None of the FSC's 21 recommendations would change your premium before your next renewal
Source: FSC, Our Prosperity Agenda: the 2026 Election Manifesto
The insurance industry's election manifesto contains five insurance-specific asks. Two would mechanically move a number on a policy, and both need legislation. We read all 21 and sorted them by what they would actually do.
By Henry Smith · Regulation · 2026-08-12
Five of the Financial Services Council's 21 election recommendations are insurance-specific. Two of them would mechanically change a number on a health or life policy, and both require legislation that does not exist. The other three change how insurance is described in policy documents, not what it costs. None of the 21 can move a premium before your next renewal.
What the FSC published, and who published it
On 29 July 2026 the FSC set out its 2026 Election Manifesto, "The Prosperity Agenda: Securing New Zealand's Wellbeing and Economic Future", containing 21 recommendations across three areas: strengthening the system, building prosperity, and protecting prosperity (FSC, 29 July 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026). The manifesto itself sets a national ambition of "one trillion dollars invested in retirement savings by 2040", supported by combined employer and employee KiwiSaver contributions "to reach 12 per cent" by 2032 (FSC, Election Manifesto 2026, July 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026).
The FSC is an industry association and this is a lobbying document. Its own manifesto describes its "100+ members" as including "life, health, disability and income insurers, KiwiSaver and investment providers, workplace savings schemes, professional services firms and financial technology companies", who "manage more than $140 billion in funds and pay $2.8 billion in life and health insurance claims each year" (same source). Every recommendation below was written by the industry that would be paid under it. That does not make any of them wrong, and several are unarguably in a consumer's interest. It does mean they are advocacy and should be read alongside whatever the counter-argument is.
Separately, on 12 August 2026 the FSC published Curia polling, commissioned by it and conducted between 1 and 4 August 2026 with 1,000 respondents, in which "91% of Kiwis say it is important that our major political parties work together on a long-term retirement savings strategy", made up of 71% saying very important and 20% fairly important (FSC, 12 August 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026). That polling was released two weeks after the manifesto launch and is not part of the manifesto document.
Which recommendations could change what you pay
The manifesto's Protecting Prosperity section holds the five insurance-specific asks: build stronger public-private healthcare partnerships (17), remove FBT on employer-provided health and life insurance (18), improve access to Pharmac negotiated pricing (19), better integrate insurance into retirement planning (20), and recognise life and health insurance as essential financial infrastructure (21). A sixth item sits in Strengthening the System: recommendation 4 asks for the Financial Markets Conduct Amendment Bill to be passed "including the removal of Managed Investment Schemes (MIS), life insurers and health insurers from the Climate-related Disclosures (CRD) regime" (FSC, Election Manifesto 2026, July 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026).
The table below is our assessment of what each would mechanically do, and to what.
| Recommendation | What it would mechanically change | What has to happen first |
|---|---|---|
| 18. Remove FBT on employer-provided health and life insurance | Cuts the employer's tax on the premium by 49.25% of its value under the pooled rate, up to 63.93% at the single rate. Changes the employer's cost, not the premium | Tax legislation. Inland Revenue has advised an exemption would erode the personal income tax base |
| 19. Insurer access to Pharmac negotiated pricing | Lowers the drug cost inside a non-Pharmac medicines benefit, the one health benefit whose underlying cost is least constrained | A purchasing and legislative change; the manifesto sets out no mechanism |
| 17. Public-private care pathways and co-funded models | Changes where a procedure happens and who pays for which part; could change a co-payment | Contracts between insurers and Health New Zealand; no legislation named |
| 4. Remove life and health insurers from climate reporting | Removes $261,500 to $600,000 a year of compliance cost per insurer, on officials' estimate | An Amendment Paper to a Bill already before the House. The FMA is not enforcing in the meantime |
| 20. Better integrate insurance into retirement planning | Nothing on its own. It asks government to "explore opportunities" | A policy work programme |
| 21. Recognise insurance as essential financial infrastructure | Nothing directly. It is a framing ask that would shape later policy | Nothing specific |
Our assessment, from the FSC's Election Manifesto 2026 (July 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026). The FBT rates are Inland Revenue's published 2026-year rates; the compliance cost estimate is from the Cabinet paper on removing health and life insurers from the CRD regime, both retrieved 20 August 2026.
Sort that by nearness and one item separates from the rest. The climate reporting change is already in a Bill before the House, and the FMA has been taking a no action approach to life and health insurer climate statements since 19 June 2026 (FMA, 18 June 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026). It is the only recommendation on the list that has already changed an insurer's cost base. It is also, on our arithmetic, worth at most $3.86 a year to a health-insured New Zealander even at complete pass-through, which we set out in our piece on the climate reporting exit.
The FBT ask is the one with the largest per-household number and the longest path. Removing FBT would be worth 49.25 cents in the dollar of premium under the flat pooled rate that most group schemes can use, and 63.93 cents at the single rate, which is the arithmetic we work through in our piece on the NZIER modelling. Against that, a Ministry of Health aide-memoire records that Treasury and Inland Revenue do not support FBT changes for private health insurance, with Inland Revenue advising an exemption would "materially erode the integrity of the broad personal income tax base and create equity concerns", and Budget 2026's FBT changes addressed motor vehicle rules and left insurance premiums untouched (Insurance Business NZ, 12 August 2026, retrieved 20 August 2026).
The Pharmac ask is the most interesting and the least developed. Non-Pharmac medicines cover is the benefit inside a New Zealand health policy whose cost is hardest to bound, because it prices at whatever the supplier charges. Access to nationally negotiated pricing would move that cost directly. The manifesto devotes 32 words to it and names no mechanism, no agency and no timeframe.
What the other 15 recommendations do
They are about savings and the advice market, not about premiums. Twelve sit in Building Prosperity: universal enrolment from 1 July 2028, contributions rising to 12% by 2032, a lower 2% employee rate for people earning below a threshold such as $60,000, a hardship pathway, phasing out total remuneration structures, auto-enrolment at birth with a one-off government contribution of $1,000 to $2,000, tax parity for self-employed contributions, employer and government contributions through the first 26 weeks of paid parental leave, decoupling KiwiSaver access from the NZ Super age, a decumulation framework, recognition of workplace savings schemes, and deeper capital markets. Four sit in Strengthening the System: better access to advice, lifelong financial capability, a dedicated ministerial portfolio for financial services, and a regulatory system that prioritises stability, proportionality and a competitiveness test (same source).
Several of those would change a pay packet. Phasing out total remuneration arrangements would stop an employer KiwiSaver contribution being absorbed into a stated total salary. Contributions rising to 12% would take more out of your pay and put more into your fund. None of them touch an insurance premium.
What it means for your cover
Budget on the basis that nothing here happens in time to matter to your next renewal, because none of it can. Every recommendation with a price effect needs either legislation or a commercial agreement that has not been made.
If you hold cover through an employer, the FBT recommendation is the one to watch, and the thing to watch for is not an announcement by the FSC but a tax bill. If you hold health cover with a non-Pharmac medicines benefit, the Pharmac recommendation is the one that would move your benefit's underlying cost most, and there is currently no mechanism attached to it.
The honest limits
We read the manifesto document itself, both FSC blog posts and the polling release. We did not speak to the FSC and we were not briefed.
The mechanical effects in the table are our assessment, not the FSC's claims and not anyone's forecast. The manifesto does not attach cost estimates, timeframes or implementation mechanisms to individual recommendations, so we could not test any of them against a published number supplied by the FSC.
We have deliberately not assessed any political party's position, likelihood of adoption, or the merits of any recommendation as policy. Where a government agency has published a contrary view, we have quoted it and named the source.
One figure appears twice in FSC material with different meanings and is easy to conflate: the manifesto foreword says the financial services sector "manages over $340 billion in savings and investments", while the About section says FSC members specifically "manage more than $140 billion in funds". The first is the sector, the second is the association's membership.
Sources
- FSC, Our Prosperity Agenda
- FSC, Election Manifesto 2026: The Prosperity Agenda
- FSC, Launching our 2026 Election Manifesto
- FSC, Kiwis want a long-term plan for KiwiSaver
- Inland Revenue, Calculation options and rates for fringe benefit tax
- Cabinet paper, Removal of Health and Life Insurers from the Climate-Related Disclosures Regime
- FMA, No action on climate reporting obligations for health and life insurers
- Insurance Business NZ, Group insurance FBT proposal faces documented government opposition
Talk to a licensed adviser about what this means for you · free, no obligation.
Explore related pages: Life Insurance, Income Protection, Health Insurance, Trauma Insurance, For Brokers.