Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Understanding The New Flood Insurance Law
President Barack Obama signed into law the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act in March. This legislation is intended as a solution to extreme flood insurance rate increases caused by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012.
When Biggert-Waters was passed, the real estate market nearly ground to a halt because government-subsidized rates disappeared when a person sold a primary home. That meant that flood insurance premiums could soar without restraint.
Key Points
The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act eliminates the provision that caused government-subsidized rates to disappear, provides a refund for those who already paid dramatically higher rates under that provision and maintains protections due to sunset for “grandfathered” properties built to code after a community adopted its first flood insurance rate map.
It holds annual increases for older homes in flood zones to 5% to 15% on average, with a hard cap of 18% until the rate reaches the actuarial rates. Owners of grandfathered second homes and commercial property also will be spared from losing their subsidized rates immediately. The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act does not, however, stop Federal Emergency Management Agency from imposing annual increases up to 25% on older second homes and commercial properties.
The new law is better than the aftermath of Biggert-Waters, but it's not clear by how much. Although rate increases have been diminished or eliminated, that is not the case for all properties. It is true that the devastating requirement that new owners immediately pay actuarial rates on properties that had previously enjoyed subsidized rates is gone. However, determination of flood insurance rates will remain complicated.
Everyone Else?
Properties are divided into three broad categories: Those built before federal flood maps existed, grandfathered properties, and everyone else. The “everyone else” are those who do not fit neatly into the other two categories.
Properties built before federal flood maps existed, which have long enjoyed subsidized rates, still will have to move to actuarial rates albeit at a more gradual path than under the former flood insurance law.
Grandfathered properties that were initially built to flood codes and later drawn into a higher-risk flood zone, but not required to pay higher rates, will keep their subsidized rates under the new law. There remain a number of concerns including how high the rates will ultimately go and what will happen to the “everyone else” category.
There also remains real concern in the local real estate market about the lack of relief in the new law for rate increases for commercial and investment properties built before federal flood maps existed.
Those properties, including second homes, will still face average rate increases of 25% a year until they reach actuarial rates, with no cap on the annual increase for individual properties.
Buying Time
Finally, there remain serious questions about the effectiveness of the nation's flood maps and the flood insurance program's rate-setting. The best those in Florida, for example, can hope for at this point is that the national flood insurance program is in the spotlight and this momentum will continue to force more positive change.
The best outcome would be for FEMA to embrace the spirit of the law and become more open and accountable for how it draws flood maps and sets insurance premiums.
The repeal of many parts of the Biggert-Waters Act and the institution of the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act may give a short-term boost to flood-prone areas' real estate market, but it may not be a long-term solution.
President Barack Obama signed into law the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act in March. This legislation is intended as a solution to extreme flood insurance rate increases caused by the Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012.
When Biggert-Waters was passed, the real estate market nearly ground to a halt because government-subsidized rates disappeared when a person sold a primary home. That meant that flood insurance premiums could soar without restraint.
Key Points
The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act eliminates the provision that caused government-subsidized rates to disappear, provides a refund for those who already paid dramatically higher rates under that provision and maintains protections due to sunset for “grandfathered” properties built to code after a community adopted its first flood insurance rate map.
It holds annual increases for older homes in flood zones to 5% to 15% on average, with a hard cap of 18% until the rate reaches the actuarial rates. Owners of grandfathered second homes and commercial property also will be spared from losing their subsidized rates immediately. The Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act does not, however, stop Federal Emergency Management Agency from imposing annual increases up to 25% on older second homes and commercial properties.
The new law is better than the aftermath of Biggert-Waters, but it's not clear by how much. Although rate increases have been diminished or eliminated, that is not the case for all properties. It is true that the devastating requirement that new owners immediately pay actuarial rates on properties that had previously enjoyed subsidized rates is gone. However, determination of flood insurance rates will remain complicated.
Everyone Else?
Properties are divided into three broad categories: Those built before federal flood maps existed, grandfathered properties, and everyone else. The “everyone else” are those who do not fit neatly into the other two categories.
Properties built before federal flood maps existed, which have long enjoyed subsidized rates, still will have to move to actuarial rates albeit at a more gradual path than under the former flood insurance law.
Grandfathered properties that were initially built to flood codes and later drawn into a higher-risk flood zone, but not required to pay higher rates, will keep their subsidized rates under the new law. There remain a number of concerns including how high the rates will ultimately go and what will happen to the “everyone else” category.
There also remains real concern in the local real estate market about the lack of relief in the new law for rate increases for commercial and investment properties built before federal flood maps existed.
Those properties, including second homes, will still face average rate increases of 25% a year until they reach actuarial rates, with no cap on the annual increase for individual properties.
Buying Time
Finally, there remain serious questions about the effectiveness of the nation's flood maps and the flood insurance program's rate-setting. The best those in Florida, for example, can hope for at this point is that the national flood insurance program is in the spotlight and this momentum will continue to force more positive change.
The best outcome would be for FEMA to embrace the spirit of the law and become more open and accountable for how it draws flood maps and sets insurance premiums.
The repeal of many parts of the Biggert-Waters Act and the institution of the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act may give a short-term boost to flood-prone areas' real estate market, but it may not be a long-term solution.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
The Cost of Making Partner
Making partner isn't cheap, and the cost is more than just the years of hard work and stress that associates put in as they reach for the brass ring.