May 24, 2012

SUPREME COURT OF MISSOURI RULES STOPLOSS INSURERS LIABLE FOR DIRECT PREMIUM TAX UNDER SECTION 148.340 OF THE MISSOURI REVISED STATUTES

In American National Life Insurance Company of Texas v. Director of Revenue, American National, a Texas domiciled insurance company that sells stoploss insurance policies in Missouri to employers who maintain self-funded health benefit plans, claimed a refund for direct premium taxes specified in § 148.340.  Section 148.340 provides that every insurance company not organized under the laws of Missouri shall pay a quarterly tax upon direct premiums received in the State of Missouri or on account of business done in the State of Missouri.  The phrase “Direct Premium” is not defined in the statute or cases interpreting the statute.  The court determined that a tax on “Direct Premiums Received” is imposed upon the consideration paid by an insured to an insurer for a contract of insurance. 

American National argued that its stoploss policies are reinsurance and not subject to the direct tax under § 148.340.  Citing Associated Industries of Missouri v. Angoff, American National argued that stoploss insurance cannot be included in the premiums taxed.  See, 937 SW.2d 277 (Mo. App. 1996).  The court rejected American National’s argument, holding that § 148.340 neither imposes a tax upon insurance, nor exempts reinsurance from tax.  Rather, § 148.340 taxes “Direct Premiums Received.”  The court reasoned that, in this instance, the insured is the employer and the insurer is American National.  The employer does not collect any specific sums from employees for the benefit and no tax is imposed on the benefit by § 148.340 upon the employer or employees.  The first premium paid and subject to tax is that paid by the employer to American National.  Based on this reasoning, the Supreme Court of Missouri affirmed the decision of the Administrative Hearing Commission, finding that stoploss policy premiums are subject to the direct premium tax under § 148.340.

 

© 2009 Clark HIll PLC.

About the Author

Benjamin A. Blume is a member in Clark Hill’s Chicago office. He is co-chair in Clark Hill’s new Insurance and Reinsurance Practice Group, which will focus on representing client’s in all aspects of the insurance and reinsurance business, including claims counseling, litigation and arbitration, business transactions and tax matters, regulatory issues and government relations, and formation of captive insurers and risk retention groups. His practice includes the handling of issues involving commercials, primary, umbrella, excess and surplus lines, and...

312-985-5937

John D. LaBarbera is a member in Clark Hill’s Chicago office. He is co-chair in Clark Hill’s new Insurance and Reinsurance Practice Group, which will focus on representing client’s in all aspects of the insurance and reinsurance business, including claims counseling, litigation and arbitration, business transactions and tax matters, regulatory issues and government relations, and formation of captive insurers and risk retention groups. He represents insurers in all aspects of their business, including claims counseling, litigation, and dispute resolution...

312-985-5936

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.