Thank you for signing!

Stop Insurance Companies From Punishing Dogs By Breed

21 signatures toward our 30,000 goal

0.07% Complete

Sponsor: The Animal Rescue Site

Families should not lose insurance or housing because of a dog’s breed. Insurers must judge dogs by behavior, not stereotypes.

Stop Insurance Companies From Punishing Dogs By Breed

Homeowners and renters insurance should protect families from real risks. It should not force people to give up a beloved dog because of breed labels, appearance, or assumptions.

The ASPCA says many insurance companies refuse coverage to people who own certain breeds, putting families in the position of choosing between their home and their pet.1 The National Association of Insurance Commissioners also notes that some insurers still use breed lists when underwriting homeowners and renters liability policies, which can make it harder for dog owners to obtain sufficient coverage.2

That practice can affect responsible pet owners who have done everything right. A dog with no bite history, no dangerous-dog designation, and no record of aggression can still make a family harder to insure simply because of how the dog looks or what breed appears on paperwork.

Breed Is A Poor Shortcut For Risk

Dog bites and dog-related injuries are real insurance issues. The Insurance Information Institute reported that dog-related injury claims rose in 2025 and that dog-bite prevention remains important for families, insurers, and communities.3

But breed-based restrictions are a blunt and unfair tool. The American Veterinary Medical Association says breed-specific laws are not a reliable or effective solution for dog-bite prevention.4 The NAIC warns that identifying a dog’s breed based only on appearance or physical traits is not definitive.2

Insurers should be able to consider documented behavior, prior bite claims, official dangerous-dog findings, and other objective risk factors. They should not deny coverage or raise rates simply because a dog is a pit bull-type dog, Rottweiler, German shepherd, Doberman, husky, or any other targeted breed.

Some States Are Already Proving A Better Way

New York law prohibits homeowners insurers from refusing to issue or renew, canceling, charging more, or limiting coverage based solely on owning a dog of a specific breed or breed mix.6 Colorado law also prohibits insurers from asking about a dog’s breed except to ask whether the dog is known to be or has been declared dangerous.7

Michigan lawmakers introduced HB 5580 in 2026 to prohibit residential property insurers from denying, canceling, or raising premiums based on a dog’s breed or breed mix.5

These laws show that reform is possible. The country needs a consistent standard.

Congress, state legislatures, NAIC, and insurance regulators should end breed-based insurance discrimination nationwide while preserving fair tools to address dogs with documented dangerous behavior.

No family should be forced to surrender a dog because an insurance company relied on a breed blacklist.

Sign now to urge lawmakers and regulators to stop dog breed discrimination in homeowners and renters insurance.

More on this issue:

  1. ASPCA, ASPCA (Accessed 15 June 2026), "Ending Breed-Specific Insurance Discrimination."
  2. National Association of Insurance Commissioners, NAIC (24 September 2025), "Breed-Specific Legislation."
  3. Insurance Information Institute, Triple-I (10 April 2026), "Spotlight on: Dog bite liability."
  4. American Veterinary Medical Association, AVMA (Accessed 15 June 2026), "Why breed-specific legislation is not the answer."
  5. Justin Fox Clausen, Capital News Service / Midland Daily News (26 February 2026), "Michigan bill would ban dog-breed bias in home insurance."
  6. New York State Senate, New York State Senate (Accessed 15 June 2026), "Insurance Law Section 3421: Homeowners’ liability insurance; dogs."
  7. Colorado General Assembly, Colorado General Assembly (2023), "HB23-1068 Pet Animal Ownership In Housing."

The Petition

To Members of Congress, state lawmakers, NAIC members, and insurance regulators,

I urge you to end dog breed discrimination in homeowners and renters insurance nationwide.

Families should not be denied coverage, charged higher premiums, nonrenewed, canceled, or stripped of liability protection simply because they own a dog of a certain breed, perceived breed, or breed mix. These decisions can force responsible pet owners to choose between housing, insurance, and a beloved family dog.

Dog-related injuries are a real concern, and insurers should be able to evaluate real risk. But breed alone is not a fair or reliable measure. A dog with no bite history, no dangerous-dog designation, and no documented behavior problem should not make a family uninsurable.

A better standard already exists. Insurers can consider objective facts such as a documented bite history, official dangerous-dog designation, court finding, or prior claim. They should not rely on breed blacklists that punish dogs and families before any individual behavior is considered.

New York and Colorado have already passed laws limiting breed-based insurance discrimination. Michigan lawmakers have introduced similar legislation. These reforms show that property insurance can remain responsible without forcing families to surrender dogs based on stereotypes.

Please support national model legislation, state laws, and regulatory standards that prohibit insurers from denying, canceling, nonrenewing, increasing premiums, or limiting coverage based solely on dog breed, perceived breed, or breed mix. Please also require insurers to use objective, behavior-based criteria and provide clear written explanations when dog-related coverage decisions are made.

This approach protects consumers, keeps families together, supports shelter and rescue efforts, and still allows insurers to address documented risk.

No family should lose insurance because of what a dog looks like. No dog should lose a home because of a breed label.

Please act now to end dog breed discrimination in homeowners and renters insurance.

Sincerely,