Legislature(2025 - 2026)GRUENBERG 120
01/28/2026 01:00 PM House JUDICIARY
Note: the audio ![]()
and video ![]()
recordings are distinct records and are obtained from different sources. As such there may be key differences between the two. The audio recordings are captured by our records offices as the official record of the meeting and will have more accurate timestamps. Use the icons to switch between them.
| Audio | Topic |
|---|---|
| Start | |
| HB24 | |
| HB20 | |
| Adjourn |
* first hearing in first committee of referral
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
+ teleconferenced
= bill was previously heard/scheduled
| += | HB 24 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | HB 20 | TELECONFERENCED | |
| + | TELECONFERENCED |
HB 20-PROHIBIT FEES FOR PAPER DOCUMENTS
1:17:56 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that the final order of business would be
HOUSE BILL NO. 20, "An Act relating to fees for paper documents;
and relating to unfair trade practices."
1:18:16 PM
REPRESENTATIVE DAN SADDLER, Alaska State Legislature, as prime
sponsor, presented HB 20. He paraphrased the sponsor statement
[included in the committee file], which read as follows
[original punctuation provided]:
House Bill 20 would prevent businesses from charging
customers an extra fee or a different typically
higher rate for services when they choose to receive
paper copies of statements, invoices and other
documents, instead of going "paperless."
Not all Alaskans have consistent internet access in
their homes. Unfairly being charged a higher rate for
the same service punishes them for something that may
be out of their control.
Additionally, not all members of Alaska's elderly
population are computer savvy and can easily access
online documents. This same population may be on a
fixed income and disproportionately feel the impact of
an additional service charge each month.
HB 20 seeks to end the system of charging different
fees or rates for customers depending on whether they
choose to go "paperless," and by doing so would
protect Alaskans from this unfair business practice.
1:20:31 PM
KAI ELKINS, Staff, Representative Dan Saddler, Alaska State
Legislature, on behalf of Representative Saddler, prime sponsor,
presented the sectional analysis for HB 20 [included in the
committee file], which read as follows [original punctuation
provided]:
Section 1: Page 1, lines 3-11 Section 1 amends AS
21.36 by adding a new section, AS 21.36.525, which
prohibits insurers from charging an additional fee or
different rate for individuals who prefer to receive
paper copies of invoices, statements and other
documents. This section does not, however, prevent an
insurer from charging a fee for providing duplicate
copies of any documents previously provided.
Section 2: Page 1, lines 12-15, & page 2, lines 1-4
Section 2 amends AS 45.45 by adding a new section, AS
45.45.940, which prohibits businesses from charging an
additional fee or a different rate for individuals who
prefer to receive paper copies of invoices, statements
and other documents. This section does not, however,
prevent a business from charging a fee for providing
duplicate copies of any documents previously provided.
Section 2 defines "business" by the meaning given in
AS 43.70.110, which states a business is "a for profit
or nonprofit entity engaging or offering to engage in
a trade, a service, a profession, or an activity with
the goal of receiving a financial benefit in exchange
for the provision of services, or goods or other
property."
Section 3: Page 2, lines 5-6 Section 3 adds to the
list of unlawful business acts and practices in Title
45 to include violations of AS 45.45.940, established
in Section 2 of this bill.
1:22:17 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA asked how the prohibition of paper fees has
impacted business fees or premiums in other states that have
enacted a similar policy.
MR. ELKINS shared his understanding that New York enacted a
similar law and has not run into any issues.
1:23:02 PM
CHAIR GRAY asked whether the bill would ban discounts for
customers who choose to go paperless.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER answered yes. He explained that there
would be no cap on fees, but they cannot be differential.
CHAIR GRAY pointed out that there are expenses associated with
sending out paper bills, such as ink and postage, so going
paperless is a cost savings to the business.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER contended that doing business through
paper is the status quo and changes to that need to be
addressed. If businesses are saving money by using electronic
billing and offering a discount to customers, that would be
great, he opined, but to changing the status quo and charge an
extra cost for that does not seem fair. He added that
businesses still print out paper and do not proportionally
apportion those costs to the client. He asserted that these
customers are already paying a cost for service, and certain
expenses should just be part of the cost of doing business.
1:25:29 PM
CHAIR GRAY shared a scenario that further challenged the idea of
eliminating discounts for paperless documents, which he
characterized as government overreach.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that this is not intended to
persist into the future forever, and those who prefer paper
would "move onto other things" with time. He said this is
intended to protect against digital costs. He added that small
charges add up and every little bit hurts.
CHAIR GRAY suggested amending the bill to only apply to places
where sending online statements is not feasible or unreliable.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER stated that there's no formal metric for
reliable or unreliable internet service. He acknowledged that
we live in a time where more people are availing themselves to
internet services, but there are people who prefer not to
operate that way and should not be penalized for doing so.
1:29:29 PM
REPRESENTATIVE MINA commented on digital equity issues in her
district and opined that the bill is a good step towards making
[paper billing] available for everyone.
1:30:16 PM
The committee took a brief at-ease at 1:30 p.m.
1:30:21 PM
CHAIR GRAY opened public testimony on HB 20. After ascertaining
that no one wished to testify, he closed public testimony.
REPRESENTATIVE SADDLER added that HB 20 would not apply to state
or government agencies.
1:31:55 PM
CHAIR GRAY announced that HB 20 would be held over.