ANALYSIS OF THE NEW JERSEY BUDGET DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND INSURANCE

Transcription

1 ANALYSIS OF THE NEW JERSEY BUDGET DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND INSURANCE FISCAL YEAR PREPARED BY OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES NEW JERSEY LEGISLATURE APRIL 2016

2 NEW JERSEY STATE LEGISLATURE SENATE BUDGET AND APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE Paul A. Sarlo (D), 36th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic), Chair Brian P. Stack (D), 33rd District (Part of Hudson), Vice-Chair Peter J. Barnes III (D), 18th District (Part of Middlesex) Jennifer Beck (R), 11th District (Part of Monmouth) Anthony R. Bucco (R), 25th District (Parts of Morris and Somerset) Sandra B. Cunningham (D), 31st District (Part of Hudson) Linda R. Greenstein (D), 14th District (Parts of Mercer and Middlesex) Steven V. Oroho (R), 24th District (All of Sussex, and parts of Morris and Warren) Kevin J. O'Toole (R), 40th District (Parts of Bergen, Essex, Morris and Passaic) Nellie Pou (D), 35th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic) M. Teresa Ruiz (D), 29th District (Part of Essex) Samuel D. Thompson (R), 12th District (Parts of Burlington, Middlesex, Monmouth and Ocean) Jeff Van Drew (D), 1st District (All of Cape May, and parts of Atlantic and Cumberland) GENERAL ASSEMBLY BUDGET COMMITTEE Gary S. Schaer (D), 36th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic), Chair John J. Burzichelli (D), 3rd District (All of Salem, parts of Cumberland and Gloucester), Vice-Chair Anthony M. Bucco (R), 25th District (Parts of Morris and Somerset) John DiMaio (R), 23rd District (Parts of Hunterdon, Somerset and Warren) Gordon M. Johnson (D), 37th District (Part of Bergen) John F. McKeon (D), 27th District (Parts of Essex and Morris) Raj Mukherji (D), 33rd District (Part of Hudson) Elizabeth Maher Muoio (D), 15th District (Parts of Hunterdon and Mercer) Declan J. O'Scanlon, Jr. (R), 13th District (Part of Monmouth) Eliana Pintor Marin (D), 29th District (Part of Essex) Maria Rodriguez-Gregg (R), 8th District (Parts of Atlantic, Burlington and Camden) Troy Singleton (D), 7th District (Part of Burlington) Benjie E. Wimberly (D), 35th District (Parts of Bergen and Passaic) OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES Frank W. Haines III, Legislative Budget and Finance Officer Thomas Koenig, Assistant Legislative Budget and Finance Officer Marvin W. Jiggetts, Director, Central Staff Thomas K. Musick, Section Chief, Commerce, Labor and Industry Section This report was prepared by the Commerce, Labor and Industry Section of the Office of Legislative Services under the direction of the Legislative Budget and Finance Officer. The primary author was Sarah M. Schmidt. The background paper Overview of the Affordable Care Act s Excise Tax: The Cadillac Tax" was authored by Richard T. Corbett. Questions or comments may be directed to the OLS Commerce, Labor and Industry Section ( Tel ) or the Legislative Budget and Finance Office (Tel ).

3 DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND INSURANCE Budget Pages... C-3, C-9, C-16, D-23 to D-29 Fiscal Summary ($000) Expended FY 2015 Adjusted Appropriation FY 2016 Recommended FY 2017 Percent State Budgeted $57,156 $64,013 $64,013 Federal Funds $430 $885 $0 (100.0%) Other $450 $490 $445 (9.2%) Grand Total $58,036 $65,388 $64,458 (1.4%) Personnel Summary - Positions By Funding Source Actual FY 2015 Revised FY 2016 Funded FY 2017 Percent State Federal % Other % Total Positions % FY 2015 (as of December) and revised FY 2016 (as of January) personnel data reflect actual payroll counts. FY 2017 data reflect the number of positions funded. Link to Website:

4 Highlights The Department of Banking and Insurance s activities are entirely funded through revenue collected from fees and assessments imposed on the industries it regulates, and in certain years, federal funding. The Governor s FY 2017 Budget recommends $64.46 million in State, dedicated, and federal funds be appropriated for the department in FY 2017, which is a $930,000 (1.4%) decrease from the current year s adjusted appropriations. The funding decline of $930,000 is reflective of an $885,000 (100%) decrease in federal appropriations for Actuarial Services and a $45,000 (9.2%) decrease in All Other Funds appropriations attributable to the Consumer Protection Services and Solvency Regulation program class for personnel costs. The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation anticipates the department to collect a total of $ million in State and dedicated revenue, a net decrease of $343,000 (0.2%) from the FY 2016 estimate of $ million (pages C-3 and C-9). Collections support the department s operating expenditures and general State government purposes. The Executive anticipates a $10.8 million decrease in Insurance Licenses and Other Fees revenue that is attributable to the non-recurrence in FY 2017 of a) an anticipated $8.0 million transfer in FY 2016 from the New Jersey Surplus Lines Insurance Guaranty Fund to the General Fund as State revenue; as well as b) $2.8 million of revenue from two nationwide settlement agreements entered into by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The Executive anticipates an FY 2017 State revenue increase of $6.5 million in fees collected by the New Jersey Real Estate Commission. The increase is attributable to FY 2017 being a renewal year in the commission s two-year licensing schedule. The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation does not anticipate any federal revenue in FY 2017 (C-16), a decrease of $885,000 (100%) from the FY 2016 estimate. The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation anticipates the discontinuation of $885,000 in federal revenue attributable to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). The department has received federal funding in recent years for rate review, Health Care Exchange establishment, and consumer assistance related to the implementation of the ACA. On September 19, 2014, the department was awarded a $1,179,000 federal Rate Review Cycle IV grant of which $295,000 was received in FY 2015 and the remaining $885,000 in FY As of April 7, 2016, approximately $140,000 of the $1.18 million Rate Review Cycle IV grant has been expended. The department reports that it will fund five positions in FY 2017 using federal funds received in previous fiscal years. The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation funds 515 positions in the department in FY 2017, which is unchanged from the count of funded position in FY Of the 515 funded FY 2016 positions, 452 were filled in January More than half of the 63- count difference between FY 2016 filled and funded positions is in the Consumer 2

5 Highlights (Cont d) Protection Services and Solvency Regulation and the Bureau of Fraud Deterrence program classes. Background Paper: Overview of the Affordable Care Act s Excise Tax: The Cadillac Tax.. p.10 3

6 Fiscal and Personnel Summary AGENCY FUNDING BY SOURCE OF FUNDS ($000) General Fund Adj. Expended Approp. Recom. Percent FY 2015 FY 2016 FY Direct State Services $57,156 $64,013 $64, % 0.0% Grants-In-Aid % 0.0% State Aid % 0.0% Capital Construction % 0.0% Debt Service % 0.0% Sub-Total $57,156 $64,013 $64, % 0.0% Property Tax Relief Fund Direct State Services $0 $0 $0 0.0% 0.0% Grants-In-Aid % 0.0% State Aid % 0.0% Sub-Total $0 $0 $0 0.0% 0.0% Casino Revenue Fund $0 $0 $0 0.0% 0.0% Casino Control Fund $0 $0 $0 0.0% 0.0% State Total $57,156 $64,013 $64, % 0.0% Federal Funds $430 $885 $0 (100.0%) (100.0%) Other Funds $450 $490 $445 (1.1%) (9.2%) Grand Total $58,036 $65,388 $64, % (1.4%) PERSONNEL SUMMARY - POSITIONS BY FUNDING SOURCE Actual Revised Funded Percent FY 2015 FY 2016 FY State % 0.0% Federal % 150.0% All Other % 13.3% Total Positions % 13.9% FY 2015 (as of December) and revised FY 2016 (as of January) personnel data reflect actual payroll counts. FY 2017 data reflect the number of positions funded. AFFIRMATIVE ACTION DATA Total Minority Percent 30.3% 33.0%

7 Significant s/new Programs ($000) Budget Item Adj. Approp. FY 2016 Recomm. FY 2017 Dollar Percent Budget Page ECONOMIC REGULATION STATE REVENUE Real Estate Commission $4,500 $11,000 $6, % C-3 This State revenue line aggregates New Jersey Real Estate Commission receipts from licensing and various other fees. The $6.5 million increase can be attributed to FY 2017 being a renewal year in the commission s two-year licensing schedule. The New Jersey Real Estate Commission issues licenses to real estate brokers and salespersons, real estate schools, and course instructors, and establishes standards of practice for the real estate brokerage profession. Banking - Assessments $13,971 $14,708 $ % C-3 This State revenue line indicates Division of Banking receipts collected from the Banking License Assessment and the Banking Depositor Assessment (N.J.S.A.17:1C-33 et seq.). Collections reimburse the Division of Banking for the cost it incurs in regulating, monitoring and supervising the banking industry. The $737,000 increase reflects higher anticipated operating expenditures incurred by or on behalf of the division. Companies in the banking industry are assessed an apportioned amount of the division s operating expenditures, as certified by the Director of the Division of Budget and Accounting in the Department of the Treasury, based on their calendar year business. These certified expenses include the direct cost of personal services, the cost of maintenance and operation, the cost of employee benefits and workers' compensation, rentals for space occupied in Stateowned or State-leased buildings, and all other direct and indirect costs of the administration of those functions, as well as any amounts remaining uncollected from the assessment of the previous fiscal year. Insurance Special Purpose Assessment $39,987 $42,022 $2, % C-3 This State revenue line indicates Division of Insurance receipts collected from the Special Purpose Assessment (N.J.S.A.17:1C-19 et seq.). Collections reimburse the Division of Insurance for the cost it incurs in regulating, monitoring and supervising the insurance industry. The $2.0 million increase can be attributed to higher anticipated operating expenditures incurred by or on behalf of the division. All insurers writing most classes of insurance in the State and Health Maintenance Organizations granted a certificate of authority to operate in the State are assessed an apportioned amount of the division s operating expenditures, as certified by the Director of the Division of Budget and Accounting in the Department of the Treasury, based on the proportion that the carrier s net written premiums for the preceding calendar year bear to the combined 5

8 Significant s/new Programs ($000) (Cont d) Budget Item Adj. Approp. FY 2016 Recomm. FY 2017 Dollar Percent Budget Page net written premiums of all carriers in the preceding year, except that no carrier is required to pay an assessment that exceeds 0.10 percent of its net written premiums. These certified expenditures include the direct cost of personal services, the cost of maintenance and operation, the cost of employee benefits and workers' compensation, rentals for space occupied in State-owned or State-leased buildings, and all other direct and indirect costs of the administration of those functions, as well as any amounts remaining uncollected from the special purpose apportionment of the previous fiscal year. Insurance Fraud Prevention $30,389 $31,639 $1, % C-3 This State revenue line reflects receipts collected from the insurance fraud prevention assessment pursuant to P.L.1983, c.320 (C.17:33A-1 et seq.). The $1.3 million increase can be attributed to higher anticipated operating expenditures incurred by the Bureau of Fraud Deterrence in the Department of Banking and Insurance and the Office of the Insurance Fraud Prosecutor (OIFP) within the Department of Law and Public Safety. This assessment is levied on certain insurers for reimbursement of all costs related to the activities and responsibilities of the OIFP and the Bureau. The Director of the Division of Budget and Accounting in the Department of the Treasury certifies the total amount of expenses incurred by the State in connection with the administration of insurance fraud prevention in the previous fiscal year. This amount is then apportioned among the insurance companies by the department and an assessment is paid by the insurance companies prior to December 31 of each calendar year for expenses accrued in the previous fiscal year. Insurance Licenses and Other Fees $52,761 $41,961 ($10,800) (20.5%) C-3 The anticipated $10.8 million revenue decrease is attributable to the non-recurrence in FY 2017 of: a) an anticipated $8.0 million transfer in FY 2016 from the New Jersey Surplus Lines Insurance Guaranty Fund to the General Fund as State revenue; as well as b) $2.8 million of revenue from two nationwide settlement agreements entered into by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. The New Jersey Surplus Lines Insurance Guaranty Fund, P.L.1984, c.101 (N.J.S.A.17: et seq.), administers the claims of insolvent surplus lines insurers that provided medical malpractice and homeowners coverage as eligible non-admitted insurers in New Jersey. All surplus lines companies in New Jersey are required to be members of the fund and to contribute funds for its operation; however, the fund surcharge has not been collected since 1993 and the one-time initial $25,000 payment has not been collected since July The fund is managed and administered by the New Jersey Property-Liability Insurance Guaranty Association. According to the department, the fund was estimated to contain approximately $11.0 million at the end of December The Executive has intended to transfer $8.0 million thereof to the State General Fund in FY Such a transfer is subject to legislative approval, which has not been granted as of April 7,

9 Significant s/new Programs ($000) (Cont d) Budget Item Adj. Approp. FY 2016 Recomm. FY 2017 Dollar Percent Budget Page New Jersey participates in the National Association of Insurance Commissioners multi-state task force to guide and coordinate the examination of unpaid claims by life insurance companies across the country. In FY 2016, New Jersey was awarded $2.8 million from two settlement agreements resulting from the task force s investigation of life insurance companies that failed to use the Social Security Administration s Death Master File, a list of everyone who has died as reported to the United States Social Security Administration, to facilitate the payment of claims on life insurance policies. HMO Covered Lives $295 $275 ($20) (6.8%) C-3 This State revenue line captures amounts the Department of Banking and Insurance collects from the HMO Covered Lives fee. The department attributes this $20,000 decrease to a reduction in the number of Health Maintenance Organization (HMO) enrollees in the State. Section 18 of P.L.2002, c.34 (N.J.S.A.26:2J-23) established a fee charged to HMOs in the amount of $1.50 per covered life per year. The revenue from this fee is used to support the Division of Insurance s HMO regulation and oversight activities. In effect, fee collections also lower the special purpose assessment that is apportioned to insurers to recover the Division of Insurance s operating expenses pursuant to P.L.1995, c.156 (N.J.S.A.17:1C-19 et seq.). The division monitors the compliance of HMOs with New Jersey rules through in-depth reviews and targeted examinations. The division investigates consumer complaints concerning HMOs and other carriers offering managed care health benefits plans. FEDERAL REVENUE Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act $885 $0 ($885) (100.0%) C-16 FEDERAL APPROPRIATION Actuarial Services $885 $0 ($885) (100.0%) D-28 The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation reflects the anticipated non-recurrence of federal revenue attributable to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA). Since August 2010, the department has received federal Rate Review grants under ACA for implementing certain provisions of this act. Pursuant to the ACA, the United States Department of Health and Human Services is required to work with state insurance departments to review unreasonable rate increases for health benefits plans. On September 19, 2014, the department was awarded its fourth federal Rate Review, or Rate Review Cycle IV, grant, worth $1.18 million. Approximately $295,000 of the total was received in FY 2015 and the remaining $885,000 in FY The Rate Review Cycle IV grant ends on September 18, As of April 7, 2016, approximately $140,000 of the $1.18 million Rate Review Cycle IV grant has been expended. 7

10 Significant s/new Programs ($000) (Cont d) Budget Item Adj. Approp. FY 2016 Recomm. FY 2017 Dollar Percent Budget Page The department anticipates using unspent federal Rate Review grant money to fund five positions within the department in FY 2017 to maintain the Rate Review database and to provide enhanced Rate Review capacity, including the development of consumer information, such as rate calculators, and the management of complaint processing. In addition, unspent federal Rate Review grant money is anticipated to procure actuarial services from the Hay Group. The consultant will be used on a limited basis for the analysis of complex filings or filings where compliance with federal standards is in question. The department also anticipates using unexpended balances for a study by the Center for State Health Policy at Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, concerning policy migration and consumer choices due to the ACA. According to the federal Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services website, the federal Rate Review funding is intended to improve the efficiency of the submission and tracking of rates; track the number of consumer inquiries and complaints, which will be posted on the department s website; and study specific rate review related elements that arise from the Affordable Care Act, including the Unified Rate Review Template, single risk pool, actuarial value, meaningful difference and the impact of risk mitigation programs such as risk adjustment, transitional reinsurance, and risk corridors. DEDICATED REVENUE Small Employer Health Benefits $490 $445 ($45) (9.2%) C-9 ALL OTHER FUNDS APPROPRIATIONS Consumer Protection Services and Solvency Regulation $490 $445 ($45) (9.2%) D-28 According to the department, the $45,000 decrease in dedicated revenue collected from the Small Employer Health Insurance assessment can be attributed to a decline in operating costs. The decrease in revenue is matched by an equal decrease in the anticipated appropriations for the Consumer Protection Services and Solvency Regulation program class under All Other Funds. The Small Employer Health Benefits Program, enacted pursuant to P.L.1992, c.162 (N.J.S.A. 17B:27A-17 et seq.), was established to provide employers with two to 50 employees with the option to purchase standardized health benefits plans. Pursuant to section 16 of P.L.1992, c.162 (N.J.S.A.17B:27A-32), the department charges an assessment on all Small Employer Health Insurance carriers for the reasonable and necessary organizational and operating expenses of the Small Employer Health Benefits Program board of directors. 8

11 Significant Language s The FY 2017 Budget Recommendation for the Department of Banking and Insurance does not contain any changes in language provisions when compared to the FY 2016 Appropriations Act. EXPLANATION: FY 2016 language not recommended for FY 2017 denoted by strikethrough. Recommended FY 2017 language that did not appear in FY 2016 denoted by underlining. 9

12 Background Paper: Overview of the Affordable Care Act s Excise Tax: The Cadillac Tax Beginning in 2020, a tax code section added by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) will assess a 40 percent excise tax annually on high-cost employer-provided health benefits coverage that exceeds certain thresholds. 1 Commonly known as the "Cadillac tax," the excise tax was originally scheduled to take effect in In response to widespread dissatisfaction with the tax, it was first postponed to 2018, and then the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 postponed the tax until According to health care analysts, the purpose of the tax is to: reduce the current unlimited exclusion of employer-provided health insurance from taxes; reduce excess health-care spending by encouraging employers to offer less generous plans and adopt strategies to reduce the cost of health care; and increase revenue to offset expenses incurred for other parts of the ACA, such as the government subsidies for purchasing health care through health care exchanges. Employers have consistently expressed concerns about potential financial and administrative burdens from the tax. Notwithstanding that they have two additional years to consider ways to adjust their plans to avoid the tax, there is reportedly a strong consensus among employers in favor of either further postponement of the tax s implementation, or its repeal. The tax has also encountered opposition from labor unions whose members wish to retain their current level of benefits. The excise tax applies to fully insured plans and self-funded plans, and to private and government employers. The tax, as originally designed to be implemented in 2018, is imposed on the amount by which the "aggregate costs" of the coverage exceed $27,500 for family coverage and $10,200 for single coverage. These thresholds are subject to annual adjustments for inflation. Also, the thresholds may be higher for plans with certain age and gender characteristics that vary from the national workforce and for plans in which the majority of employees are in certain high-risk occupations. For the purpose of calculating the tax, the aggregate costs of the coverage include total premiums paid by the employer and the employee, but not cost-sharing amounts such as deductibles, coinsurance, and copayments that are paid at the time of treatment. In addition to the plan premiums, aggregate costs include other arrangements that provide health benefits to employees such as: health reimbursement arrangements, employer contributions to health savings accounts, and flexible spending accounts. The law requires the "coverage provider" to be responsible for paying the tax. For insured plans, the coverage provider is the insurer. Although there is some uncertainty as to the definition of "coverage provider" and whether third party administrators must pay the tax for employers who provide self-funded plans, it is widely anticipated that employers will reimburse any third party administrator that pays the tax for them, or pay for the tax in the form of higher premiums charged by the insurer U.S.C. s.4980i 2 For self-funded plans, the coverage provider is the "person who administers the plan benefits," which may be the third party administrator that employers typically retain to administer self-funded plans. Since there is no definition of these terms in the ACA, the IRS issued Notice to invite comments on this issue and several other excise tax issues. Comments were due by October 1,

13 Background Paper: Overview of the Affordable Care Act s Excise Tax: The Cadillac Tax (Cont d) Reportedly, some employers are reacting to the potential implementation of the tax by revisiting the health care plans they provide to employees, to bring the costs of their plans below the thresholds. In 2015, the Kaiser Family Foundation estimated that the tax, if implemented in 2018, could have affected 26 percent of all employers in the first year of the tax, 30 percent in 2023, and 42 percent in Methods for employers to reduce the impact of the tax include: maintaining narrower and less expensive provider networks; increasing cost-sharing for employees, in the form of higher deductibles, copayments or coinsurance; capping flexible spending accounts, health savings accounts, or health reimbursement arrangements; and reducing covered services. With the most recent delay of the implementation of the tax, employers will have two more years to study and implement changes to their health care plan offerings. In addition to delaying the implementation of the excise tax until 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2016 made the tax fully deductible from taxable income for any entity to which it applies, whereas the original law did not allow deductibility. Further, since the threshold amounts are indexed to annual inflation, delaying the effective date will result in higher thresholds in the years that the tax goes into effect. At the time the tax is implemented, some employers may keep their high-cost plans and pay the tax. Other employers may revise their plans to avoid the tax thresholds and pay their employees more in salary to make up for lesser health benefits. These salary increases would then be subject to income and payroll taxes. The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimated in 2015, that the excise tax would have raised $3 billion in revenue in 2018, and revenues from the tax would gradually increase annually to $17 billion in These estimates take into account both the income from the excise tax and the associated effects on revenues of higher taxable compensation to employees. 4 Since the tax will not go into effect until 2020, it is anticipated that the CBO will periodically revise and publish new estimates, using the new effective date as a reference point. Currently, estimates are not available with respect to the total cost of the excise tax to health insurers and employers in New Jersey because insurers and employers are continually reconsidering their plan offerings, which will affect how many plans will exceed the excise tax thresholds. However, health care analysts have noted that the tax could impact New Jersey more than some other states because New Jersey is a high-cost state with respect to health insurance, and the excise tax is not adjusted for geographic differences in costs. 5 3 How Many Employers Could be Affected by the Cadillac Plan Tax?, Claxton, Gary and Levitt, Larry, Kaiser Family Foundation Issue Brief, August, The Excise Tax on High-Cost Employer-Sponsored Health Insurance: Estimated Economic and Market Effects, Gravelle, Jane G., Congressional Research Service Report, August 20, 2015; Budgetary and Economic Effects of Repealing the Affordable Care Act, Congressional Budget Office, June, One study estimated that New Jersey would be one of only two states in which 10 percent of employees with employer-sponsored health insurance could be affected by the excise tax as early as 2018, if the tax had not been postponed. Most states would not have 10 percent of workers affected until after See Rethinking the Affordable Care Act s Cadillac Tax. Nowak, Sarah and Eibner, Christine, The Commonwealth Fund, December 18,

14 Background Paper: Overview of the Affordable Care Act s Excise Tax: The Cadillac Tax (Cont d) There are several bills introduced in Congress in the current session to repeal the excise tax in its entirety. In the House of Representatives, H.R.879 and H.R.2050 are referred to the House Committee on Ways and Means. In the Senate, S.2045 and S.2075 are referred to the Senate Finance Committee. 12

15 OFFICE OF LEGISLATIVE SERVICES The Office of Legislative Services provides nonpartisan assistance to the State Legislature in the areas of legal, fiscal, research, bill drafting, committee staffing and administrative services. It operates under the jurisdiction of the Legislative Services Commission, a bipartisan body consisting of eight members of each House. The Executive Director supervises and directs the Office of Legislative Services. The Legislative Budget and Finance Officer is the chief fiscal officer for the Legislature. The Legislative Budget and Finance Officer collects and presents fiscal information for the Legislature; serves as Secretary to the Joint Budget Oversight Committee; attends upon the Appropriations Committees during review of the Governor's Budget recommendations; reports on such matters as the committees or Legislature may direct; administers the fiscal note process and has statutory responsibilities for the review of appropriations transfers and other State fiscal transactions. The Office of Legislative Services Central Staff provides a variety of legal, fiscal, research and administrative services to individual legislators, legislative officers, legislative committees and commissions, and partisan staff. The central staff is organized under the Central Staff Management Unit into ten subject area sections. Each section, under a section chief, includes legal, fiscal, and research staff for the standing reference committees of the Legislature and, upon request, to special commissions created by the Legislature. The central staff assists the Legislative Budget and Finance Officer in providing services to the Appropriations Committees during the budget review process. Individuals wishing information and committee schedules on the FY 2017 budget are encouraged to contact: Legislative Budget and Finance Office State House Annex Room 140 PO Box 068 Trenton, NJ (609) Fax (609)