Joel Wood is senior vice president of government affairs for the Council of Insurance Agents & Brokers in Washington, which he joined more than 20 years ago. Mr. Wood previously was assistant vice president of government affairs for the National Association of Professional Insurance Agents and served six years as press secretary and legislative director for former Rep. Don Sundquist, R-Tenn. Mr. Wood spoke recently with Business Insurance Senior Editor Mark A. Hofmann about issues including the implementation of the National Association of Registered Agents and Brokers, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and the atmosphere on Capitol Hill. Edited excepts follow.

Q: What are the big property/casualty and risk management issues remaining before Congress?

A: No doubt, cyber risks are top of mind, and I expect to see much evolution in the coming years. Now that the Senate has passed the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act, we expect action to merge the two bills previously passed by the House into one package that can be signed into law by the end of the year. Hopefully, corporate America's ability to improve their cyber defenses will benefit from this legislation's reciprocal process of sharing of cyber threat indicators.

There also are international regulatory issues with respect to capital standards that are anxiety-inducing. We understand the risks of imposition of bank-like capital standards on insurers, but we don't think that the answer to that threat is to undermine the Federal Insurance Office. We believe the FIO is doing a very good job at representing U.S. interests at the international negotiating table. We can't have 50-plus jurisdictions all separately negotiating with other nations; we've simply got to do a better job of speaking with one voice.

Q: How has NARAB implementation progressed?

A: The White House, in consultation with the Federal Insurance Office, has chosen prospective NARAB board members, and they're undergoing rigorous background checks right now, so the names of the 13 board members are not yet public. Realistically, it's going to take more than a year for the board to establish criteria for NARAB membership and establish a funding mechanism. I'll be very disappointed if this process isn't well underway in 2017.

Q: Has the implementation of the surplus lines provisions of the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act run into any significant roadblocks? 

A: The good news is that the NRRA's promise is being realized; the overwhelming majority of multistate surplus lines placements are being transacted under one set of rules — the rules of the home state of the insured. But the implementation of the NRRA has been rocky. The Nonadmitted Insurance Multi-State Agreement continues to sputter along with only a handful of participating states. The bureaucratic costs of NIMA far exceed any imaginable benefit to the states. Also, we're working closely with the National Association of Professional Surplus Lines to change premium tax laws in a number of states that have blended rates depending on where risks are located. Under NRRA, blended rates are unnecessary; the frictional costs are way too high.

Q: What's happening with the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act?

A: We've had good conversations with Treasury officials in the past year about applicability of FATCA to non-cash-value commercial property/casualty insurance transactions. We strongly believe that such international transactions are at zero risk of being utilized for the purpose of income tax evasion, and we are asking for a carve-out of our industry sector from this law.

Fortunately, Treasury officials last year did exempt brokers from burdensome annual premium reporting requirements, but FATCA compliance still must be demonstrated for international transactions. 

Q: Has the current atmosphere on Capitol Hill hindered progress on issues of interest to risk managers, brokers and insurers?

A: Congressional dysfunction cuts both ways. When you're trying to get stuff done, it's depressingly bad. The TRIA (Terrorism Risk Insurance Act) extension is a good example. The end bill was overwhelmingly supported by both chambers of Congress on a bipartisan basis. But getting there was like a yearlong red-hot poker stuck in our eye. On the other hand, we're just as often engaged in trying to keep bad stuff from happening to our members, and dysfunction occasionally can come in handy there. On balance, it's been ugly and sometimes awful, with far too much power wielded by a small minority who would prefer 100% of nothing over 90% of something.