Which of the following would NOT justify the revocation of an insurance license?

The situation described highlights that sharing commissions with another licensed agent does not inherently justify the revocation of an insurance license. This practice is generally legal when it complies with state laws and insurance regulations. In many jurisdictions, licensed agents can share commissions as long as both agents are licensed and the arrangement is properly disclosed.

On the other hand, misrepresentation, placing business solely on an agent's own property, and rebating are practices that can lead to disciplinary action or revocation. Misrepresentation involves providing false information, which undermines trust and can harm consumers. Using a license primarily to benefit oneself rather than clients can be seen as a breach of ethical duties, and rebating—offering a portion of the premium back to the client as an incentive—can violate laws designed to ensure fair competition.

Thus, sharing commissions when done within legal parameters is permissible and is why this option stands out as not justifying license revocation.