California’s Regulatory Restrictions Contribute to Risk Crisis
California’s regulatory restrictions to fair, actuarially sound insurance pricing and underwriting, coupled with the need for more mitigation and resilience efforts in the state, are putting financial pressure on insurers and contributing to limited availability of property insurance in high-risk markets, according to the Insurance Information Institute’s (
Trends and Insights: California’s Risk Crisis, examines this changing risk environment and the impact of Proposition 103 – a three-decades-old measure that has made it hard for insurers to profitably write coverage in the state. In a dynamically evolving risk environment that includes earthquakes, drought, wildfire, landslides, and, in recent years, flooding due to “atmospheric rivers,” Proposition 103 and its regulatory implementation have prevented insurers from using the most current data and advanced modeling technologies. Instead, they have required insurers to price coverage based on historical data alone.
“Much has changed in the world since 1988 when Proposition 103 came into effect, and it's well over time to evolve California’s insurance regulatory system,” said
The Issues Brief noted that Proposition 103 also has impeded premium rate changes by allowing consumer advocacy groups to intervene in the rate-approval process. This makes it hard to respond quickly to changing market conditions, resulting in approval delays and rates that don’t accurately reflect current (let alone future) risk. It also drives up legal and administrative costs. This has led, in some cases, to insurers deciding to limit or reduce their business in the state. With fewer private insurance options, more Californians are resorting to the California FAIR Plan, the state’s insurer of last resort, which offers less coverage for a higher premium.
In
Public discourse often frames the risk crisis as an “insurance crisis” – conflating cause with effect, Triple-I’s Issues Brief noted. Legislators, spurred by calls from their constituents for lower insurance premiums, often propose measures that would tend to worsen the problem because these proposals generally fail to reflect the importance of accurately valuing risk when pricing coverage. California’s Proposition 103 and the federal National Flood Insurance Program before its Risk Rating 2.0 reforms are just two examples, according to
RELATED LINKS |
|
Triple-I Articles: |
|
|
|
|
|
Triple-I Blog: |
Calif. Risk/Regulatory Environment Highlights Role of Risk-Based Pricing |
|
|
Triple-I Papers: |
|
|
About the
With more than 50 insurance company members — including regional, super-regional, national, and global carriers — the
Unlike other sources, Triple-I’s sole focus is creating and disseminating information to empower consumers. It neither lobbies nor sells insurance.
src="https://cts.businesswire.com/ct/CT?id=bwnewssty=20240314006595r1sid=acqr8distro=nxlang=en" style="width:0;height:0" />
View source version on businesswire.com: https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20240314006595/en/
New York Press Office:
Source:
CrossCover – We can't fly under the radar any longer…
Palomar Holdings Inc. (NASDAQ: PLMR) Making Surprising Moves in Thursday Session
Advisor News
Annuity News
Health/Employee Benefits News
Life Insurance News