Why the 2026 stop-loss market is harder to laser than the renewal letters suggest

Lasering — the practice of raising an individual's stop-loss attachment point because of known claim history — has dominated mid-market renewal letters since 2020. Carriers used it freely. CFOs grumbled. Brokers, paid by those same carriers, mostly accepted it.

Something has shifted.

In Q1 conversations with five of the largest stop-loss writers (Sun Life, Tokio Marine HCC, Berkley, Voya, and a national reinsurer that prefers not to be named), four reported tightening internal underwriting guidance against lasers for plans above 250 lives. None of this has reached the renewal letters our clients are receiving.

What changed.

Three forces are at play. First, the no-laser RFP volume is now high enough that carriers refusing the term are simply losing the procurement to those who accept it. Second, brokers operating under §3(21) co-fiduciary status — still a small minority, but rising — are inclined to walk groups out of laser-bearing renewals on principle. Third, Lewandowski-style plaintiff theories have made carriers nervous about visible discrimination against individual claimants.

The negotiating posture.

If your renewal letter still contains lasers, treat it as an opening bid, not a final price. Demand the carrier defend the laser against a no-laser quote from a peer. In our last three renewals, the laser was withdrawn within ten business days. The premium load to absorb the laser-free term ran between 0.4% and 1.1% — well inside the range you would have spent fighting individual claims.