Multistate Restaurant Chain: Home State and Premium Tax Allocation
A Hawaii-domiciled restaurant chain with 40 locations-25 in Hawaii, 10 in California, and 5 in Nevada-seeks a $2 million commercial general liability policy. The insured's principal place of business is Honolulu. The broker is licensed in Hawaii and California. Total annual premium is $140,000, allocated 70% Hawaii, 20% California, 10% Nevada. A California location has a pending slip-and-fall claim. The California broker wants to collect California surplus lines tax on the California allocation. The insured is not an exempt commercial purchaser. The policy is placed with an unauthorized insurer that is eligible in Hawaii but not on California's eligible list. The broker collects the full $140,000 and plans to remit tax only to California on the 20% allocation.
1. Which state is the home state, and where must the surplus lines premium tax be paid? Explain why the California allocation does not control.
Read the worked answer
Under the NRRA, for an insured that is not an exempt commercial purchaser, the home state is the state where the insured maintains its principal place of business. The chain's principal place of business is Honolulu, so Hawaii is the home state. The surplus lines broker must remit the surplus lines premium tax to Hawaii on the full $140,000 premium.
California and Nevada do not get a separate surplus lines tax on their allocated portions; the 70/20/10 allocation is useful for rating, claims, and internal accounting, not for dividing surplus lines tax among states. The broker's plan to remit only California tax on the 20% allocation is wrong and would leave Hawaii tax unpaid. The broker should correct the remittance, document the home-state determination, and keep the allocation schedule to support the premium calculation.
2. Does California's eligible-insurer list bar this placement? What changes if the insured is an exempt commercial purchaser?
Read the worked answer
No. Under the NRRA, the insurer's eligibility is determined by the home state, Hawaii. If the insurer is eligible in Hawaii and authorized in its domicile, California's list does not control the placement. California can still regulate the broker's California conduct, and the pending California claim must be handled under the policy and applicable claims rules.
If the insured were an exempt commercial purchaser, the broker could skip the diligent effort only if it first disclosed to the insured that coverage may be available from authorized insurers and the insured requested the unauthorized placement. The tax result would still be Hawaii as home state. The broker should document ECP status carefully; it is not assumed, and the broker should confirm the insured meets the definition and that the disclosure is timely.