The introduction of federal terrorism coverage could tempt some insurers into taking on exposure irresponsibly and have the perverse effect of casting doubt on ratings, according to a Standard & Poor’s report.
“The concern is some insurers could use federal backing as a crutch,” Fred Loeloff, a director in Standard & Poor’s insurance ratings, remarked. “From a ratings perspective, you need to have confidence in the exposure-management capabilities of the insurer, that it can properly assess and manage its risks, without depending on government backing.”
Reportedly, although there is a compelling case for government-backstop legislation to ease constraints in the U.S. economy, its importance to insurers has diminished in the past year because carriers have drastically reduced their exposure to terror events.
Another concern is that those states which now permit insurers to exclude terrorism from policy contracts, could reverse themselves and require the coverage.
“Our sensitivities will be increased because companies will, either by
mandate or voluntarily, be exposed to terrorism risk,” Steve Dreyer, managing director, warned.
Topics Catastrophe Natural Disasters Carriers
Was this article valuable?
Here are more articles you may enjoy.
Palm Beach Billionaires Feud Over Who’s Really Protecting the Everglades 
Carnival Cruise Passenger Served 14 Shots Awarded $300,000 After Fall Down Stairs 
Three Sentenced in Bear-Suit Attacks Insurance Fraud Case 
Chubb Q1 Net Income Increases 74% on Fewer Catastrophe Losses 
