Flood Insurance Price Increases Affecting Home Sales
Flood
insurance is an essential in many parts of the country, especially
the coastal states. For years now this insurance has been available
at reasonable rates because subsidies provided by the Nation Flood
Insurance Program. But over time, and especially after hurricane
Katrina, the debt that the program has accumulated has grown to
unacceptable and unmanageable proportion- around $20 billion. About
$1.3 trillion of property in all 50 states is covered by the program,
with California, Florida, Louisiana, New Jersey and Texas accounting
a 66% of all policies.
The
Biggert-Walters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012 seeks to repair
the weak financial state of the program by increasing
flood insurance premiums. The
law states that those who bought homes after July 2012 will no longer
be eligible for these subsidies. This will affect over 1 million home
owners whose finances will take a big hit. In addition to this, the
new high flood insurance premiums are discouraging potential home
buyers from investing in property.
The Impact Is Huge
It
is often presumed that the removal of a subsidy will result in a
marginal increase in costs that is a financial pain, but which can be
borne. That is not so in the case of flood insurance. For example, a
middle aged school teacher and her husband bought a waterfront home
in Florida a little over 4 months ago. Expecting to retire in the
next 5 to 10 years, this was their investment for their future. The
flood insurance premium for their 2,200 square foot home was $2,000
and they anticipated only marginal changes in the future. When the
news of the removal of the subsidy came out they checked on the rates
for the next year and were stunned to find that it had jumped to
$14,000. They cannot afford that premium and because of the water
front location and the mortgage requiring flood insurance, they are
planning to sell the house, probably at a loss, to find something
cheaper. This is not a stray case.
In
many parts of the country buyers are blacklisting localities where
the rates are on the rise. In some parts of Plaquemines Parish, a
community on the Gulf of Mexico, flood insurance premiums range from
$10,000 to $25,000 per year. Buyers are shying away from what would
often be good deal when they see the new insurance costs.
Is There A Solution?
The
problem is that the debt accumulated by the National Flood Insurance
Program is unsustainable and a way to escape this debt trap must be
found. There is logic in the argument that those homeowners who are
most at risk from floods should pay higher rates than others. Unless
the program returns to financial viability, and there seems to be no
other way, its very existence in the long term is in doubt.
But
many states have begun action to reduce the hardship to homeowners
and the damage that the increases will do to the real estate market.
Some states are planning to enact legislation to cap the amount of
rate increase and others are considering suing the federal government
on the grounds that the impact of the increases has not been
completely considered. Bills with bipartisan support are pending in
both the U.S. House and Senate to delay the implementation of the
rate increases so that homeowners and the property market have time
to plan and adjust to the increases. This, it is hoped, will reduce
the negative impact on the sale of homes.
Even
Maxine Waters, one of the sponsors of the bill to remove the
subsidies, says that she never imagined that it would result in this
kind of increases and the ensuing negative impact on the market.
Homeowners and buyer are both waiting to see the outcome of the
pending bills so that they can decide on their plans for the future.
Comments
Post a Comment