniform Licensing Standards

Final - 1.6.17.doc

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section I – Appendix Z
Licensable / Non-Licensable: Implementation Guidelines

Adopted by the Producer Licensing (EX) Working Group and Producer Licensing (EX) Task Force 8.16.10
LICENSABLE NON-
ACTIVITIES “AGENT” LICENSABLE
ACTS “CLERICAL”
ACTS
Solicit
Dispense brochures, and other general information (so long as no x
conversation relating to the terms of a contract)
Disseminating buyer’s guides, applications for coverage, coverage x
selection forms or other similar forms in response to a request from
prospective or current policyholders
Receiving and recording information from a policyholder to give to an x
insurance producer for his or her response
Scheduling appointments with insurance producers to discuss x
insurance
Offering general information, which may include a description of the x
coverage, and the price, as well as processing the application,
collecting premiums, and other activities permissible under the
Guidelines, on behalf of a licensed business entity that is clearly
identified as such on the marketing materials and fulfillment packages
for limited lines of insurance offered, solicited, or sold to the consumer
under an individual, group or group enrolment under a maker policy in
with an incidental to non insurance goods or services, including
coverage for (i) travel, (ii) car rental, (iii) [state may list other lines it
fits into this category including self-storage, pet, portable electronics];
or [(iv)] another similar coverages as designated by the insurance
commissioner.
Disseminating information as to rates secured by reference to a x
published or printed list or computer data base of standard rates
Negotiate
Communicating with the policyholder or prospective policyholder in
order to obtain factual information necessary for an insurance producer x
to complete a review
Explain, discuss or interpret coverage, analyze exposures or x
policies, or give opinions or recommendations as to coverage
Discuss the effect of age, health or other risk-related x
conditions of the prospective policyholder
Counsel, urge or advise any prospective purchaser to buy a particular x
policy or to insure with a particular company
Sell
Receiving requests for coverage for transmittal to a licensed insurance
producer or for processing through an automated system developed x
and maintained under the supervision of an insurer or licensed
insurance producer

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
LICENSABLE NON-
ACTIVITIES “AGENT” LICENSABLE
ACTS “CLERICAL”
ACTS
Sell (continued)
Receiving and recording information from an applicant or
policyholder and preparing an application for insurance pursuant to x
instructions from and for the review of an insurance producer
Obtain underwriting information from credit agencies, DMV, and x
other insurance agencies and companies
As an underwriter employed by an insurer or by a licensed insurance
producer, upon receipt of an application submitted by a licensed x
producer, requesting and reviewing information relating to the audit of
records or loss control on underwriting verifications and inspections,
requesting and reviewing the results of a physical examination of a
prospective insured named in a submitted application, requesting and
reviewing information from persons other than the applicant, making a
determination that the applicant meets the insurer’s underwriting
criteria, and mailing the policy to the policyholder or the producer
Indicate that requested coverage is or will be bound or issued x
Bind coverage x
Receiving and recording information from an applicant or
policyholder and preparing for an insurance producer’s review and x
signature all binders, certificates, endorsements, identification cards or
policies pursuant to instructions from the insurance producer
Receiving premiums at the recorded place of business where the
payment is being made on a binder, endorsement or existing policy x
Issue certificates of insurance, endorsements, binders, commitments, Dependent upon whether issuance
insurance policies or insurance identification cards is physical delivery only or the
effectuation of the insurance policy
Servicing of Existing Policyholders

Receiving and recording an insured’s request concerning any additions x
or deletions to an existing policy and preparing the appropriate
endorsements or processing the appropriate changes. Person could
give rate quote
on the requested
change only.
Informing the insured as to his or her coverage as Indicated in policy x
records
Receive telephone calls reporting additional or replacement items x
(vehicles, property, drivers) for policies currently in force
Opening mail, office filing and mailing billings x
G:\MKTREG\DATA\Producer Licensing\Uniformity\Licensable - NonLicensable -Activities 2011.doc

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section II – General Reference Materials
A. Sample Continuing Education Program Instructions to Course Providers

B. Sample Frequently Asked Questions by Producers Regarding Continuing Education Requirements
C. Sample State Licensing Department Internal Training Manual

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section III – Appendix A
Sample Continuing Education Program Instructions to Course Providers
This Appendix contains a sample outline of the type of information a state may consider providing to Continuing Education
providers. It may also serve as a guide to states that wish to adopt formal regulations on CE provider requirements. This
document has not been formally adopted by the PLWG or the NAIC. See also information on the CER and the PLWG
guidelines on CE in this appendix.
Fees and Recordkeeping Requirements
 Continuing Education providers’ initial application fee is .

 Course approval filing fee shall be .
 CE providers must maintain attendance records, course outlines and course completion records of participants for
years following each course offering. The insurance department will periodically conduct audits of provider’s
records. Any provider who cannot furnish the requested records when audited shall be subject to suspension or
revocation.
Providers are responsible for advertising where and when a course offering will be held. A course should not be advertised
before it has been approved. Failure on the part of a course provider to hold a course may result in suspension and/or
revocation of the provider’s authority, if the course is not rescheduled or the fees refunded to the participants.
Section I – CE Provider Responsibilities
1. The CE provider must meet the criteria defined by state laws and regulations.
2. If the state uses a vendor, insert instructions on filing with the vendor.
3. The CER form must be used. All CE provider application forms submitted to the department must be typed. The
application form must include the name of the person who will represent the provider for continuing education
purposes. If any part of the application is not filled out, the application will be returned to the applicant, delaying the
approval process.
4. The CE provider is responsible for ensuring that each participant satisfactorily completing a course is furnished with
a Certificate of Completion. The provider must also send CE course completion rosters/reports electronically to the
department or its vendor within days of course completion.
5. The CE provider shall maintain attendance records, course outlines and course completion records of participants for
years following each course offering. Any provider who cannot furnish the requested records when audited shall
be subject to suspension or revocation.
6. CE course completion reports must be formatted correctly and information must be accurate. If not, reports will be
rejected and returned.
7. All CE providers, study materials and certifications are subject to audit by the department or designated
representatives of the department at any time. An audit may be conducted through class schedules and records of the
course or through actual attendance of class presentations at any time and without warning.
8. Each licensee taking the course must be issued a certificate. CE providers should instruct the class participants to
keep these certificates in a safe place until the next license renewal (reporting period) in the event that they are
audited.
9. Providers may submit a course outline for approval only after having been approved as a CE provider. CE providers
are responsible for their own advertisements.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section II – Course Approval
1. All course applications and required forms must be submitted for approval to the department (vendor) at least
days prior to the first course offering.
2. The CE provider must submit a detailed course summary in outline form. In addition to the outline, if the proposed
course is self-study, the provider must also submit all the course material that the licensee will receive for
department review. Self-study and online courses must include an appropriate testing instrument requiring a grade of
70 percent or higher to successfully complete the course. The examination must be administered by a licensed
producer or representative of the CE provider. The outline should state a description of the course content, including
a time frame for each major topic area to be covered in the course. If the content of an approved course should
change, the provider must resubmit the course along with a new course outline and time frame for approval. Courses
can be approved for classroom instruction, seminar, self-study (correspondence), and/or online in whole credit-hour
increments only.
The following are examples of subjects that most likely will qualify for continuing education credits:
 Fundamentals/principles of property insurance

 Fundamentals/principles of casualty insurance
 Fundamentals/principles of life insurance
 Fundamentals/principles of health insurance
 Estate planning/taxation (may not be for personal benefit)
 Ethics in insurance
 Legal, legislative and regulatory matters in insurance
 Insurance policy contents
 Proper use of insurance products
 Insurance rating
 Accounting/actuarial considerations in insurance
 Principles or risk management
 Provisions/differences in insurance policy contracts
 Professional designation courses (see list of designations in Pre-license Education section)
Examples of subjects that most likely will NOT qualify for prelicensing or continuing education credits:
 Prospecting
 Motivation
 Sales
 Psychology
 Recruiting
 Basic non-insurance related computer training
 Office skills
 Time management
 Telephone skills
 Health/Stress/Exercise courses
 Personal finance or tax courses intended for the producer instead of his/her clients
Section III – Instructor
The CE provider must monitor the activities of instructors. Each CE provider is responsible for the actions of their
instructors. An instructor teaching an approved course shall qualify for the same number of classroom hours as would be
granted to a person taking and successfully completing such a course or seminar. The instructor, if also a licensee, should be
issued a Certificate of Completion and entered on the roster for the course offering.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Section IV – CE Reciprocity Course Filings
(See also PLWG CE guidelines regarding courses that are part of a national designation program.)
(Insert information on the NAIC Continuing Education Reciprocity (CER) filings)
Section V – Definitions
Course – A course is an organized, outline body of information intended to convey knowledge to the licensee.
Continuing Education Course Provider (CE Provider) – A CE provider is an entity that has been approved by the
department to offer continuing education courses to insurance producers in the state.
CE Credit – Fifty (50) minutes of participation in an approved course is equal to one CE credit.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section III – Appendix B
Sample Frequently Asked Questions by Producers Regarding Continuing Education Requirements
This Appendix contains sample questions and answers regarding continuing education requirements. These examples
contemplate that a producer must complete a certain number of credits to be eligible to renew their license. A state should
alter the questions to refer to a continuing education reporting period if the state does not renew licenses. This document has
not been formally adopted by the PLWG or the NAIC.
Q: How many hours do I need to renew my license?
A. (Insert state requirement)
Q: Do I need to complete the CE requirements if I am a nonresident?
A: No. A nonresident who has satisfied his/her home state’s continuing education requirement is exempt.
Q: Does my company renew my license?
A: No. Companies renew appointments. License renewal is the producer’s responsibility.
Q: Must licensees take courses related to the lines of insurance they hold?
A: No. You may take any approved course without regard to the type of license you hold.
Q: Can I count the prelicensing course I recently took for my CE requirements?
A: No. This course is not approved for CE credits, only prelicensing.
Q: Can extra credits earned from the previous year count for this year’s renewal requirements?
A. No. Carryover is not allowed.
Q: Can credits earned while taking courses to obtain a professional designation be used for the annual CE requirements?
A: Yes, but only after the provider and courses have been approved by the state department of insurance and only if the
course is completed after the producer has already received an insurance producer license.
Q: Do I need to send my certificates of completion to the state department of insurance?
A: No, if you renew online, there is no need to send certificates to the department; however, always keep your certificates on
file. (Other possible answers: Yes, if you are unable to renew online due to a CE discrepancy or upon a CE audit request, you
may have to send certificates for verification.)
Q: Can the person who teaches the course receive CE credits?
A: Yes, instructors will receive the same number of credits as the individuals who take the course.
Q: Can I go to the Department Web site to look up how many CE credits I have?
A: (It is recommended that states offer this service.)
Q: How can I find out how many continuing education hours I have?

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
A: It is your responsibility to keep a record of your CE credits and retain your certificates of completion. If a department
requires CE providers to file attendance reports, the department will only be able to verify the number of credits that have
been reported by CE providers.
Q: Do I have to take 12 credits for my life license and 12 credits for my property license?
A: No, you only have to submit the total number of credits hours required, no matter how many lines of authority you hold.
Q: Can I take online CE courses?
A: Yes, if the provider and course is approved in your state.
Q: Can I take the same CE course two years in a row and receive credit?
A: No. You cannot receive credit for any course more than once in any CE reporting period.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section III – Appendix C
Sample State Licensing Department Internal Training Manual
This Appendix contains a sample outline and some suggested text for a state insurance department to use to create an internal
training manual for licensing staff. This document has not been formally adopted by the PLWG or NAIC.
Introduction
The State of Insurance Department is required by the Code of to license individuals to sell insurance in the
state of . The Producer Licensing Division’s responsibility is to make sure this is carried out as written.
The Producer Licensing Division is governed by laws and regulations adopted by the commissioner to provide the basic
details necessary to implement statutory requirements. Regulations most likely to be of interest to employees in this division
are . A brief description of each is found in the glossary.
The Continuing Education Program was established to provide producers with information to keep them informed of new
laws, rules and regulations governing the insurance industry. It also serves the consumer by providing licensed continuing
education providers to industry personnel so that they may provide a more informative means of communication. Many other
states require continuing education hours. In an effort to aid the process, the department, like most states, participates in a
reciprocal program where we accept hours from other states and they do the same for our resident producers.
This resource manual is compiled to serve as a guide to employees in the insurance department who work directly and/or
indirectly with the Producer Licensing Division. It contains pertinent regulatory information that is applicable to the
prelicensing education, testing, licensing, license renewal and continuing education requirements. This manual will be used
as a training guide for new employees and as a reference guide for other employees.
Contents
Division Organization Chart

Prelicensing Information
Testing Information
Licensing Information
Renewal Information
Continuing Education Information
Miscellaneous Forms
Exhibits
Glossary
Answering Calls
1. Answer promptly (before the third ring if possible).

2. Before picking up the receiver, discontinue any other conversation or activity such as eating, typing, etc., that can be
heard by the caller.
3. Speak clearly and distinctly in a pleasant tone of voice.
4. Use “hold” button when leaving the line so that the caller does not accidentally hear conversations being held
nearby.
5. When transferring a call, be sure to explain to the caller that you are doing so and where you are transferring them.
6. Remember that you may be the first and only contact a person may have with your department, and that first
impressions will stay with the caller long after the call is completed.
7. If the caller has reached the wrong division, be courteous. Sometimes they have been transferred all over the
department with a simple question. If possible, attempt to find out where they should call/to whom they should
speak. They will greatly appreciate it.
8. When the called party is not in, use a tactful response to protect the privacy of the office staff.
9. At the end of the day, spend a few moments reflecting on what you have accomplished. Tally up the good
experiences against the bad. You might be surprised to find that on any given day, there were many more “pluses”
than “minuses.”

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
10. Because you are a professional, it’s natural to remember and be concerned about the negative contacts you
experience. But don’t let the negatives overwhelm you; take those few minutes to tally the successes.
Mail/Fax Procedures
Address and Name Changes
1. Name and address changes are processed .

2. Name change requests must be accompanied by a marriage certificate, divorce decree, or other court document.
3. Address change forms do not have to be verified.
4. Make sure all names are spelled correctly, whether in the address or name.
5. Name changes can now be done online.
(Address changes can easily be made online through NIPR’s Address Change Request – ACR)
Prelicensing Education Information (optional)
Individuals must complete a prelicensing course of study for the lines of authority desired before taking most of the insurance
producer license examinations. The prelicensing course must consist of 20 credit hours per line of authority, or equivalent
individual instruction, on the general principles of insurance for that line of authority. The lines of authority requiring a
prelicensing course are as follows:
 Life
 Accident & Health or Sickness
 Variable Life & Variable Annuity
 Property and/or Casualty
 Personal Lines
Once the prelicensing course is completed and a certificate is awarded, the insurance licensing examination can be taken
within from the date of the certificate. If the examination is not taken, the certificate will expire, and the course must
be retaken to qualify for the examination.
Prelicensing Course Exemptions
 Holders of the following designations are exempt from the prelicensing requirement:
Life: CEBS, ChFC, CIC, CFP, CLU, FLMI, LUTCF
Health: RHU, CEBS, REBC, HIA
Property/Casualty: AAI, ARM, CIC, CPCU
 Applicants for the following limited lines of authority may be exempt from the prelicensing requirement:
Crop Insurance
Credit Insurance
Travel Insurance
Car Rental Insurance
Surety

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Examinations
Once the appropriate prelicensing course is completed, an individual is eligible to sit for the insurance producer examination.
If not reported electronically, test candidates must present an original certificate of completion from an approved prelicensing
provider at the time of the examination. A prelicensing course certificate is valid for from date of completion. The
insurance producer examination is available in locations around the state. Information about testing locations is on the
department Web site. This Web site also contains information on insurance licensing, the application process, registration for
examinations and the issuance of licenses. The examination fee is $ .
Initial Licensing Qualifications
The qualifications necessary to become an insurance producer include, but are not limited to, the following:
 Must be at least 18 years of age.

 Must not have committed any act that is a ground for denial, suspension or revocation of license (See PLMA section
12).
 Must complete a prelicensing course of study, if required, for the major lines of authority for which the person is
applying.
 Must successfully complete the examination for the lines of authority for which the individual has applied.
Initial Licensing Process
Residents
There are two options available to obtain a resident license:
Option 1: Test results are reported electronically to the insurance department. Applications can be submitted online at
the department Web site. (or)
Option 2: After successfully completing the examination, applicants must attach both the original examination results
certificate and a $ fee to the uniform application form for Individual Producer License and send to .
Nonresidents
 Applicants must be in good standing and hold an active license in their resident state for the same lines of authority
for which they are applying.
 Applicants must complete the NAIC Uniform Application for Individual License.
 No letter of certification is required with application.
Appointments (Optional)
Once licensed, a producer can then be appointed by one or more insurers to act as their producer.
Renewal Process
Upon license expiration, producers are eligible to reinstate their license for a period of 12 months from the last day of their
birth month without the necessity of completing the prelicensing course or passing a written examination.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Part III - Section IV – Glossary 1033 (1033 consent waivers)
A federal law commonly referred to by licensing directors as “1033” establishes a ban on certain individuals from
working in the insurance business. The law provides that a banned person can apply to the state insurance commissioner
for a written consent to participate in the insurance business.
Adjuster
A person who determines coverage and evaluates the damage caused to property or people when an insurance-related
accident occurs. There are three classes of adjusters: company adjusters (employed by an insurance company),
independent adjusters (independent contractors with an insurance company) and public adjusters (employed by the
policyholder).
Appointment
A notification filed with the insurance department that an insurer has established an agency relationship with an insurance
producer.
Appointment renewal
The continuation of a company’s existing appointment.
Bail Bond Agents
Any person or corporation that will act as a surety and pledge money or property, or that will sell an insurance product as
bail for the appearance of a criminal defendant in court.
Business Entity
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, a corporation, association, partnership, limited liability company, limited
liability partnership, or other legal entity.
Central Registration Depository (CRD)
The securities industry online registration and licensing database, operated by FINRA contains reports on industry
registration/licensing forms completed by brokerage firms and regulators. Contains professional background information
on approximately 660,000 currently registered brokers and 5,100 currently registered securities firms. Information is also
available on thousands of formerly registered firms and brokers.
Charitable Gift Annuities (CGA)
An arrangement in which an individual transfers cash or marketable securities to a charitable organization. The
organization issues the gift annuity and makes a promise to make fixed annual payments to the individual for life. In
exchange, the individual is eligible for a current income tax deduction. In some states, charitable organizations engaging
in this activity are required to register with the state insurance department.
Charitable Organizations
Under Charitable Gift Annuities Exemption Model Act (#241), an entity described by either Section 501(c)(3) or Section
170(c) of the Internal Revenue Code.
Continuing Education Reciprocity (CER)
A simplified filing method for continuing education courses approved by other states.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Controlled Business
Insurance business over which an insurance producer is able to exercise personal influence. Some states prohibit a
producer from obtaining or continuing to hold a producer license if more than a certain percentage of the producer’s
business is generated through controlled business.
Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA)
The non-governmental regulator (a self-regulatory association designated by Congress) for all securities firms doing
business in the United States. FINRA oversees more than 5,000 brokerage firms, about 171,000 branch offices and more
than 672,000 registered securities representatives. FINRA was created in July 2007 through the consolidation of the
National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD) and the member regulation, enforcement and arbitration functions of
the New York Stock Exchange.
Fraternal Benefit Society
A membership organization that is legally required to offer life, health and related insurance products to its members, be
not- for-profit and carry out charitable and other programs for the benefit of its members and the public.
Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLBA)
Congress passed GLBA in 2000, which required that a majority (29) of state insurance departments were required to adopt
uniform licensing standards by November 2002, or all state insurance departments would face preemption in the licensing
arena by the new National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers (NARAB). GLBA Section 321 requires twenty-
nine (29) states, no later than 3 years after the date of the enactment of the GLBA, to enact: (1) uniform laws and
regulations governing the licensure of individuals and entities to sell, solicit and/or negotiate the purchase of insurance
within the State; or (2) reciprocity laws and regulations governing the licensure of nonresident individuals and entities
authorized to sell, solicit or negotiate the purchase of insurance within those States.
Home State
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, the District of Columbia and any state or territory of the United States in which
an insurance producer maintains his or her principal place of residence or principal place of business and is licensed to act
as an insurance producer.
I-SITE
An online interface designed for state insurance departments to obtain comprehensive financial, market conduct, producer
licensing, and securities information. I-SITE offers regulators access to NAIC database information including Summary
Reports, Batch Reports, and Detailed Lookup Reports.
Interstate Insurance Product Regulation Compact
An organization formed by the states to provide a vehicle to (1) develop uniform national product standards that will
afford a high level of protection to consumers of life insurance, annuities, disability income and long-term care insurance
products; (2) establish a central point of filing for these insurance products; and (3) thoroughly review product filings and
make regulatory decisions according to the uniform product standards. The compact is administered by the Interstate
Insurance Product Regulation Commission (IIPRC). For more information visit the Web site at:
www.insurancecompact.org.
Life Settlement
A transaction (also referred to as a viatical settlement) in which the owner of a life insurance policy sells the right to
receive the death payment due under the policy to a third party. Typically the owner/insured receives a cash payment, and
the buyer agrees to make any remaining premium payments on the policy.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Managing General Agents (MGA)
An agent authorized by an insurance company to manage all or a part of the insurer’s business in a specific geographic
territory. Activities on behalf of the insurer may include marketing, underwriting, issuing policies, collecting premiums,
appointing and supervising other agents, paying claims, and negotiating reinsurance. Many states regulate the activities
and contracts of managing general agents.
Market Analysis Working Group (MAWG)
Identifies and reviews insurance companies that are exhibiting, or may exhibit, characteristics indicating a current or
potential market regulatory issue that may impact multiple jurisdictions. The Working Group determines if regulatory
action is being taken and supports collaborative actions in addressing problems identified. MAWG meets in closed session
and its membership is limited to 16 regulators appointed by the Chair of D Committee.
Market Regulation Handbook
Developed by the NAIC Market Regulation Handbook Working Group and contains guidelines for market regulation
examinations and investigations. The handbook contains guidelines for regulators on different options for investigation
techniques, called the continuum of regulatory responses.
Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWA)
Arrangements allowed under the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA) law that allow a group of
employers collectively to offer health insurance coverage to their employees. MEWAs are most often found among
employer groups belonging to a common trade, industry or professional association.
National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC)
A U.S. standard-setting and regulatory support organization created and governed by the chief insurance regulators from the
50 states, the District of Columbia and five U.S. territories. Through the NAIC, state insurance regulators establish standards
and best practices, conduct peer review, and coordinate their regulatory oversight. NAIC staff supports these efforts and
represents the collective views of state regulators domestically and internationally. NAIC members, together with the central
resources of the NAIC, form the national system of state-based insurance regulation in the U.S.
National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers (NARAB)
H.R. 5611, the National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers (NARAB) Reform Act of 2008 (“NARAB II”)
would amend the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act to reestablish NARAB as a nonprofit corporation (“Association”) to provide a
mechanism through which licensing, continuing education and other insurance producer qualification requirements and
conditions can be adopted and applied on a multi-state basis, while preserving the right of states to: (1) license, supervise
and discipline insurance producers; and (2) prescribe and enforce laws and regulations regarding insurance-related
consumer protection and unfair trade practices.
If states fail to maintain compliance with the standards expressed in GLBA, NARAB would be established to provide a
mechanism through which uniform licensing, appointment, continuing education and other insurance producer sales
qualification requirements and conditions would be adopted and applied on a multistate basis. NARAB guidelines would
preempt state licensing laws.
National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
A federal program enabling property owners in participating communities to purchase insurance as protection against
flood losses. The program is administered by FEMA. Individuals selling flood insurance must be licensed as an insurance
producer.
National Insurance Producer Registry (NIPR)

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
A non-profit affiliate of the NAIC created in 1996 through collaboration of the NAIC and industry. The purpose of the
NIPR was to work with the states and the NAIC to reengineer, streamline and make more uniform the producer licensing
process for the benefit of regulators, the insurance industry and consumers. The NIPR worked with the NAIC to develop
and implement the Producer Database (PDB) utilized by the industry for licensing and appointment information and the
State Producer Licensing Database (SPLD) for use by regulators.
National Producer Number (NPN)
The National Producer Number is a unique NAIC identifier assigned through the licensing application process or the NAIC
reporting systems to individuals and business entities (including, but not limited to producers, adjusters, and navigators)
engaged in insurance related activities regulated by a state insurance department. The NPN is used to track those
individuals and business entities on a national basis.
Negotiate
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, the act of conferring directly with or offering advice directly to a purchaser or
prospective purchaser of a particular contract of insurance concerning any of the substantive benefits, terms or conditions
of the contract, provided that the person engaged in that act either sells insurance or obtains insurance from insurers for
purchasers.
North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA)
A voluntary association, similar to the NAIC, whose membership consists of 67 state, provincial and territorial securities
administrators in the 50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Canada and Mexico.
Producer (Insurance Producer)
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA) a person required to be licensed under the laws of a state to sell, solicit
or negotiate insurance. A producer may be an individual or a business entity.
Producer Database (PDB)
The Producer Database (PDB) is a central repository of producer licensing information updated on a timely basis by
participating state insurance departments. The PDB includes data from external databases such as the Regulatory
Information Retrieval System (RIRS) to provide a more comprehensive producer profile.
Producer Licensing Model Act (PLMA)
A model act adopted by the NAIC to update and standardize many aspects of state producer licensing. Full text available
through the NAIC Model Law Service.
Producer Licensing Task Force (PLTF)
The NAIC Task Force develops and implements uniform standards, interpretations and treatment of producer and adjuster
licensees and licensing terminology; 2) monitor and respond to developments related to licensing reciprocity; 3) coordinate
with industry and consumer groups regarding priorities for licensing reforms; and 4) provide direction based on NAIC
membership initiatives to the NIPR Board of Directors regarding the development and implementation of uniform producer
licensing initiatives, with a primary emphasis on encouraging the use of electronic technology.
Psychometrician
One who designs, administers and interprets quantitative tests for the measurement of psychological variables such as
intelligence, aptitude and personality traits. In licensing, the duties relate more to the interpretation of the data derived
from the knowledge-based licensing exams. He/she basically looks at the test statistics and makes appropriate suggestions
for any adjustments to the test items.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Regulatory Information Retrieval System (RIRS)
A database maintained by the NAIC that includes information filed by states to report formal administration actions.
Reinsurance Intermediary
Acts as a broker in soliciting, negotiating or procuring the writing of any reinsurance contract or binder. Acts as an
insurance producer in accepting any reinsurance contract or binder on behalf of an insurer.
Risk Management Agency (RMA)
Part of the United States Department of Agriculture. RMA operates and manages the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation
(FCIC). The RMA was created in 1996.
Risk Purchasing Group (RPG)
Allowed under Federal Law to form so that similar risks may pool purchasing power. RPGs are purchasing entities, not
insurers, and are not generally subject to state insurance laws. RPGS are only allowed to place liability coverage.
Risk Retention Group (RRG)
Under the Federal Liability Risk Retention Act certain product sellers are allowed to provide group self-insurance. RRGs
are insurers licensed and fully regulated in one state pursuant to that state’s laws. RRGs are limited to providing non-
workers’ compensation commercial lines liability insurance to their members. All owners of an RRG must be insureds,
and all insureds must be owners.
Securities and Insurance Licensing Association (SILA)
An industry association created for the purpose of communication and education for licensing and education experts
whose occupations encompass all areas of securities and insurance licensing and registration.
Sell
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, to exchange a contract of insurance by any means, for money or its equivalent,
on behalf of an insurance company.
Solicit
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, attempting to sell insurance or asking or urging a person to apply for a
particular kind of insurance from a particular company.
Stamping Offices
Nonprofit non-governmental agencies whose existence is authorized by law. These offices act as a liaison between the
surplus lines producer and the state insurance department. Stamping office duties vary among the 14 states in which they
exist. Responsibilities may include evaluation of insurance companies for inclusion on a white list, review of surplus lines
policies, and education. Stamping offices are funded by stamping fees assessed on each policy of surplus lines insurance
written in the state.
State Producer Licensing Database (SPLD)
An electronic database consisting of information relating to insurance producers. Participating states regularly send
updates from their state licensing database to the SPLD. The SPLD links participating state regulatory licensing systems
into one common repository of producer information.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
STOLI or IOLI
Stranger-originated life insurance or investor-originated life insurance. The typical scenario for this type of transaction
involves the recruitment of an individual to consent to the purchase of life insurance or an annuity with a promise to, in
some manner, finance the purchase of the product. The “stranger” or investor becomes the owner of the product and will
receive the death benefits paid under the product.
Surety
Under the Uniform Licensing Standards, insurance or bond that covers obligations to pay the debts of, or answer for the
default of, another, including faithlessness in a position of public or private trust. For purpose of limited line licensing,
surety does not include Surety Bail Bonds.
Surplus Lines Insurance (SLI)
Products sold by authorized nonadmitted companies. SLI companies provide access to products and coverages not
available in a state. In some states, SLI companies are required to file a special registration with the state.
System for Electronic Rate and Form Filing (SERFF)
An NAIC program that allows companies to send and states to receive, comment on, and approve or reject insurance
industry rate and form filings. For more information, visit the NAIC Web site or www.serff.org.
Terminate
Under the Producer Licensing Model Act, the cancellation of the relationship between an insurance producer and the
insurer or the termination of a producer’s authority to transact insurance.
Termination for Cause
When an insurer has ended its agency relationship with a producer for one of the reasons set forth in Section 12 of the
PLMA or that the producer has been found by a court, government body, or self-regulatory organization authorized by law
to have engaged in any of the activities set forth in Section 12.
Third-Party Administrators (TPA)
A person who directly or indirectly underwrites, collects charges or premium, or adjusts or settles claims on behalf of a
self- funded insurance plan for life, annuity or health coverages.
Title Insurance
Insurance against losses from defects in title to real property and from the invalidity or unenforceability of mortgage liens.
It is meant to protect an owner’s or lender’s financial interest in real property against loss due to title defects, liens or other
matters.
Title Insurance Agent
An individual who sells title insurance. In most states, title insurance agents are required to either register or obtain a
license from the state insurance department.
Uniform Applications
The Producer Licensing Task Force has adopted uniform applications for individual producers, business entities and third-
party administrators. The forms are available at http://www.naic.org/paper_licensing/maps_paper_licensing.htm.

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Uniform Licensing Standards (ULS)
A set of standards adopted by the Producer Licensing Working Group to guide state licensing directors in implementing
uniform standards among the states.
Viatical Settlement
A transaction (sometimes called a life settlement) in which the owner of a life insurance policy sells the right to receive
the death payment due under the policy to a third party. Typically the owner/insured receives a cash payment, and the
buyer agrees to make any remaining premium payments on the policy.

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners
(NAIC) is the U.S. standard-setting and regulatory support
organization created and governed by the chief insurance
regulators from the 50 states, the District of Columbia and five
U.S. territories. Through the NAIC, state insurance regulators
establish standards and best practices, conduct peer review,
and coordinate their regulatory oversight. NAIC staff supports
these efforts and represents the collective views of state
regulators domestically and internationally. NAIC members,
together with the central resources of the NAIC, form the
national system of state-based insurance regulation in the U.S.
For more information, visit www.naic.org.

Handbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handbook

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Handbook

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

State Licensing

Accounting & Reporting Special Studies

Consumer Information Statistical Reports

Financial Regulation Supplementary Products

Legal Capital Markets & Investment Analysis

Market Regulation White Papers

Printed in the United States of America

NAIC Executive Office NAIC Central Office NAIC Capital Markets

Part I Insurance Producer Licensing

Section A Governing Principles

Chapter 1 Modern Producer Licensing ............................................................................................... 5

Section B Licensing Processes

Chapter 5 Activities Requiring Licensure......................................................................................... 23

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

The Limited Lines ............................................................................................................ 40

Section C License Continuation

Chapter 14 Continuing Education....................................................................................................... 59

Part II Miscellaneous Licenses

Chapter 18 Adjusters .......................................................................................................................... 69

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Chapter 25 Multiple Employer Welfare Arrangements (MEWAS) .................................................... 85

Part III Appendices

A. Broker Compensation Frequently Asked Questions ....................................................................... 99

Section Two – General Reference Materials

A. Sample Continuing Education Program Instructions to Course Providers ....................................259

Section Three – Glossary

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Part III contains Appendices to this Handbook.

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 1

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 2

Part I Insurance Producer Licensing

Section A Governing Principles

Chapter 1 Modern Producer Licensing

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 3

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 4

Modern Producer Licensing

Uniformity Provisions of the Gramm Leach Bliley Act Adopted in 1999

National Insurance Producer Registry

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 5

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 6

Producer Licensing Model Act

The key uniformity provisions of the PLMA are:

Other Key Provisions of the Producer Licensing Model Act

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 7

Change of Home State

Section-by-Section Summary of the Producer Licensing Model Act

The full text of the PLMA is in the Appendices.

Section 1: Purpose and Scope

 To promote efficiency and uniformity in producer licensing.

Section 3: License Required

Section 4: Exceptions to Licensing

© 2009-18 National Association of Insurance Commissioners 8

Section 5: Application for Examination

 Allows use of outside testing services to administer examinations.

Section 6: Application for License

 Sets forth the qualifications for licensure as an individual or business entity.

 Provides guidelines for license continuation and reinstatement.

 Lists the information the license should contain.

Section 8: Nonresident Licensing