Michigan Compiled Laws

Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2066 (2026)

Rebates and illegal inducements prohibited; violation; revocation of license or certificate; penalties.

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MI-LEGlegislature.mi.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

THE INSURANCE CODE OF 1956

Act 218 of 1956

500.2066 Rebates and illegal inducements prohibited; violation; revocation of license or certificate; penalties.

Sec. 2066.

(1) No insurer, by itself or any other party, and no insurance agent or solicitor, personally or by any other party, transacting any kind of insurance business shall offer, promise, allow, give, set off or pay, directly or indirectly, any rebate of, or part of, the premium payable on the policy or on any policy, or agent's commission thereon, or earnings, profit, dividends or other benefit founded, arising, accruing or to accrue thereon, or therefrom, or any other valuable consideration or inducement to or for insurance, on any risk in this state now or hereafter to be written, which is not specified in the contract of insurance; nor shall any such insurer, agent or solicitor, personally or otherwise, offer, promise, give, sell, or purchase any stocks, bonds, securities or any dividend or profits accruing or to accrue thereon, or other thing of value whatsoever as inducement to insurance or in connection therewith which is not specified in the policy contract.

(2) Upon satisfactory evidence of the violation of this section by any insurer, its officers, solicitors or agents, or any insurance broker, the commissioner shall revoke the license or certificate of authority of such offending insurer, its officers, solicitors or agents, after following the procedures provided for in section 2068; and no license or certificate of authority shall be issued to such insurer, officers, agents, solicitors or brokers, within 1 year from the date of such revocation.

(3) Violations of this section shall also be subject to the penalties provided for in section 2069.

History: 1956, Act 218, Eff. Jan. 1, 1957

PopularName Notes:

Act 218

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1987–2019 · leading case: Lawyers Title Ins. v. Chicago Title Ins., 409 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lawyers Title Ins. v. Chicago Title Ins., 409 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “Therein, she reversed the hearing officer’s decision only insofar as he concluded that respondents had violated MCL 500.2066; MSA 24.12066. Moreover, the Insurance Commissioner concluded that respondents, other than Lawyers Title, violated MCL 500.”

Katt v. Ins. Bureau, 505 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “12024, MCL 500.2066(1); MSA 24.12066(1), and MCL 500.”

Stephen E Slaga v. Total Health Care Inc (Mich. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “” Specifically, plaintiff alleges that the bonus system he was asked to carry out violated MCL 500.2066, and that he was discharged for refusing to participate further in that system.”

N. Ins. Co. of New York v. InsurAmeriCorp, Inc., 195 F. Supp. 2d 965 (W.D. Mich. 2002). “§ 500.2066(1) (italics added). Zurich argues that the explicit language of the statute prohibits IAC from taking a set-off for premium payments.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2066(1) — 3 cases

Katt v. Ins. Bureau, 505 N.W.2d 37 (Mich. Ct. App. 1993). “12024, MCL 500.2066(1); MSA 24.12066(1), and MCL 500.”

Lawyers Title Ins. v. Chicago Title Ins., 409 N.W.2d 774 (Mich. Ct. App. 1987). “Therein, she reversed the hearing officer’s decision only insofar as he concluded that respondents had violated MCL 500.2066; MSA 24.12066. Moreover, the Insurance Commissioner concluded that respondents, other than Lawyers Title, violated MCL 500.”

— Mich. Comp. Laws § 500.2066(2) — 1 case

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.