Proposed Federal Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act
Insights for Insurers Alert | 2 min read
Apr 17, 2020
On April 14, 2020, United States Representative Mike Thompson (CA-05) introduced the Business Interruption Insurance Coverage Act of 2020 (H.R. 6494). Thompson stated the bill is intended "to ensure businesses who purchase interruption insurance will not get their claims denied because of major events, such as the Coronavirus pandemic, public safety power shutoffs or evacuations." Representative Thompson also said H.R. 694 is "a solution to future forced closures to help small business owners and their employees. Forced closures shouldn't mean the end of the local businesses that power our economy." Seven Democratic co-sponsors, along with one Republican co-sponsor, are identified in the bill.
Section 2 of H.R. 6694 provides that, effective upon the date of the enactment,
each insurer that offers or makes available business interruption insurance coverage shall make available, in all of its policies providing business interruption insurance, coverage for losses resulting from (A) any viral pandemic; 10 (B) any forced closure of businesses, or mandatory evacuation, by law or order of any government or governmental officer or agency, including the Federal Government and State and local governments; or (C) any power shut-off conducted for public safety purposes; and (2) shall make available business interruption insurance coverage for losses specified in paragraph (1) that does not differ materially from the terms, amounts, and other coverage limitations applicable to losses arising from events other than those specified in paragraph (1).
Under Section 3, any exclusion in a contract for business interruption insurance that is in force on the date of the enactment shall be void to the extent that it excludes losses specified in Section 2. The section purports to preempt state law by providing that any state approval of any exclusion of losses from a contract for business interruption insurance that is in force on the date this Act is enacted, shall be void to the extent that it excludes losses specified in section.
Further, the bill provides that an insurer may reinstate a preexisting provision in a contract if:
- the insurer has received a written statement from the insured that affirmatively authorizes such reinstatement; or
- if the insured fails to pay any increased premium charged by the insurer for providing such business interruption coverage after receiving notice.
H.R. 6494 raises several issues, but by its own terms, would not apply to the instant COVID-19 pandemic-related claims. We will continue to monitor developments.
Related Content
- Insurers Must Be Proactive to Comply With Federal, State, and Local COVID-19-Related Laws and Regulations to Limit Potential Governmental Overreach, March 27, 2020
- U.S. Congress Members Call for COVID-19 Business Interruption Coverage, March 20, 2020
- Future of New Jersey COVID-19 Insurance Coverage Bill is in Question, March 19, 2020
- As COVID-19 Coverage Law Suits Are Filed, New Jersey Legislature Considers Mandated COVID-19 Business Interruption Coverage, March 17, 2020
Related People
Featured Insights

Employment Law Observer
Aug 10, 2026
As Leaves Fall, Leave Requests Rise: Are You Compliant With Chicago’s Expanded Rules?

Press Release
Aug 7, 2026
Daniel McGrath Re-Elected Senior Director of the Federation of Defense & Corporate Counsel

Insights for Insurers Alert
Aug 7, 2026
California Supreme Court Clarifies Pleading Standards for Excess Policy Claims

Press Release
Aug 6, 2026
Charles Townsend Named a Best Mentor Finalist in the 2026 ALM Texas Legal Awards

Webinar
Aug 5, 2026
April Toy Moderates HNBA Webinar on AI in the Practice of Law

Privacy, Cyber & AI Decoded Alert
Aug 5, 2026
2026 AI Compliance: Upcoming Laws Every Organization Needs to Know

Press Release
July 21, 2026 | Updated on August 4, 2026
Three Hinshaw Attorneys Named to the 2026 National Black Lawyers’ Top 40 Under 40 List

Healthcare Alert
Aug 3, 2026
Fixing the Emergency Refill Trap: What California’s AB 1587 Means for Pharmacies

Consumer Crossroads: Where Financial Services and Litigation Intersect
Jul 30, 2026
Should Text Messages be Considered “Calls” Under the TCPA? The Seventh Circuit Says No

Healthcare Alert
Jul 30, 2026
California Courts Sharply Curtail the MICRA Damages Cap in Nursing Home Litigation

Insights for Insurers Alert
Jul 30, 2026
Analyzing a Couple of Cases Involving Exclusions in D&O Policies


