Reasonable and Risk-Based?
Replacing NFIP Generally Subsidized Rates with a Means-Tested Subsidy
Published in: Southern Economic Journal, Volume 85, Issue 4, pages 1180–1195 (April 2019). doi: 10.1002/soej.12329
Posted on RAND.org on July 22, 2020
The National Flood Insurance Program was created to seek two often conflicting goals: (i) shifting risks from federal taxpayers to those who choose to live in flood plains and (ii) ensuring flood insurance is available to everyone at "reasonable" rates. Efforts to accomplish the second goal currently take the form of subsidies based on location and the date a home was constructed. The resulting revenue from subsidized insurance premiums is not sufficient to cover the true cost of flood insurance, and federal taxpayers have paid the difference: $30 billion to date. Based on a detailed survey of households in the high-risk flood zones of New York City (NYC), we find that replacing existing premium subsidies with risk-based prices and a subsidy for low-income housing-burdened households could better meet both goals by ensuring low-income individuals have access to affordable flood insurance while still saving the federal taxpayer up to $183 million per year in NYC alone.
Research conducted by
This report is part of the RAND Corporation External publication series. Many RAND studies are published in peer-reviewed scholarly journals, as chapters in commercial books, or as documents published by other organizations.
The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.