The Rise of the Domestic Surplus Lines Insurer
This article discusses some of the key benefits of pursuing the formation or purchase of a DSLI, as well as some of the challenges associated therewith.
September 30, 2022 at 02:20 PM
8 minute read
With the increasing demand for niche, specialty insurance products driven in part by the "InsurTech" wave permeating the insurance underwriting, distribution and claims handling components of the commercial and personal lines insurance industry, excess and surplus lines insurance has become more popular than ever. Surplus lines insurance companies are not typically "admitted" in the U.S. jurisdictions where they place insurance policies, but rather are "eligible" to write insurance pursuant to the provisions of the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act of 2010 (NRRA) and as further regulated under applicable state insurance law.
Traditionally, there have been two methods for an insurance company to gain surplus lines eligibility. One method, with respect to alien (non-U.S.) insurance companies is to obtain inclusion on the Quarterly Listing of Alien Insurers maintained by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC). The second option is to become licensed as an admitted insurer in at least one U.S. jurisdiction whereby such company may write surplus lines insurance business in all other states as long as certain eligibility criteria are satisfied.
Historically, a problem that U.S. companies have faced, however, is that being licensed as an admitted insurer in a domiciliary state precludes writing surplus lines insurance business in that state. Fortunately, during the last 10-15 years, some states have begun embracing the concept of a "domestic surplus lines insurer" (DSLI) whereby an insurance company is licensed in its domiciliary state solely to transact surplus lines insurance business. To date, nearly half of all states have passed DSLI legislation. This article discusses some of the key benefits of pursuing the formation or purchase of a DSLI, as well as some of the challenges associated therewith.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All![NY No-Fault Insurance Adopts Worker’s Compensation Fee Schedule NY No-Fault Insurance Adopts Worker’s Compensation Fee Schedule](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/ac/07/3b63fefa43818951e66b77d9d581/workers-compensation-767x633.jpg)
![Buyer Beware: Continuity of Coverage in Legal Malpractice Insurance Buyer Beware: Continuity of Coverage in Legal Malpractice Insurance](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2023/05/Jeffrey-G.-Steinberg-headshot-767x633.jpg)
![New York State Authorizes Stand-Alone Business Interruption Insurance Policies New York State Authorizes Stand-Alone Business Interruption Insurance Policies](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/25/78/ba2fdffc4ba28f4fed44054aa174/nyc-snow-767x633.jpg)
New York State Authorizes Stand-Alone Business Interruption Insurance Policies
6 minute read![Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2021/07/Scott-Mollen-767x633.jpg)
Unit Owners Sued Board for Failure To Maintain Adequate Fire Insurance: This Week in Scott Mollen’s Realty Law Digest
Law Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1States Accuse Trump of Thwarting Court's Funding Restoration Order
- 2Microsoft Becomes Latest Tech Company to Face Claims of Stealing Marketing Commissions From Influencers
- 3Coral Gables Attorney Busted for Stalking Lawyer
- 4Trump's DOJ Delays Releasing Jan. 6 FBI Agents List Under Consent Order
- 5Securities Report Says That 2024 Settlements Passed a Total of $5.2B
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250