Skip to main content
Dual Regulation of Insurance
Villanova Law Review (2019)
  • Christopher French
Since this country was created, the insurance industry has been principally
regulated by the states with infrequent Congressional interventions.
As the insurance industry has evolved in recent decades, however, individual
states have become unable to adequately regulate some insurers, such
as multinational insurers and foreign insurers, because they lack jurisdiction
over such entities. Simply having the federal government assume responsibility
for regulating insurers will not solve the current regulatory
problems, however, because Congress’ past forays into regulating certain
areas of insurance generally have yielded poor results. Consequently, this
Article makes the novel proposal and argument that, with the creation of
the Federal Insurance Office (FIO) in 2010, the time is ripe for dual state
and federal regulation of insurance. The FIO could regulate the areas of
insurance where states are unable to do so or have done so inadequately
while the states could continue to regulate areas where they have demonstrated
  • insurance,
  • regulation,
  • McCarran-Ferguson Act,
  • ERISA,
  • NFIP,
  • Affordable Care Act,
  • National Flood Insurance Program,
  • Multinational,
  • Federal Insurance Office,
  • AIG,
  • solvency,
  • NAIC,
  • ISO,
  • reinsurance,
  • catastrophe bonds
Publication Date
Citation Information
Christopher C. French, Dual Regulation of Insurance, 64 Vill. L. Rev. 25 (2019)