- Federal agenciesPreserves insurer nonpublic data and trade secrets from direct federal collection.
- Federal agenciesReduces duplicative federal data requests, lowering compliance burdens on insurers.
- StatesReinforces coordination with state insurance regulators and supports state regulatory primacy.
Insurance Data Protection Act
Referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consi…
The bill restricts federal financial regulators — including the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) and certain OFR authorities — from collecting data directly from insurance companies without first seeking existing sources. It removes or limits certain subpoena/enforcement authorities, requires coordinative pre‑collection searches (including state regulators and public sources), mandates Paperwork Reduction Act compliance before collecting data, and strengthens confidentiality and nonwaiver protections for nonpublic insurer data.
Liberals fear weakened federal oversight; conservatives emphasize limiting federal power
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal change by amending specific statutes and inserting defined duties and confidentiality protections.
The bill restricts federal financial regulators — including the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) and certain OFR authorities — from collecting data directly from insurance companies without first seeking existing sources.
It removes or limits certain subpoena/enforcement authorities, requires coordinative pre‑collection searches (including state regulators and public sources), mandates Paperwork Reduction Act compliance before collecting data, and strengthens confidentiality and nonwaiver protections for nonpublic insurer data.
The bill also clarifies that FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552) exceptions apply to data submitted and codifies these rules into the Financial Stability Act (Dodd‑Frank) structure.
Targeted, non‑spending deregulatory bill has supporters among industry and states but faces institutional resistance and Senate hurdles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal change by amending specific statutes and inserting defined duties and confidentiality protections. It integrates with existing law and sets out concrete mechanisms (source-first requirement, PRA compliance, privilege retention).
Liberals fear weakened federal oversight; conservatives emphasize limiting federal power
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
- Federal agenciesMay impede federal regulators’ timely access to insurer data needed for systemic risk monitoring.
- Potential burdenCoordination and PRA requirements could delay data collection during financial stress or crises.
- Federal agenciesIncreases administrative and coordination costs for federal agencies seeking insurer information.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
Liberals fear weakened federal oversight; conservatives emphasize limiting federal power
Skeptical.
Likely to view the bill as shifting oversight power away from federal regulators and toward insurers and state regulators, potentially weakening federal monitoring.
May appreciate stronger confidentiality for consumer data but worry about reduced enforcement and data gaps for systemic risk analysis.
Cautiously mixed.
Appreciates reduced redundant demands and coordination with state regulators, while worrying about potential delays or gaps in data that could harm oversight.
Focused on implementation details and safeguards for prompt crisis access.
Supportive.
Views the bill as a necessary limitation on federal overreach into the insurance sector, protecting proprietary information and reinforcing state primacy.
Likely welcomes removal of broad subpoena powers and additional confidentiality safeguards.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Targeted, non‑spending deregulatory bill has supporters among industry and states but faces institutional resistance and Senate hurdles.
- Absent cost or regulatory impact assessment
- State insurance regulator positions vary by state
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
Liberals fear weakened federal oversight; conservatives emphasize limiting federal power
Targeted, non‑spending deregulatory bill has supporters among industry and states but faces institutional resistance and Senate hurdles.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly effects substantive legal change by amending specific statutes and inserting defined duties and confidentiality protections. It integrates with existing law a…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.