Under O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(8)(A), unfair discrimination in life insurance occurs when an insurer charges different rates to individuals who are:

Why A is correct

O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(8)(A) sets the life insurance test: individuals of the same class, the same amount of insurance, and an equal expectation of life must be charged the same rates. The three-part standard ties price to actuarial risk, so differences in class, coverage amount, or life expectancy justify rate differences, while differences among actuarially identical lives do not — those amount to unfair discrimination the Insurance Commissioner can stop.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) Different classes may lawfully carry different rates; the statute requires equal treatment only within a class.
• C) Smokers and nonsmokers have different expectations of life, so different rates are actuarially justified and lawful.
• D) Different ages produce different expectations of life, so age-based rate differences are lawful under the statute.

Memory hook

Same class, same amount, same life expectancy — same price.

Why A is correct

Under O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(8)(A), a life insurer may not discriminate between applicants of the same class and the same amount of insurance and an equal expectation of life. Different treatment is permissible only where one of those equalizers is absent — different class, different amount, or different expectation of life — which is how actuarially sound underwriting remains lawful while arbitrary differentiation does not.

Why the other options are wrong

• B) An underwriting manual cannot override statute; distinctions must rest on the class, amount, and expectation-of-life criteria of O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(8)(A).
• C) There is no advance-approval mechanism for premium differentials; lawfulness depends on actuarial criteria, not on a Commissioner waiver.
• D) Identical premiums for everyone is not the rule — Georgia permits differentiation between applicants who differ in class, amount, or expectation of life.

Memory hook

Same class, same amount, same life span — same price.

Why B is correct

Under O.C.G.A. § 33-6-4(b)(8)(A)(i), the prohibition on unfair discrimination in life insurance rates applies between individuals of the same class, the same policy amount, and equal expectation of life. Here the amounts of insurance differ, so one of the three equalizers is missing and actuarially sound rate differentiation between the two applicants is lawful.

Why the other options are wrong

• A) The statute does not demand identical rates for everyone in a class; differences become lawful whenever class, amount, or expectation of life is not equal.
• C) There is no advance-approval mechanism for life rate schedules; lawfulness rests on the statutory equalizers, not on a Commissioner waiver.
• D) County of residence is not a lawful basis for discrimination between applicants of the same class and expectation of life; the justification here is the differing amount of insurance.

Memory hook

Different coverage amounts break the tie — CAL-E must fully match before rates must match.