Search
Close this search box.

FEMA unveils first flood insurance update in 50 years

pexels-arthur-brognoli-2260967

FEMA unveils first flood insurance update in 50 years

While most homeowners will see lower premiums, others will face higher rates under the NFIP’s long-awaited new system.

Storm surge surrounds a home as Hurricane Delta makes landfall in Port Arthur, Texas, on Friday, Oct. 9, 2020. 

(Bloomberg) — On Friday, April 2, the Federal Emergency Management Agency unveiled the details of an overhaul to its beleaguered National Flood Insurance Program, the initiative’s first major update in 50 years. Most homeowners in the program will have lower or stable premiums, but roughly 11% of homes — largely the highest value ones — will see increases in premiums of at least $10 a month. Those could continue to rise until they reach a cap of $12,000 a year.

The NFIP serves roughly 5 million homes, most of which are in high-risk flood areas. Premiums have risen steadily over the years, and yet the program is more than $20 billion in debt, in part because of climate change-related phenomena such as sea-level rise and increased storms and heavy precipitation events, which lead to more intense and more widespread flooding.

Up until now, FEMA used a fairly simple methodology developed in the 1970s that based risk ratings on two factors: whether homes were inside a severe flood zone, and if so, their elevation within those zones. FEMA says its new model, Risk Rating 2.0, is based on huge advances in technology, including sophisticated catastrophe models that are standard for the private insurance industry.

“The new methodology is not a minor improvement but a transformational leap forward,” said David Maurstad, senior executive of the NFIP. The agency said such models would allow them to adapt fluidly to all sorts of changes in weather and the built environment. “We will be able to reflect the impacts of climate change in the years to come, unlike with the antiquated program we are saddled with at this time,” he said.

The rollout of the new system has been expected — and delayed — for years. The agency must now manage the concerns of politicians afraid of fallout from constituents facing higher premiums. FEMA said it would roll out Risk Rating 2.0 gradually, allowing homeowners now eligible for discounts (nearly a quarter of current policyholders) to receive those as soon as October of this year, when the program kicks in. Meanwhile, elevated premiums won’t hit until April of 2022. None will face more than an 18% annual increase.

“It is great to see that FEMA is moving forward with Risk Rating 2.0, which is so badly needed,” said Matthew Eby, executive director of the First Street Foundation, a climate and technology non-profit that has done its own extensive flood-mapping. He said he hoped FEMA’s new rightsized risk program, along with other tools, “will not only empower Americans to make fully informed decisions but fundamentally change the calculus involved in where we live and develop.”

The result is that FEMA’s revenue will actually drop by half a billion dollars in the first year of the program compared to the $4.5 billion it currently collects in premiums. This will even out over the next three years, FEMA officials said, but they also added that it could take as long as 15 years for the homes that ought to be paying more to reach the $12,000 cap. That cap may be adjusted over time, the agency said. Even after the price increases, though, FEMA doesn’t expect to break even.

Another big change in the program will reflect another standard private insurance practice: homes that cost more to replace will have higher premiums. Currently, Maurstad said, some of the oldest homes in the program have the highest premiums, while fancy new coastal properties have some of the lowest. “There was an inequity in the program that built up over time that needed to be addressed,” he said.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related posts

Insurance-technology

Specific Technologies Driving Insurtech Investment in 2024

Understanding the Funding Decline The decrease in funding does not necessarily spell trouble for the insurance sector but instead highlights a strategic shift, the report suggests. “The insurance industry, like many sectors, is focusing on the most promising ventures with substantial insurance potential,” the report explains. “Insurers are directing their investments toward key areas and current trends such as embedded insurance, employee benefits, and cyber risk management. This strategic investment approach signals a forward-looking mindset within the industry.” Three Key Insurtech Trends for 2024 The report identifies three major trends shaping insurtech investments in 2024: Public Insurtech Companies: Financial and Growth Strategies The report also notes that public insurtech companies are prioritizing revenue growth as their main goal. These firms are restructuring their financial strategies to boost cash flow and capitalize on rising revenue streams. Their growth prospects are supported by expanding asset portfolios and strong market demand. “Public insurtech companies are focusing on revenue growth and optimizing their financial frameworks to increase cash flow,” the report states. “The growth potential for these companies is driven by increasing revenue opportunities, broadening asset bases, and a robust market for their services.” In summary, while global insurtech funding saw a decline in 2023, the industry’s focus on GenAI, digital process management, and connected insurance technologies is setting the stage for a dynamic and forward-looking 2024.

Read More
Business

Insurer Secures Unanimous Supreme Court Victory in New York Choice of Law Dispute

In the world of sports, a clean sweep, a shutout, or a perfect game is the ultimate achievement. In the legal arena, a unanimous decision from the U.S. Supreme Court is equally rare and significant. In a notable legal triumph, Great Lakes Insurance SE achieved a unanimous 9-0 victory in the Supreme Court on February 21, 2024. This victory follows a protracted legal battle that began in the District Court of Pennsylvania, advanced to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and culminated in the Supreme Court’s decisive ruling. Background of the Case: Great Lakes Insurance SE v. Raiders Retreat Realty Company The heart of the dispute was the insurance contract’s clause selecting New York law to govern any future legal conflicts. Although the financial implications of this case were relatively minor compared to the broader marine insurance industry, the insurer’s determination to uphold a crucial maritime legal principle has significant long-term implications for marine insurance. Faced with the insured’s counterclaims—including allegations of breach of fiduciary duty, insurance bad faith, and violations of Pennsylvania’s Unfair Trade Practices Law—the insurer was confronted with serious risks. Such claims could lead to the shifting of attorney’s fees, treble damages, and more, which might normally encourage insurers to settle rather than risk pursuing justice. However, Great Lakes Insurance, supported by The Goldman Maritime Law Group, opted to challenge the Third Circuit’s decision and seek clarity from the Supreme Court. Supreme Court Ruling: A Landmark Decision In a landmark ruling, Justice Brett Kavanaugh affirmed that choice of law provisions in maritime contracts should be upheld by default. This ruling is a major victory for establishing a consistent federal standard in maritime law and avoiding a patchwork of state laws that could complicate marine insurance disputes. The Supreme Court’s decision overturned the Third Circuit’s earlier judgment, which had questioned whether Pennsylvania’s public policy concerns might override the insurance contract’s choice of New York law. By upholding the New York choice of law clause, the Supreme Court eliminated the extra-contractual bad faith claims under Pennsylvania law, thereby ensuring that the dispute could be resolved based on the merits of the insurance claim itself. Significance of the Supreme Court’s Decision This ruling represents a significant advancement in maritime law, affirming that choice of law clauses in maritime contracts are generally enforceable. The decision establishes a clear, uniform legal framework for resolving maritime contract disputes, which will streamline the process and ensure fair adjudication of future insurance claims. Justice Clarence Thomas’s concurring opinion was particularly notable for its criticism of the 1955 Wilburn Boat v. Fireman’s Fund Insurance decision, which had previously influenced maritime insurance law. Thomas argued that Wilburn Boat was incorrectly decided and stressed that a uniform and enforceable set of rules is essential for the development of maritime law. Impact on the Marine Insurance Industry The Supreme Court’s decision sets a “bright-line” rule affirming that choice of law clauses are valid unless there is a strong argument against the selected jurisdiction. By endorsing New York’s insurance laws as a reasonable choice, the ruling supports a more consistent and predictable legal environment for marine insurers. This decision represents a major step forward in maritime law, helping insurers better assess risks, determine premiums, and ensure fair and efficient resolution of maritime insurance disputes.

Read More
Try your instant quote