Seal of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Massachusetts Audit Explorer - what the State Auditor found

← all audits

Audit of the Division of Insurance

August 21, 2019 · Division of Insurance · Read the full official report on mass.gov ↗

Published August 21, 2019 Audit covers July 1, 2016 – June 30, 2018 Under Suzanne M. Bump · 2011–2023

In plain English
The audit found that the Division of Insurance left $857,306 in required charges off bills to some insurers, which meant other insurers were charged more.
source
“DOI did not bill insurers for $857,306 in operations assessments.”
Read the plain-English breakdown
What is this?

This is a state performance audit of the Massachusetts Division of Insurance covering July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.

“In accordance with Section 12 of Chapter 11 of the Massachusetts General Laws, the Office of the State Auditor has conducted a performance audit of the Division of Insurance (DOI) for the period July 1, 2016 through June 30, 2018.”
Why was it audited?

Auditors checked whether the agency handled its insurance-company assessments correctly and whether it properly reviewed insurers’ market behavior.

“In this performance audit, we reviewed how DOI administered its operations assessment process and its market conduct analysis of Massachusetts licensed insurers.”
Why it matters

The Division of Insurance oversees insurers and helps enforce insurance laws, so mistakes in how it funds its operations affect regulated companies and public accountability.

“We also investigate and enforce state laws and regulations pertaining to insurance and respond to consumer inquiries and complaints.”
What's in it for me?

For ordinary residents, the point is that insurance oversight should be funded fairly and the agency should keep watch on companies that may pose risks to consumers.

“Market conduct analysis allows DOI to identify insurers that warrant further inspection or, in some cases, regulatory action.”
The bottom line

The market conduct review passed, but the billing process did not: some insurers were excluded from operations assessments even though they should have been included.

“In fiscal years 2014 through 2018, the Division of Insurance (DOI) did not bill 62 out of a total of 5,816 insurers for $857,306 in annual operations assessments even though the insurers were required to pay them.”
What happens next

The auditor recommended that DOI stop exempting those insurers and look at whether overbilled insurers should get money back.

“DOI should work with insurers that were overbilled for operations assessments to determine whether any restitution is necessary.”
Why it's significant

The key significance is fairness: when some insurers were left out, the cost was shifted to the insurers that did get billed.

“By not doing this, DOI clearly overbilled the insurers that did receive annual operations assessments in an amount equal to what it should have billed to the insurers it should not have excluded.”
Jargon, unpacked

An operations assessment is a charge to insurers that helps reimburse the state for running the Division of Insurance.

“Assessments under this section shall be charged to the normal operating cost of each company.”

1 figure(s) pending source verification - not shown

What the Auditor checked

What the Auditor found

The Division of Insurance did not bill some insurers for required operations assessments.
internal controlsrecordkeeping/documentation

Why it matters: DOI overbilled the remaining insurers that were assessed annual operations assessments.

Standard: Section 8C of Chapter 26 of the Massachusetts General Laws; line item 7006-0020 in the Commonwealth’s budget summaries; Section 7A of Chapter 26 of the General Laws; Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation’s Division of Insurance Assessment Calculation and Billing Procedures ( Section 8C of Chapter 26 of the Massachusetts General Laws; line item 7006-0020 in the Commonwealth’s budget summaries for fiscal years 2014–2018; Section 7A of Chapter 26 of the General Laws )

2 recommendations
  • DOI should discontinue its practice of excluding some insurers from annual operations assessments and notify insurers that have traditionally been exempt from these assessments that they will no longer be exempt.agency: agreed
  • DOI should work with insurers that were overbilled for operations assessments to determine whether any restitution is necessary.agency: disagreed
Agency response & Auditor reply
Agency: "No insurers were “overbilled.”"
Auditor: "By not doing this, DOI clearly overbilled the insurers that did receive annual operations assessments in an amount equal to what it should have billed to the insurers it should not have excluded."

More audits of this entity

Other Office of the State Auditor reports on Division of Insurance .

See this entity's page with all 3 audits →