Call or email us anytime
(805) 484-0333
Search Guide
Today is Thursday, April 18, 2024 -

News Articles

MSF Asks Court to Stop Management Fee Transfer

  • State: Montana
  • Topic: WEST
  • - Popular with: Legal
  • -  0 shares

Montana State Fund is asking a court to declare unconstitutional legislation awaiting Gov. Steve Bullock’s signature that would impose a 3% “management fee” on the carrier’s investment portfolio, according to media reports.

Laurance Hubbard

Laurance Hubbard

The complaint filed with the District Court in Helena argues that state law prohibits legislative raids on any money the carrier collects, which includes money it has invested and income from the investments.

On the same day the complaint was filed, Judge Mike McMahan denied a request for a temporary restraining order, saying the carrier would not suffer any irreparable harm if forced to wait until a Dec. 4 hearing on a request for a preliminary injunction.

Bullock has yet to enact Senate Bill 4, a measure introduced by Sen. Ed Buttrey, R-Great Falls, which would assess a 3% management fee on the carrier’s portfolio administered by the state Board of Investments. The fee is projected to generate $29.7 million over the next two years to help close a $227 budget deficit.

The fee was part of the package of proposals the governor announced when calling a special budget session that ran for three days starting Nov. 14.

As soon as the proposal was in print, Montana State Fund President and CEO Laurence Hubbard questioned the legality of the fee. During an emergency meeting of the board of directors, Hubbard said the carrier would likely have to seek an injunction if the lawmakers passed the bill.

After the judge on Friday denied the request for a restraining order, Hubbard pointed out that the ruling did not address the actual merits of the complaint, according to a report by the Associated Press.

The governor’s office, however, took the judge’s ruling as an indication that the legal challenge will not succeed.

“We have serious concerns about the propriety of the lawsuit, and it appears the court feels the same way,” spokeswoman Ronja Abel said.

Judge McMahon’s decision questioned whether State Fund had a cause of action and said the carrier had not established “that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its claims” to warrant a restraining order.

No Comments

Log in to post a comment

Close


Do not post libelous remarks. You are solely responsible for the postings you input. By posting here you agree to hold harmless and indemnify WorkCompCentral for any damages and actions your post may cause.

Advertisements

Upcoming Events

  • May 5-8, 2024

    Risk World

    Amplify Your Impact There’s no limit to what you can achieve when you join the global risk managem …

  • May 13-15, 2024

    NCCI's Annual Insights Symposi

    Join us May 13–15, 2024, for NCCI's Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2024, the industry’s premier e …

  • May 13-14, 2024

    CSIA Announces the 2024 Annual

    The Board of Managers is excited to announce that the CSIA 2024 Annual Meeting and Educational Con …

Workers' Compensation Events

Social Media Links


WorkCompCentral
c/o Business Insurance Holdings, Inc.
PO Box 1010
Greenwich, CT 06836
(805) 484-0333