Tax Rates Are Higher In Floodville -- Imagine That
Jeff Harrington writes in the Tampa Bay Trib that Floridians pay more for insurance -- an article accompanied by a photo of mobile homes partly under water:
It's still more expensive to buy homeowners insurance in Florida than anywhere else in the country.In fact, Florida homeowners are now paying more than double the national average.
Average insurance premiums statewide for the most common type of homeowners policy rose nearly 8 percent in 2012 to $2,084, according to data released this week from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.
That makes Florida the first state to cross the $2,000 mark in average premiums and widens the gap between the next two states on the list, both of them coastal: Louisiana (average premiums of $1,742) and Texas ($1,661).
The national average: $1,034. For the record, Florida's premiums are 102 percent higher.
And the truth is, taxpayers do a whole lot of subsidizing of seaside-dwelling wealthy people and others who choose to live in areas where disaster is prone to strike. This should be on them, not on the rest of us.
UPDATED: ("Flood," which I erroneously included before "insurance," has been removed.)
via @reasonpolicy
I don't know about Florida...but where ever I have lived flood insurance was separate from home owners insurance.
The Former Banker at January 22, 2015 11:12 PM
This may surprise you, but flooding due to rainfall is nearly nonexistent in Florida. It is a flat state, with few contours to concentrate rainfall in populated areas. You simply do not see the sort of signs you find along the side of the road in South Carolina, Pennsylvania or Maine (three places I've seen these), stating, "Hundred year flood level nn feet at this location".
Of course the state is vulnerable to hurricane storm surges.
Radwaste at January 23, 2015 3:13 AM
Gregg was in a horrible hurricane there when he lived there -- maybe two. And he didn't live there long.
I shouldn't have written "flood" above. Going to correct it.
Amy Alkon at January 23, 2015 5:15 AM
My homeowners insurance skyrocketed after Hurricane Andrew. Floridians were not paying enough to cover the costs incurred by the hurricane. Florida does not have an insurance problem. Florida is an insurance problem.
MarkD at January 23, 2015 7:31 AM
I suspect that the "average", by which I suppose then are referring to the mean, does not do a good job of representing the situation due to an abnormal distribution curve. My experience in Florida is that those who live on or near the coast pay extremely high insurance rates; those who live inland pay about the national average or maybe a bit less. As Raddy points out, rainfall-driven flooding is not actually that big a thing in Florida, because it's flat and because the soil is very permeable and rain soaks in quickly. Florida isn't subject to the types of natural disasters that most of the U.S. experiences: no earthquakes, no ice storms, few strong tornadoes. The big thing is lighting, but residences are usually protected by taller structures, and the people who build tall structures in Florida know how to deal with it.
Cousin Dave at January 23, 2015 7:35 AM
In the more northern reaches of Florida, where the soil becomes a Georgia clay with slopes, flooding can be a problem.
A neighbor a few blocks over from me got water in his house before Christmas when Tallahassee received 7+" of rain in a 24 hour period. That house was located in a bit of a dip, maybe two to four feet from either end of the block, and about four feet down from the street directly in front. Which, also sloped at the house. The berm used to channel that water to a storm drain failed. Whoops.
The worst I'd seen here was the no-longer-named tropical storm Allison which dumped over 10" on us in 24 hours, and much of that over a 5 hour period. A pond in a park had been drained and dredged earlier that year, and we had been told that it would take about 2 years to refill.
Heh. Took about 5 hours...the roads around it where flooded, as was much of the park.
The Former Banker is correct: flood insurance is separate from general home owners. I am fortunate that I don't live in a flood plane, as I am not required to buy flood insurance.
Also: flood insurance is heavily subsidized. But the reason we're paying so much in home owners insurance is due to the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons.
I R A Darth Aggie at January 23, 2015 7:41 AM
Yes, to your last paragraph.
The rates to insure right-on-the-water properties would be so outrageous (rightfully so) that nobody could afford to insure them (again, rightfully so). In which case there would be fewer of them (rightfully so). Which would be better for everyone, for lots of reasons - insurance and otherwise.
It steams me that I am paying the same rate as a waterfront home (my little town is a waterfront town). But I'm on high ground, protected by very old trees (that have obviously not been damaged by hurricanes in at least a century). The insurance companies have to know this, right? But that's not reflected in my rates.
And that doesn't count FEMA and other disaster costs borne by taxpayers, spread over a wider pay-base than us "close to the water" insureds. Why in the world do we let developers cash in on these endangered locations, disappear with the loot, then expect the gov't to swoop in and rescue the (willing) suckers? Really, it's a zoning problem more than anything.
flbeachmom at January 23, 2015 7:49 AM
Those balmy tropical breezes are wonderful, until they get a running start from the West Indies.
Conan the Grammarian at January 23, 2015 9:30 AM
Also: flood insurance is heavily subsidized. But the reason we're paying so much in home owners insurance is due to the 2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons.
By everyone else in the state. You want to live on the water, fine. You want everyone else to pay when bad things happen, once maybe. Once the ocean (or the Gulf) decides your house does not belong so close, and you get your money back (from Uncle and all your neighbors), next time is ALL ON YOU.
drcos at January 23, 2015 10:02 AM
It seems most folks just do not get the concept of "insurance."
It should be about risks and liabilities. Not about everyone paying the same.
If you drive a more expensive car or drive more dangerously; then you should pay more car insurance.
If you build a house in an area that has more flooding, or more earthquakes, or other natural disasters then you should pay more than the folks who build their houses in a safer area.
But, then we have Obamacare which is trying to make us all purchase the same healthcare insurance and get the same crappy healthcare. So, why would we expect most folks to think differently about other types of insurance?
charles at January 23, 2015 9:02 PM
Leave a comment