THEA-~-~RNJ~Y GENERAL OFTEXAS HonombleKarvfnHall Catmissioner, Fire I~urance Division Auatln, Texss Dear Sir: Attention: Mr. Qfrard KWeg, Super- visor, Age&a Lfcenasa. Opinion Bo. O-2565 Rer Should the ImaranceDeparimid of Texas charge Bmi Hampshire Cmlpaniee a fee of $2. for all soliciting agenta operating out of recording agencies whfah have been appointed by said New Hmp- shire ccmpanies? Your recent requeet for m opinion of thla Department, by letter dated July 31, in which you submitted the above question, Is predicated upon the f011owfng fnfozmation taken thereframt *Aeoording to information which Thea offfee has been able to obtain frm the @cximfasioner of Immranee of New Hampshdrs, it wouhi appear that for allworking purposes, the New Ham shepe system is 'fdentfealwith that of Kansas and that the z-&l& furnhhed ua by your Department relative to the Km&a matter would a.Uo apply to eompsrnfes domiefled in Hew Hampshire.: The outstanding difference in the proceQurc followtd 118 these two state8 ia Me faot t&t in Kansas, a fee is charged for each imifvfdualj wherese, in Hew Hampshire, a fee fs charged for the ffrm m a whole; however, from nmerom atatamntamade by the Camnfesfoner of Inmaranbe of Rev Hampshire, it would appear that cad sub-agent workfng for an agency must have a sepsrate license f"or which a $2.00 fee fa charged each eompmy he represents. St ia 0~3" belief that the,esntroversy arises out of the fad that the ageney system of Texas differs 80 greatly from that of New Hmp8hire. %an all availablla data, it appears that the iGwHampshfre sgatem is W&is Before an indfvfaualmay eolicft or write bue- iness, a lieems mast be obtained for him from the Ibv Hampshire Xnmranoe Departient ba the inmzmxe company. A fei? of $2.00 fs charged for this Picenae. In an agency In which more than one person ccmpr~es the ffrm and Sn which nmerous sub-agents Honorable Marvin Hall, Page 2 (O-2585) are “.pl.oyed, the aaae type of license Is held by the firm and eaoh sub-agent. The same fee ie charged, and the agents ownot produo bwinese for any ocmpany for whioh t&y have not been properly lloenaetl. In Texas, on the other hand, a reoording ageaoy irr appointed for variouf~ ocmpauler. The a@tIOY in tUrn, appointtl VWi0u6 EmlioitoX’a, ad rlnoe Texan law rrwirrr curly one of the oompaaler in the agenoy’r offioe to join in ‘#IO appolntamt, It lo quite probable that moot of the oomp~fe~ reprerented by the reoording agenoy have no lamfledge of the mnuber or Identity of the solloltorfa working out of their agenoy’s offioej however, any one of I&I solioi- tom lioeneed to repPesent the recording agency haa authority to produce business whioh may be placed by the agenoy with any of the ompmfes for which it ia lioenatd. *Our oontentlm in the premirea Is this: that In-oh am a Texrs oanpany lmust pay $2.00 to the DepartPent of Inanrance of llew Hampshire for every agenoy and sub-agent hold- autbor- ity’in the State of New Hapehire to produce business for eald Texao oc@any, this Department mu&, in order to properly etioroe the Retaliatory Law, Art. 4758, exact a simmilar fee again& a Hew Hampshire sompany dofng business in Texas for all agencies ana solicitors holding authority fn thfs state to prodlice buaineaa faa this state for said New Hanpshfre company. For the purpose of applying thie law, it weuld aseemto ua *at a solfcftor In Texas is t&e came a a eubagent i~lew Hampshire.* Aoeepting the infolmatfpn above quoted from your letter ao correct, that eaoh sub-agent working for a Hew Hampshfre agenoy is aaaaessed a $2. lieenaa fee charged for each sompany he repTeeent8, wd see no reason why your a&ion in applyfng the retaliatory ssaessment on the number of solfoftora in Texas representing the New Hampshire ccapmy and working out of fte Texas reaordfng agency, is not proper. For the purpose of ap- plying the retaliatory law, there is no material diatinotion b&seen a sub-agent in New Hampshire and a aolfcitor in Texas. And tither, the faot that the agent’s U@?JXWJfee is charged for the agency and not each individual ccmpoaing the agency does not concern the questian here, invol- ving *solicitors* or “sub-agents” working out of and produoing business through such agenotes. The feeuence of licenses in this respect by the Commission of Insurance in the State of Bew Hampshire is similar to those issued In Texas0 Section 3, Article 5062a, Vernon’s C~ivil Statutes of Texas, prevfdea in part ae followar * D 0 0 The board is authorized to issue licenses to fixma or to individuala engagbg M partiers in the insurance busfsess provided the in-e8 of all peraone interoated in auch firm are nuned fi the lfcenae, and providea, further, that all lioenaed agents must be residents of Texafi . . . .* -i Honorable MuMn Hall, Page 3 (O-2585) Seotion 2, Article 5062a, Vernon"s Civil Statutes, defines the term *solloitor" (LBfollowsi *By the term p6011pitor~ is meant a pemion off4olng with, end sd in, rolioitlng lnmrmos on behalf of a Iaoal Reoordlng &ant, who doer not rQn ard exeoute policies of inmranot, and who does not maintalxn ocmpany reoords of such tranMc.t1ons. e e e* 1twfl.l be noted that Section 1 of safd stat&e epeeffioalQ ela.seif%es "aolicftors' a~ "insurance agenta.* While the above quoted Section 2 of the Act lfmfta the autiorfty 0:P solfoftors in some respects, their acts in eolfeftfng cm produnzing Insurance business, au& as befng %a~m0a with application 'ble4nk5, proourfug s%(plaii;ures to same, oolleotlng and transmitting premkx@ and deifvering policies &nd receipts are those generally engaged in by Weub-agenta, * "speefal' agenta, OP by whatever n&me they may be called. In ~on~lu~fon, we think our opfnfon O-1997 applicable to the question here presented and it 1s o-tar further opinion that your departamnt is authorized to ffih~pge New Haxkpshtis eamparniea a fee of $2. for all eolfoftfng agents ha9ding adharity to solfaft business for said foreign eaupanfes and operating cmt or Texas recording argenefas whfeh have been appointed by said Bear Hanip~hfre ecmpanies. Yours very trdy A'PB3YGEIiERALOFTEXAS B,? /a/ Wm. Jo B, King Wm. JT, R. King Assfatant APPROVED AlJG 21, 1940 AFPROVED OPIIBIOM /8/ Grayer Sellera col4lmTzE BY /8/ Rg&g. FIRST ASSISTANTATPOFUDX GENERAL c- WRKa~-ds