Legal statements were checked against the Legislature’s HB 97 records, the published text of Kileen v. Didio, OSI Bulletin 2025-013 and the LFC fiscal report. Updated October 15, 2026: an earlier version said coverage became mandatory January 1, 2026; HB 97 did not become law.

No. As of October 15, 2026, the sources reviewed do not show New Mexico requiring every driver to carry uninsured motorist coverage. Insurers must meaningfully offer uninsured and underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) coverage, with the price disclosed for each vehicle. A named insured may reject coverage in writing. House Bill 97, which proposed a broader mandate effective January 1, 2026, died in the Legislature and did not change the law.

Key Findings

  • HB 97 did not become law. The Legislature lists the bill as “Died.” Its proposed January 1, 2026 effective date never took effect.
  • UM/UIM must be offered. New Mexico’s statute permits a named insured to reject coverage in writing, subject to the applicable rejection and renewal rules.
  • The offer must be per vehicle. In Kileen v. Didio, the New Mexico Supreme Court required a meaningful per-vehicle offer; OSI Bulletin 2025-013 directed insurers to adopt per-vehicle disclosure and exclusion forms.
  • The 16% and 43% figures are estimates. The 2025 LFC fiscal impact report attributes these possible rate effects to OSI. They are not rate increases caused by a mandate that took effect.
  • Limit of this review. I did not locate an official consolidated 2026 version of Section 66-5-301 or a later enacted UM/UIM mandate in the official records checked. Confirm current requirements with OSI before making a coverage decision.

Navigate This Guide

What happened to House Bill 97?

The 2025 House committee substitute for HB 97 proposed removing the insured’s right to reject UM/UIM, requiring coverage for every vehicle, prohibiting an offset for the at-fault driver’s liability payment, and taking effect January 1, 2026. These were proposed provisions, not enacted law.

The Legislature’s official page lists HB 97 as “Died.” Its history records committee action on March 11, 2025, followed by “Postponed Indefinitely”; no floor votes are listed. The LFC report identifies SB 319 as a duplicate; LegiScan lists it as having died in chamber.

A proposed effective date cannot take effect when a bill fails. The available 2025 statute text retains a rejection option; OSI Bulletin 2025-013 governs the per-vehicle offer and documentation.

DiedStatus of HB 97 in the 2025 session (New Mexico Legislature)
June 30, 2025Kileen v. Didio decision requiring per-vehicle UM/UIM offers
16% / 43%Estimated possible rate effects cited in the 2025 LFC report; not observed rate changes
Proposed in 2025
Mandatory UM/UIM Not law
Proposed effective date: January 1, 2026 (HB 97)
The committee substitute would have eliminated the rejection option, required UM/UIM coverage for every vehicle, and prohibited a UIM offset tied to the at-fault driver’s liability payment. The Legislature lists HB 97 as “Died.”
Current rule
Offer, with written rejection In effect
Per-vehicle offer and premium disclosure (OSI Bulletin 2025-013)
Insurers must meaningfully offer UM/UIM coverage by vehicle and show the cost for each vehicle. OSI directed insurers to adopt per-vehicle disclosure and exclusion forms, including a process for existing policyholders.

Where did the 16% and 43% figures come from?

The LFC fiscal impact report for the House committee substitute, last updated March 12, 2025, says OSI estimated possible rate increases of 16% for a full-coverage policyholder and 43% for a policyholder with state-minimum coverage. These estimates describe a bill that did not pass, not observed increases caused by a mandate.

The report also says an OSI agency analysis was solicited but not received. The separate OSI analysis PDF dated February 27, 2025, does not show the calculations behind these percentages. The underlying filings, driver profiles, coverage assumptions and methodology remain unconfirmed; treat the figures only as estimates attributed to OSI by the LFC report, not as a forecast for an individual policy.

Compare auto insurance options for your New Mexico vehicle

Use our free tool to see estimated rate ranges by coverage level. It is not a quote, and final prices come from the insurer.

GET YOUR CAR INSURANCE QUOTES

What drivers should do now

Check the declarations page and renewal paperwork to see whether UM/UIM coverage appears on the policy and at what limits for each vehicle. A policy without coverage may reflect an earlier rejection. Because the court’s holding applies with selective prospectivity, do not assume it automatically reinstates coverage under every older policy or resolves a past claim. Ask your insurer which forms and dates apply.

Check your declarations page for UM/UIM
Confirm what you actually have
Look for uninsured or underinsured motorist lines and the limits shown for each vehicle. Do not assume the coverage is included.
Ask for the per-vehicle disclosure form
Required by OSI Bulletin 2025-013
OSI directed insurers to adopt per-vehicle disclosure and exclusion forms for new applications and policy changes, and set a process for distributing revised forms to existing policyholders. Ask your insurer which form applies to your policy.
Weigh the risk before rejecting coverage
Your decision, in writing
UM/UIM coverage may respond when an at-fault driver has no insurance or insufficient liability limits, subject to your policy terms, limits and exclusions.
Contact OSI if something looks wrong
State regulator can help
The Office of Superintendent of Insurance regulates auto insurance in New Mexico and can answer questions about forms, offers and complaints.

Frequently Asked Questions About New Mexico Uninsured Motorist Coverage

Does New Mexico require uninsured motorist coverage?

No. The sources reviewed as of October 15, 2026, do not show New Mexico requiring every driver to carry UM/UIM. Insurers must offer it, and a named insured may reject it in writing. HB 97, which proposed a January 1, 2026 mandate, is listed as “Died.”

Can I still reject uninsured motorist coverage in New Mexico?

Yes, subject to applicable disclosure and form rules. In Kileen v. Didio, the New Mexico Supreme Court required a meaningful UM/UIM offer for each vehicle, and OSI Bulletin 2025-013 directs insurers to use per-vehicle forms. Whether an older rejection affects a past loss depends on timing and circumstances; the ruling does not automatically restore coverage.

Did New Mexico House Bill 97 pass?

No. The Legislature’s official bill page lists HB 97 as “Died.” Its action history records a committee action on March 11, 2025, and says the bill was postponed indefinitely. No floor votes are listed.

The bottom line for New Mexico drivers

UM/UIM coverage remains optional in New Mexico based on the sources reviewed, but insurers must offer it on a per-vehicle basis and disclose the cost for each vehicle. HB 97’s proposed January 1, 2026 mandate never became law, and the reported rate effects describe a proposal rather than an enacted rule.

Check the coverage and limits shown in your policy. If UM/UIM is missing or you are unsure whether a rejection form applies, ask your insurer or OSI for clarification. For a disputed claim or question about the effect of a prior rejection, consider advice from a qualified New Mexico insurance or legal professional.

How We Verified This

We opened the Legislature’s official HB 97 status record and substitute text, the published text of Kileen v. Didio (2025-NMSC-038, June 30, 2025), and OSI Bulletin 2025-013. They support HB 97’s “Died” status and the per-vehicle-offer requirement, including OSI’s directions about forms for new applications, policy changes and existing policyholders.

We reviewed the LFC fiscal impact report (updated March 12, 2025) and OSI’s February 27, 2025 agency-analysis PDF. The LFC report attributes the 16% and 43% estimates to OSI but also says an OSI agency analysis was not received; the available PDF does not show the calculations. Underlying filings, driver profiles, coverage assumptions and methodology remain unconfirmed. We removed the LFC report’s uninsured-driver percentage and national comparison because the cited passage gives no observation period or methodology.

The accessible 2025 text of Section 66-5-301 was reviewed, but we did not locate an official consolidated 2026 edition. The published opinion text was reviewed on Justia because the official legal-publisher page could not be accessed. No later enacted UM/UIM mandate was located in the official records searched. Confirm current rules with OSI; this article does not resolve coverage for a specific claim.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and is not professional insurance, legal or financial advice. Rates, rules and deadlines vary by insurer, state and driver, and can change. Confirm details with a licensed agent, your insurer or your state department of insurance before making a coverage decision.

Sources

Last updated: