State RegulationsMA specificDifficulty 3/5
Which practice is distinguishable from rebating and remains permissible under Massachusetts law?
Select an option to reveal the answer and the full 3-part explanation — free, no signup.
Answer & full 3-part explanation (select an option above, or peek)
Why C is correct
M.G.L. c. 175, § 182 and M.G.L. c. 176D, § 3(8) prohibit returning value to the purchaser that the contract does not provide for, whether it comes from the premium or from the producer's pocket. Compensation paid to a licensed producer for the sale is the ordinary method of distribution and does not transfer value to the applicant, so it is not a rebate. The Massachusetts Division of Insurance treats producer commissions as lawful compensation while policing any diversion of that value to the customer as rebating.
Why the other options are wrong
- A) Refunding commission to the insured is a classic rebate under M.G.L. c. 175, § 182; the prohibition does not depend on whose pocket the value came from.
- B) Merchandise of value beyond the contract is an unlawful inducement under M.G.L. c. 175, § 182, because the ban covers anything of value, not only premium.
- D) Discounting the premium below the contract rate is a premium rebate under M.G.L. c. 176D, § 3(8), one of the core forms the statute forbids.
Memory hook
Pay the producer, fine; pay the purchaser, rebating — direction of value decides.