Michigan lawmakers are considering changes to auto insurance personal injury protection (PIP) rules, with a bill clarifying insurer responsibility in motor vehicle and motorcycle accidents.
On November 13, 2025, House Bill No. 5298 was introduced by Representatives Mike Harris and Jason Morgan and referred to the Committee on Insurance. The bill proposes amendments to the Michigan Insurance Code of 1956, specifically section 3114, to clarify and modify the rules for PIP benefits following motor vehicle and motorcycle accidents.
The bill states that a personal protection insurance policy applies to accidental bodily injury to the person named in the policy, their spouse, and relatives domiciled in the same household, if the injury arises from a motor vehicle accident. If multiple policies could provide benefits, the injured person’s insurer must pay all benefits up to the coverage level of that policy and is not entitled to recoupment from other insurers.
For injuries occurring while operating or riding in a motor vehicle used in the business of transporting passengers, the bill requires PIP benefits to be paid by the insurer of that vehicle. Exceptions are listed for passengers in school buses, buses operated by common carriers, government-sponsored transportation, nonprofit organizations, taxicabs, and certain other vehicles, unless the passenger is not entitled to benefits under any other policy.
If an employee, their spouse, or a relative is injured while occupying a motor vehicle owned or registered by the employer, the insurer of that vehicle is responsible for PIP benefits.
The bill also addresses situations where a person not covered under a personal protection insurance policy suffers accidental bodily injury in a motor vehicle accident. In such cases, the person must claim PIP benefits under the assigned claims plan, unless certain exclusions apply.
For motorcycle accidents involving a motor vehicle, the bill establishes a specific order of priority for insurers responsible for PIP benefits: first, the insurer of the owner or registrant of the motor vehicle involved; second, the insurer of the operator of the motor vehicle; third, the motor vehicle insurer of the operator of the motorcycle; and fourth, the motor vehicle insurer of the owner or registrant of the motorcycle.
If a policyholder has elected not to maintain PIP coverage or if an exclusion applies, the injured person must seek benefits from other available policies in the same order of priority, or from the assigned claims plan if no such policies exist. When multiple policies are available in the same order of priority, the total benefits are limited to the highest available coverage limit among those policies.
The bill also allows for partial recoupment among insurers in the same order of priority that pay benefits, to ensure equitable distribution of the loss and processing expenses.
Definitions for terms such as "personal vehicle," "transportation network company digital network," and "transportation network company vehicle" are included, referencing the limousine, taxicab, and transportation network company act.
If enacted, these amendments would affect how insurers in Michigan determine responsibility and coordinate benefits for PIP claims, particularly in cases involving transportation network company vehicles and complex multi-policy scenarios. The bill is currently pending further legislative action.
