Work on TasInsure, Tasmania’s proposed state-owned insurer, is moving into the design and implementation phase, with the consultation closed and an external adviser appointed, as industry bodies set out their expectations and concerns about the scheme’s structure and impact.
Public submissions on the TasInsure discussion paper and preliminary draft legislation, released in November 2025, closed on Jan. 9, 2026. The Tasmanian government says it received 18 submissions and has engaged financial services and insurance specialist John Trowbridge to advise on operating arrangements and governance.
Premier Jeremy Rockliff has framed the proposal in the context of recent natural catastrophe activity and ongoing affordability pressures in the Australian general insurance market. “Cyclone Koji has battered northern Queensland, fire has ravaged Victoria, and we are already seeing peak insurance bodies warn that this will impact premiums. We know the insurance market is broken, and this again highlights the need for a Tasmanian solution. For too long, Tasmanians have been underinsured, unable to get insurance or paying the price of disasters on the mainland,” Rockliff said. According to the government, TasInsure would operate on a not-for-profit basis, with indicative savings of about $250 a year per household and “thousands per year” for small businesses. Rockliff has previously said the model is designed to benefit sectors such as cafes, restaurants, wineries, breweries, and distilleries through lower insurance costs and more predictable cover.
The TasInsure discussion paper and draft bill describe the entity as a locally owned insurer “built for Tasmanians", with stated objectives around affordability and access. Consultation responses have focused on how the scheme would interact with the existing private market, which lines it might write, and what regulatory settings would apply. According to Rockliff, Trowbridge “has hit the ground running, with work already underway on options for operating arrangements.” The advisory work covers TasInsure’s development, structure, and governance, as well as potential product classes, including whether workers’ compensation would be brought within scope. For market participants, key design questions include whether TasInsure will function as a broad competitor to private insurers, a facility for specific segments such as high-risk property, or a last-resort mechanism targeted at clearly defined gaps.
The National Insurance Brokers Association (NIBA) has lodged a submission addressing consumer outcomes, distribution, scheme design, and regulatory safeguards. While NIBA acknowledges the “genuine affordability pressures” behind the proposal, it argues that neither the discussion paper nor the draft bill sets out how Tasmanian consumers purchasing TasInsure products would access the broking profession. The association characterises this as a significant omission, citing evidence that broker clients are more likely to be fully covered at claim time than direct buyers. NIBA warns that if TasInsure products are not available through brokers, small businesses, community organisations, and regional customers with complex risk profiles could lose access to advice, claims advocacy, and structured support in assessing and transferring risk.
On scheme design, NIBA recommends that TasInsure operate as a last-resort provider focusing on demonstrated market failures, rather than competing with private insurers primarily on price. It also urges caution on including workers’ compensation at this stage, pointing to financial distress seen in some other state-based statutory classes. The association has also highlighted consumer protection measures. It has recommended that TasInsure be required to join the Australian Financial Complaints Authority (AFCA) so that its policyholders have access to “free, independent external dispute resolution” similar to that available to customers of private insurers. NIBA is further seeking release of comprehensive financial modelling, including stress tests under major-loss scenarios, before the legislation is finalised.
The Insurance Council of Australia (ICA) has raised broader concerns about the TasInsure proposal, arguing that a state-run insurer would transfer a significant portion of catastrophe risk from the private sector to taxpayers. According to the ICA, “the proposal would transfer risk from a functioning private market onto the public purse, exposing Tasmanians to the cost of recovering from significant extreme weather.” It notes that the Australian private insurance market currently sources about $40 billion each year from global reinsurance markets to support post-disaster recovery.
The council points to Tasmania’s exposure to natural perils, with around 98% of the state’s land area designated as bushfire-prone, and estimates that a repeat of the 1967 Black Tuesday bushfires could result in about $4.1 billion in insured losses at today’s values. Under existing arrangements, the ICA says, those losses would be borne by the private market and its reinsurers. Referring to international experience, the ICA cites the United States National Flood Insurance Program, which has left the US federal government with more than US$20 billion in unfunded debt, even after US$16 billion was written off in 2017 to enable claim payments following a severe hurricane season.
Alongside debate on TasInsure’s design, both NIBA and the ICA are advocating for measures they say would have more immediate effects on premiums. The ICA argues that removing state taxation on insurance – in particular stamp duty and the Fire Services Levy (FSL) – would be the most direct short-term lever. It estimates that Tasmanians paid more than $150 million in insurance taxes in 2024–25 and are projected to pay $631 million over the four years from 2024–25. NIBA has similarly argued that completing FSL reform would provide “immediate, quantifiable savings” without the complexity and risk associated with a state-owned insurer.
Industry bodies are also promoting increased public investment in risk reduction and resilience, including measures to improve the physical protection of properties in areas exposed to bushfire, flood, and other climate-related perils. With submissions closed and advisory work underway, TasInsure’s eventual scope, risk appetite, and competitive stance remain unresolved. Insurers, brokers, and reinsurers continue to engage with the Tasmanian government as it refines the model, with further detail expected as draft legislation progresses.
