The committee recently changed its name from the Legislative Committee to the Advocacy Committee. What does this shift represent, and how does it align with VCIA’s broader vision for member-driven advocacy?
The change in name signals a number of things. First off, it shows the transition of the committee from a more passive body that received monitoring reports relating to legislative developments to a more active body that plays a key role in carrying out those developments. In addition, advocacy goes beyond legislation – it involves shaping policy at many different levels of government. Finally, VCIA recognizes that its members all bring their own skills and perspectives to the table, and by focusing on advocacy, we want to make sure we leverage the talents of our members for the good of the domicile and the industry as a whole.
What are the Advocacy Committee’s main priorities for 2026, and how do you see those goals shaping VCIA’s advocacy work throughout the legislative session and the year ahead?
The initial priority for the Advocacy Committee in 2026 is determining what those priorities should be. We have put together a working group comprised of captive owners, captive managers, attorneys, and former regulators to perform a broad-based assessment of the legal landscape and identify the most significant threats and opportunities to the industry, as well as those areas where VCIA is most likely to be able to make a difference. Once those priorities are identified, VCIA can give its government relations team their marching orders and support their efforts with help from individual members. The intent will be to allow VCIA both to spearhead its most important initiatives as well as to provide a rapid response to developments that might result in harm to the industry.
Can you walk us through how Vermont’s annual captive bill is developed—when conversations begin, who’s at the table, and how the process unfolds between industry, regulators, and policymakers?
Conversations typically begin in the fall, shortly after the VCIA annual conference. The VCIA canvasses some of its key stakeholders to identify issues in the captive insurance statute that would benefit from some sort of amendment. The DFR staff performs that same exercise on their side. Then the VCIA and DFR get together for a series of meetings to compare notes, determine what sort of proposals are feasible, and reach a consensus on our requests for the year. By the time the legislative session begins in January, VCIA and DFR have are able to show up in Montpelier and present a unified front to the legislature, highlighting not only the strength of the domicile but also the collaborative relationship between regulators and industry that is tough to find pretty much anywhere else in state government.
Vermont is widely regarded as the gold standard for captive regulation. From your perspective, how does our statute compare to other domiciles, and what continues to set Vermont apart?
Vermont has the most comprehensive captive insurance statute of any domicile that I have encountered. The statute is thorough and explicit, providing a clear guidebook for anybody seeking to establish a captive insurance company in the state. Vermont’s statute is so well regarded, the story goes, that other states seeking to form their own upstart captive domiciles ripped off the Vermont captive statute wholesale, right down to typos and cross-references to other sections of the Vermont Statutes Annotated. But what continues to set Vermont apart is the fact that the industry and the regulators look at the statute every single year and propose tweaks to the statute to make sure that the statute provides both the industry and the regulators with the tools they need to do their jobs to the maximum extent possible. The legislature has come to expect the captive housekeeping bill every year and routinely seeks to act as a partner to the domicile, making sure the domicile receives what the stakeholders believe it needs.
Looking ahead, what emerging issues or trends do you think could shape VCIA’s advocacy agenda in the coming years?
Self-procurement taxes continue to be a thorn in Vermont’s side. No matter how effective Vermont’s regulatory framework might be, it can be a challenge to overcome the tax bill that many states impose on the procurement of insurance from a non-admitted carrier domiciled somewhere other than the insured’s home state. Also, the Terrorism Risk Insurance Program is up for renewal in a couple of years, so the VCIA will need to make a concerted effort to remind Congress of the benefits that come from captive insurers being able to participate in this program. Finally, the advent of generative artificial intelligence, along with the ever-increasing risks relating to climate, provide some key opportunities, and VCIA will need to shape its advocacy efforts to ensure that captives can have a seat at the table.
