U.S. Code » Title 5 » Part PART III— EMPLOYEES › Subpart Subpart G— Insurance and Annuities › Chapter CHAPTER 90— LONG-TERM CARE INSURANCE

5 U.S.C. § 9005

Preemption

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 5 CasesGoogle Scholar
(a)Contractual Provisions.—The terms of any contract under this chapter which relate to the nature, provision, or extent of coverage or benefits (including payments with respect to benefits) shall supersede and preempt any State or local law, or any regulation issued thereunder, which relates to long-term care insurance or contracts.(b)Premiums.—(1)In general.—No tax, fee, or other monetary payment may be imposed or collected, directly or indirectly, by any State, the District of Columbia, or the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, or by any political subdivision or other governmental authority thereof, on, or with respect to, any premium paid for an insurance policy under this chapter.(2)Rule of construction.—Paragraph (1) shall not be construed to exempt any company or other entity issuing a policy of insurance under this chapter from the imposition, payment, or collection of a tax, fee, or other monetary payment on the net income or profit accruing to or realized by such entity from business conducted under this chapter, if that tax, fee, or payment is applicable to a broad range of business activity.(Added Pub. L. 106–265, title I, § 1002(a), Sept. 19, 2000, 114 Stat. 768; amended Pub. L. 107–104, § 2, Dec. 27, 2001, 115 Stat. 1001.)Editorial NotesAmendments

2001—Pub. L. 107–104 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), inserted heading, and added subsec. (b).

Statutory Notes and Related SubsidiariesEffective Date of 2001 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 107–104 effective as if included in the enactment of section 1002 of Pub. L. 106–265, see section 3 of Pub. L. 107–104, set out as a note under section 9001 of this title.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2007–2007 · leading case: Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Russell D. Conger, 474 F.3d 258 (6th Cir. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Russell D. Conger, 474 F.3d 258 (6th Cir. 2007). “5 U.S.C. § 9005 (a). In the related arena of insurance plans governed by ERISA, which also broadly preempts state law, we have held that the federal common law determines the effect of a misrepresentation or omission in the insured’s application for insurance.”
Metro Life Ins Co v. Conger (6th Cir. 2007). “5 U.S.C. § 9005 (a). In the related arena of insurance plans governed by ERISA, which also broadly preempts state law, we have held that the federal common law determines the effect of a misrepresentation or omission in the insured’s application for insurance.”
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.