Bill 53, introduced on August 13, 2024, by Representative Ricardo Agustín Vigil López of Circuit 4-3 together with eight co-sponsors — including Carlos Saldaña, Manuel Samaniego, Eliécer Castrellón, Augusto Palacios, Yamireliz Chong, Roberto Archibold, Janine Prado, and Didiano Pinilla — sought to amend Articles 2 and 3 of Law 68 of 2016 governing the Mandatory Basic Traffic Accident Insurance (SOAT). The Communications and Transportation Commission approved it in First Debate on March 26, 2025, in Second Debate on September 15, 2025, and in Third Debate on September 16 of that year.

The central measure was a mandatory compliance discount of 25% on the actual SOAT premium for any policyholder who maintained an annual record of zero liability in accidents during the policy's term, applicable automatically from the first renewal. The initiative also added a numeral 17 to Article 241 of Law 12 of 2012, requiring insurers to resolve claims within thirty business days of submission. It further incorporated a tripartite committee — the Superintendency of Insurance, ACODECO, and the Faculty of Economics of the University of Panama — to certify the base cost of policies annually.

President Mulino returned the bill unsigned through Note No. 548-2025-AL dated October 27, 2025, objecting to it in its entirety as both inconvenient and unconstitutional. The Executive argued that the discount compels lower premiums to be charged to a segment of policyholders, distorting the mutuality principle set out in Law 12 of 2012 and potentially undermining insurers' financial solvency. Additionally, the tripartite committee was challenged for infringing on the autonomy of the Superintendency of Insurance recognized in Article 6 of that law, and for allowing insurer associations to jointly submit price proposals — conduct the Executive characterized as incompatible with Law 45 of 2007 on free competition.

The presidential note also cited unconstitutionality: Article 1 of the bill, by defining the 'good driver' solely by the absence of accidents without excluding acts of God, could infringe the equality principle of Article 19 of the Constitution. The provision on total loss that would permanently bar a vehicle from returning to circulation under any grounds was objected to as affecting the right to private property under Article 47.

With the veto in effect, the current SOAT regime remains unchanged. The Assembly may call a second debate to insist on the original text, but would need 47 votes — a qualified majority — to promulgate it without the Executive's approval. Urban transport workers who had participated in the subcommission had expressed support for the discount, noting they work up to 16 hours a day and rarely use insurers' services. The Panamanian Association of Insurers and the National College of Insurance Producers had opposed the measure during debates, arguing that premium refunds would deplete the system's reserves.