Committee Summary for House Commerce and Consumer Affairs (04/08/2026)

Member	Member	Member
Hunt, John(Chairman)(R)[B+]2025	Post, Lisa(Clerk)(R)[A]2025	Potucek, John(V Chairman)(R)[A-]2025
Butler, Billie(D)	Salvi, Santosh(D)[CT]2025	Chourasia, Manoj(D)[F]2025
Ammon, Keith(R)[A]2025	Herbert, Christopher(D)[D-]2025	Osborne, Jason(R)[A+]2025
Thackston, Dick(R)[B+]2025	Walsh, Lilli(R)[B]2025	Porcelli, Susan(R)[B]2025
Spier, Carry(D)[D-]2025	Burroughs, Anita(D)[F]2025	McAleer, Chris(D)[D-]2025
Sullivan, Jared(D)[D]2025	Miles, Julie(R)[A-]2025	Presa, Adam(R)[B]2025

Bill/Time	Type	Title	Sponsor
HB610	General Working Session	(New Title) relative to the residential ratepayers advisory board.	Berry, Ross(R)[A+]2025
HB548	General Working Session	relative to licensing requirements for health care facilities that operate on a membership-based business model.	McLean, Mark(R)[A-]2025
HB358	General Working Session	relative to exemption from immunization requirements on the basis of religious belief.	Kofalt, Jim(R)[A+]2025
SB444	Public Hearing	prohibiting the use of animal testing when other comparable methods are available.	Innis, Daniel(R)[B]2025
SB487	Public Hearing	allowing credit union members to pay members of the board of directors for their services as a board member.	Innis, Daniel(R)[B]2025
SB525	Public Hearing	raising the maximum amount of state guarantees in force.	Innis, Daniel(R)[B]2025
SB607	Public Hearing	relative to short-term, limited duration health insurance policies	Innis, Daniel(R)[B]2025

HB610: Information Only 00:06:27.496 - 10:05:13 AM; Discussed current annual reporting on health insurance and proposed extending it to long-term care insurance trends. Explained that individual policy hearings are inappropriate due to competitive concerns. Noted that rate filings can span multiple years, up to 10 years, to avoid shocks. Suggested an amendment to maintain a dedicated website page with rate increase data, carrier information, and consumer guides. Recommended an annual hearing or report on trends similar to health cost drivers, filed with lawmakers and posted online, to help consumers understand ongoing issues.
HB610: Support 00:10:42.430 - 10:09:28 AM; Emphasized that the bill addresses unexpected high premium increases (15-20%) that burden consumers who were not informed when purchasing policies. Argued for regulation like a maximum cap on annual increases rather than just reports or hearings, as trends alone do not solve affordability issues. Highlighted consumer perspective, noting companies' failure to anticipate costs should not solely penalize policyholders. Stressed the need for compromise to protect existing policyholders who bought based on assurances, separate from future education efforts.
HB610: Information Only 00:16:30.728 - 10:15:16 AM; Explained the Insurance Department's primary responsibility is ensuring carrier solvency, which limits ability to impose caps due to case law and risk of companies failing, triggering guarantee funds. Noted nationwide issues with long-term care products due to underestimated health care costs, leading to carrier insolvencies without increases. Stressed educating future buyers on rate volatility and that current policyholders may need to pursue legal recourse if misled. Reiterated solvency as fundamental, overriding consumer impact in decisions.
HB610: Oppose 00:23:01.020 - 10:21:47 AM; Clarified that not all companies are underwater but significant increases stem from stopping sales of the product, relying solely on existing policies without new premiums. Opposed annual reviews as burdensome, since filings occur every 3-5 years; suggested department summarize trends from received applications without disclosing individual carrier data. Emphasized known trends via public approvals and that consumers often react only after receiving increase notices. Proposed advance notification to policyholders before approval, allowing comments during a 60-day period, but noted challenges with confidential filings.
HB610: Information Only 00:42:01.349 - 10:40:47 AM; Reiterated that rate reviews involve robust actuarial analysis, not rubber-stamping, with adjustments and back-and-forth; court case struck down arbitrary caps like no increases after age 70, focusing on solvency for future claims. Explained prohibitions against spreading losses across business lines to avoid unfair premium hikes in unrelated policies. Noted carriers can manage risk by stopping sales or running off books, but must honor existing contracts. Confirmed prior commissioners pushed back successfully, like a 7-year moratorium, without changing statutes.
HB610: Vote 00:45:48.792 - 10:44:34 AM; Motion for interim study on HB 610 passed unanimously (15-16 in favor), deferring further discussion to September to explore solutions for long-term care rate issues, acknowledging complexity and no easy fixes like caps due to solvency concerns.
HB548: Information Only 00:48:42.968 - 10:47:28 AM; Discusses an amendment for increased disclosure on lobbyist registrations and notifications regarding potential illegal contributions from companies, including foreign entities, to state representatives. Emphasizes that the legislation targets any foreign country, not just China, and clarifies that HB 648 is not an early bill.
HB548: Information Only 00:50:05.004 - 10:48:51 AM; Educates the committee on fiscal notes (FN) and early bills, explaining that FN relates to financial analysis, while early bills involve fines, penalties, appropriations, or taxes, routing them to specific committees like Criminal Justice, Finance, or Ways and Means.
HB548: Information Only 00:51:52.018 - 10:50:38 AM; Provides a refresher on HB 548, originating from concerns over hospital contract impasses. Outlines provisions for public forums for impacted consumers and reforms to notifications when providers go out-of-network. References the St. Joseph's and Anthem dispute as a recent example, noting similar issues with multiple hospitals and carriers.
HB548: Information Only 00:53:00.194 - 10:51:46 AM; Inquires about the bill's fiscal note status, which was withdrawn as the Insurance Department determined no added costs for hosting public forums using existing resources. Confirms it remains an early bill.
HB548: Information Only 00:54:17.662 - 10:53:03 AM; Explains current notification responsibilities of carriers and concerns over biased materials in notices that pressure parties in disputes. Proposes two options: department approval of carrier notifications or use of a standardized department template to ensure neutral, essential information for consumers.
HB548: Information Only 00:55:25.622 - 10:54:11 AM; Reviews Anthem's notification post-event, finding it mostly straightforward with minor ambiguous content. Stresses not basing policy on single examples and draws analogy to premium non-payment notices, suggesting standardized department notifications for out-of-network issues.
HB548: Information Only 00:56:39.342 - 10:55:25 AM; Clarifies that existing protections include network adequacy reviews, in-network coverage for out-of-network claims during transitions, 60-day continuation of care (90 days for certain conditions like pregnancy), and notifications of provider changes. Emphasizes the bill's role in reviewing notice language to exclude contractual disputes and focus on consumer needs.
HB548: Information Only 00:57:41.062 - 10:56:27 AM; Acknowledges the need for rulemaking authority in the bill rather than prescriptive text, agreeing to amend for flexibility in notifications, including continuity of care details.
HB548: Information Only 01:00:34.942 - 10:59:20 AM; Presents a sample Anthem notification, noting it covers most elements but lacks specifics like pregnancy extensions. Reviews it for inflammatory content and suggests more detailed guidance on continuity without overwhelming length.
HB548: Information Only 01:01:34.062 - 11:00:20 AM; Confirms review would ensure inclusion of critical consumer information like 60/90-day continuity provisions for ongoing treatments, such as surgeries.
HB548: Oppose 01:02:32.183 - 11:01:18 AM; Clarifies the sample as a template with additional communications like microsites in specific cases. Opposes the bill as unnecessary and problematic, arguing it increases management of notices and could apply broadly to all provider terminations, not just major disputes. Suggests tying to a 1,000-member threshold and notes potential delays in notifications due to department back-and-forth.
HB548: Information Only 01:03:44.731 - 11:02:30 AM; Agrees to simplify the bill via rulemaking for notifications, avoiding prescriptive statute to allow flexibility. Plans to draft an amendment focusing on rulemaking authority.
HB358: Support 01:15:04.600 - 11:13:50 AM; Presents an amendment based on the Senate version, incorporating analysis of other states' laws, testimony from prior hearing, and industry feedback to position New Hampshire as a leader in digital assets. Introduces key definition of 'new customer' (identity verified less than 5 days prior) enabling protections like 72-hour clawback windows for transactions, $3,000 transaction limits, inflation adjustments, fraud warnings, and disclosures.
HB358: Information Only 01:16:09.800 - 11:14:55 AM; Seeks clarification on new customer protections, including verification at kiosks and waiting periods for transactions.
HB358: Information Only 01:17:09.840 - 11:15:55 AM; Explains that new customers can make multiple transactions within 5 days, each with a 72-hour refund option. Notes operators can set limits, and highlights burdens like market volatility during holds but emphasizes protections for naive users.
HB358: Information Only 01:22:30.457 - 11:21:16 AM; Questions the need for inflation adjustment on the $3,000 limit and suggests a small initial transaction (Satoshi test) for verification, similar to bank linking.
HB358: Information Only 01:23:39.257 - 11:22:25 AM; Defends inflation adjustment for long-term relevance and explains logistical issues with Satoshi test due to blockchain fees and congestion, deeming it an undue burden currently.
HB358: Information Only 01:24:34.097 - 11:23:20 AM; Shares personal experience with scams involving convincing victims to withdraw cash and deposit elsewhere, questioning if the bill addresses non-kiosk scenarios.
HB358: Information Only 01:25:54.147 - 11:24:40 AM; Discusses the recent law on teller verification and emphasizes the need for a $3,000 cap on new customer transactions to prevent scams. Explains the identity verification process at kiosks, including driver's license photos and a five-day clock for new customers. Questions the $3,000 cap amount, noting it might be high and suggesting a lower cap or waiting period to better protect vulnerable new users from multiple transactions across machines.
HB358: Information Only 01:26:57.433 - 11:25:43 AM; Expresses concern over the $3,000 cap allowing potential scams up to $27,000 across nine machines. Suggests lowering the cap to $500 or $1,000 for the first five days to limit damage, arguing it wouldn't burden companies seeking new customers. References the Senate bill's $2,000 cap and proposes considering total cap over five days rather than per transaction. Mentions fraud warnings and blockchain analytics as additional tools.
HB358: Information Only 01:30:30.553 - 11:29:16 AM; Questions statistics on legitimate kiosk transactions in New Hampshire over the last three years, noting testimony focused on scams. Argues scammers will adapt to any rules and suggests banning the machines to protect elderly victims, as rules won't help.
HB358: Information Only 01:31:45.030 - 11:30:31 AM; Lacks specific New Hampshire data but notes providers would remove machines if only used for illegal transactions. Explains high fees due to operational costs like hardware, rent, armored trucks, and selling cash to the Federal Reserve. Cites industry data showing 1.5% fraud rate but distrusts unverified statistics. Emphasizes interest in New Hampshire-specific data for constituents.
HB358: Oppose 01:33:59.310 - 11:32:45 AM; Suggests banning kiosks entirely due to scam impacts on elderly in places like Nashua, arguing scammers are smarter and will circumvent rules.
HB358: Information Only 01:35:08.590 - 11:33:54 AM; Highlights amendment sections: data privacy limits, preemption clause to prevent local regulatory patchwork, and remedies under consumer protection statute. Refers to 50-state landscape chart, opposing fee caps to let market decide, notes 2017 exemption from money transmitter laws, and explains refund period after new customer phase.
HB358: Information Only 01:38:20.483 - 11:37:06 AM; Inquires about states like Vermont, Massachusetts, California not listed in the chart and whether they have kiosks.
HB358: Support 01:39:20.471 - 11:38:06 AM; Describes onboarding process: cameras for photos and ID, third-party verification via text with biometrics. Explains wallet verification using blockchain analytics to flag high-risk wallets and pinning to prevent sharing. Notes 72-hour hold as cooling-off period for new customers, full refund available. Cites 1-2% scam rate from internal and analytics data. Defends legitimate uses: convenience for cash users, unbanked/underbanked, privacy-conscious individuals avoiding online exchanges. Compares to airport currency exchanges. Addresses two-way machines being more expensive with low sell demand. Emphasizes self-custody benefits over exchanges.
HB358: Information Only 01:44:02.782 - 11:42:48 AM; Questions compelling reasons for using kiosks over cheaper home methods, suggesting mandate for cash-only and two-way machines for better regulation.
HB358: Support 01:51:08.813 - 11:49:54 AM; Supports SB 482 as passed yesterday but views this amendment as weaker yet better than nothing. Suggests $3,000 cap apply to total over five-day new customer period, align refund request to five days for consistency. Addresses data privacy tensions with minimization under 507-H, suggesting refinements to avoid disincentivizing verification. Notes lack of New Hampshire data; clarifies Iowa's 95% fraud from subpoena investigation, not study. Recommends voluntary or compelled data collection via licensing. Warns of resource needs for complaint handling.
HB358: Support 02:09:49.195 - 12:08:35 PM; Notes evolution from 2013 prototype without verification to current tools like tracking and analytics. Good actors adapt to prevent fraud; bad actors could use old tech illegally. Supports bill as baseline for operators.
SB444: Support 03:31:46.587 - 1:30:32 PM; Introduces SB 444, emphasizing protection of animals from unnecessary suffering in testing cosmetics, cleaners, pesticides, chemicals. Notes alternatives are efficient and cost-effective; bill requires alternatives only when available, exempts biomedical/university research and required state/federal testing.
SB444: Support 03:32:41.787 - 1:31:27 PM; Explains bill requires non-animal methods when available/reliable for products like cleaners, cosmetics, drugs, pesticides, chemicals; mandates reporting. Highlights alternatives' accuracy over outdated animal tests (90% drug failure rate); describes cruelty in animal testing. Aligns with states like VA, NJ, NY, CA and federal shifts. Addresses limited NH data (few USDA facilities, universities exempt); reporting needed to identify impacts. Urges ought to pass for science, health, animal protection, biotech investment.
SB487: Information Only 04:01:28.131 - 2:00:14 PM; Introduces Senate Bill 487 on behalf of Senator Ennis. Explains that the bill allows credit union members to vote on compensating board members. Introduced at the request of the Cooperative Credit Union Association and other NH credit unions. Notes that it would align NH with 16 other states. Emphasizes it is enabling legislation, not mandatory.
SB487: Information Only 04:03:13.828 - 2:01:59 PM; Provides neutral testimony from the Banking Department, which drafted the bill at the Credit Union Association's request. Informs that approximately 20 states permit credit union board compensation in various forms, and federally chartered credit unions can compensate one board member. Suggests it may help NH credit unions recruit board members competitively. Answers questions about a previous version of the bill that failed due to a non-germane amendment.
SB487: Support 04:08:54.799 - 2:07:40 PM; Testifies in support of SB 487, highlighting credit unions' role in serving over 800,000 members and contributing to the local economy, including philanthropy like supporting Make-A-Wish NH. Argues the bill aligns NH with regional states like CT and RI, addressing increased board responsibilities. Stresses it is enabling legislation, allowing democratic member votes on optional compensation to improve governance without mandating it. Notes modest compensation compared to other institutions helps attract talent amid competitive challenges like cybersecurity.
SB487: Support 04:12:11.465 - 2:10:57 PM; Supports the bill by discussing the growing complexity of running credit unions, including cybersecurity, asset liability management, and regulatory compliance. Emphasizes the need for qualified board members to provide oversight, given extensive time commitments like monthly meetings, committee work, and preparation. Notes St. Mary's Bank as the oldest credit union in the US and stresses compensation to attract and retain talent from diverse regions, ensuring strong community representation and governance. Clarifies credit unions are not-for-profit (501c14, not 501c3) and pay various taxes and fees.
SB525: Information Only 04:26:12.338 - 2:24:58 PM; James Thiebaud introduced Senate Bill 525, explaining the background of the Business Finance Authority (BFA), established in 1992 to help companies start and grow in New Hampshire. He highlighted successful projects like partnerships with Sig Sauer, BAE Systems, New Balance, and others that created jobs and tax base without state subsidies. The bill proposes increasing the statutory cap on BFA's contingent credit limit, which is not indexed to inflation and requires legislative increases. This limit guarantees BFA's bonds, but the state has never paid out. The increase is needed due to rising costs and larger projects to attract major employers, with no impact on bond ratings as per the state treasurer.
SB525: Support 04:29:05.658 - 2:27:51 PM; James Q. Wallace supported SB 525, noting its familiarity as similar bills have passed before, including a recent House version (HB 1042) amended to $450 million. He explained the cap increase is driven by higher inflation in construction costs (80%+ increase) and larger projects (e.g., $70 million for New Balance vs. previous $17-20 million), requiring only 4-5 more projects. A cap is necessary for bond ratings, but indexing to inflation could prevent frequent requests. In Q&A, he addressed the rapid increase from $200 million, attributing it to program growth and economic success, and briefly discussed a Bitcoin-backed bond as an innovative financing tool for digital asset companies, rating BA2, enabling access to capital markets.
SB607: Information Only 04:39:03.838 - 2:37:49 PM; James Thiebaud introduced Senate Bill 607, noting 64,000 uninsured in New Hampshire in 2024, likely increasing due to premium hikes. The bill updates short-term health plan limits to 12 months initial duration and up to 36 months total with renewals, matching 29 other states. These plans serve as affordable bridges for those between jobs, starting businesses, or priced out of comprehensive coverage, with lower premiums but limited benefits and higher deductibles. Disclosure language highlights tradeoffs, while comprehensive options remain available.
SB607: Support 04:41:28.045 - 2:40:14 PM; John Reynolds supported SB 607, representing 1,700 small businesses where health costs are a major issue for attracting workers and owners' coverage. Many owners (late 40s-early 60s) lack affordable options, risking business viability. With 64,000 uninsured and 15-20% premium increases, short-term plans provide a bridge. Current NH limits (6 months, no renewal) are outdated post-ACA, leaving gaps outside open enrollment. He illustrated affordability: short-term plans cost $167-$225/month for high deductibles vs. $494+ for ACA bronze/silver. Plans involve medical underwriting (e.g., via UnitedHealth/Golden Rule), subject to state disclosures and mandates. In Q&A, he confirmed renewals may involve re-underwriting, emphasizing plans as catastrophic coverage to prevent financial ruin and uncompensated care.