All posts by Jeff Dunsavage

Partnering for Resilience: Protecting Homes Through Stronger Roofs

By Loretta L. Worters, Vice President, Media Relations, Triple-I

Roof damage is a leading driver of insured losses and recovery costs. When a roof fails, the damage rarely stops there. Water intrusion can destroy interiors, equipment, inventory, and critical infrastructure, often leading to business interruptions, displacement, and significant financial hardship.

As hurricanes, hailstorms, tornadoes, wildfires, and other disasters become more frequent and costly, strengthening roofs is one of the most effective ways to reduce damage, improve resilience, and support long-term insurance affordability. For homeowners and businesses alike, a resilient roof is the first line of defense against nature’s most destructive forces.

That is why organizations such as the Insurance Institute for Business & Home Safety (IBHS), the Insurance Information Institute (Triple-I), and the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA) are increasingly aligned around a simple but powerful principle: investment in resilience works.

These organizations bring complementary strengths. IBHS provides scientific research and testing that underpin resilient roofing practices; Triple-I helps consumers, businesses, policymakers, and the media understand the connection between mitigation, risk reduction, and insurance affordability; and SBA supports small-business preparedness, resilience, and recovery through financing, technical assistance, and disaster assistance programs. Working together, they help translate research into action and encourage broader adoption of proven roof mitigation strategies.

Small improvements make a difference

IBHS research has consistently shown that relatively modest roof upgrades can dramatically reduce storm damage and insurance losses. Improvements like stronger roof deck attachments, sealed roof decks, impact-resistant roofing materials, enhanced edge protection, and improved water barriers help buildings better withstand severe weather. These upgrades are often most cost-effective when incorporated into roof replacement.

One of the most successful resilience initiatives is IBHS’s FORTIFIED™ program, a voluntary construction and re-roofing standard designed to strengthen buildings against severe weather. By enhancing roof performance and reducing the risk of water intrusion, FORTIFIED™ standards help close the gap between minimum building-code requirements and true resilience. As evidence of their effectiveness grows, more insurers and communities are embracing these standards to reduce losses and speed recovery after disasters.

Triple-I helps consumers and policymakers understand that insurance affordability is increasingly linked to reducing preventable losses before disasters occur, while highlighting the economic benefits of resilience investments. Through Triple-I’s educational outreach and resources, property owners can make more informed decisions about protecting their homes and businesses.

Small businesses at risk

Small businesses are especially vulnerable to roof-related losses. A severe storm can interrupt operations for weeks or months, damaging inventory, equipment, technology systems, and customer relationships. This is where SBA can play a transformative role. Financing options, resilience-focused partnerships, technical assistance, and mitigation programs can help overcome one of the biggest barriers to adoption: Upfront cost. Investing in stronger roofs is not simply a construction decision—it is an economic resilience strategy that helps businesses remain operational, communities recover faster, and local economies remain stronger after disasters.

Reducing disaster losses requires collaboration across the public and private sectors. Stronger roofs are more than a construction upgrade—they are an investment in economic stability, community resilience, and a more sustainable insurance market. By aligning scientific research, insurance incentives, public education, and financing support, organizations such as IBHS, Triple-I, and SBA can help drive meaningful change. The question is no longer whether mitigation works. The evidence is clear. The next step is creating the awareness, incentives, and financing needed to make resilient construction the norm rather than the exception.

Property owners seeking practical guidance can access Triple-I’s Roof Toolkit, IBHS’s Roofing Roadmaps, and SBA disaster loans, which can be increased by up to 20% to fund mitigation improvements, such as roof upgrades. Borrowers have up to two years from the date of loan approval to request mitigation funding. Together, these resources provide actionable information and financial support to help strengthen roofs and reduce disaster-related losses.

Learn More:

National Roofing Week Infographic: https://www.iii.org/article/infographic-national-roofing-week

Roofing Toolkit: How Your Roof Influences Your Home and Business Insurance

Steady Workers Comp Performance Masks Uneven Industry Realities

By William Nibbelin, Head of Industry Data and Actuarial Science, Triple-I 

While the workers’ compensation line continues to demonstrate remarkable resilience, underlying metrics indicate carriers must move beyond national averages to maintain long-term underwriting stability, according to the NCCI Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2026 – a key event for the workers’ comp industry.

“There’s not a single number that defines the workers’ compensation system,” said Donna Glenn, NCCI chief actuary, in her remarks on the NCCI State of the Line report. “Behind this year’s 91 combined ratio, factors such as industry mix, state differences, and carrier variation are all shaping results.”

Glenn added that insurers must interrogate the data and question these outcomes “to deliver deeper, actionable insights.”

State Differences

The workers’ comp system operates as a collection of unique jurisdictions with independent statutory frameworks and distinct economic exposures, creating variations in performance across states. NCCI acts as the licensed rating, advisory, and statistical organization for workers’ comp in most states, with California and New York being notable exceptions. Together, NCCI-rated states, alongside California and New York, make up 80 percent of the workers’ comp marketplace.

California results heavily skewed national reporting, with the state’s private-carrier accident-year combined ratio totaling 129 in 2025. Claims in the state can remain open after five years, at three times the national average, which has fueled a sharp escalation in cumulative trauma (CT) claims. Such claims now represent over 25 percent of all indemnity claims in the state, compared to a stable average of less than 5 percent across NCCI jurisdictions.

Litigation is another key driver, as more than 90 percent of CT claims in California become litigated. The transition to virtual case hearings has also allowed specialized legal firms to expand their reach statewide. Consequently, the California bureau filed a substantial 10.4 percent rate increase for late 2026.

In contrast, New York approved a loss cost decrease of 21.9 percent, effective late 2026, marking 10 consecutive years of downward rate adjustments. Workers’ comp writers in New York file for rate changes differently than those in California. In New York, they are required to use the New York Compensation Insurance Rating Board loss costs and, therefore, are only able to file loss-cost multipliers when filing for a rate change. In California, they can file loss costs in addition to their loss-cost multipliers.

New York also enforces strict medical treatment guidelines, generic drug formularies, and capped medical fee schedules that require extensive regulatory processes to alter.

On the exposure side, New York has experienced a noticeable post-pandemic structural shift in its economy. While overall total private sector jobs rose to 8.5 million, higher-risk sectors like construction and retail shrank by 7 percent and 9 percent, respectively, since 2019.

Regulatory Impacts

Looking at other states,Nevada was used as an example of how standalone statutory mechanisms impact actuarial trends. The state filed a standalone 21.6 percent loss cost increase for early 2026, an extreme outlier within NCCI states, driven by new state regulations. Senate Bill 317 effective October 1, 2026, will raise Nevada’s long-standing statutory cap limit on exposure reporting of $36,000 of an employee’s payroll to approximately $100,000.

Local medical and administrative delivery systems also impact state performances. NCCI actuaries evaluated temporary disability duration across claims closed within two years and observed substantial state-by-state disparities:

  • Low Duration States (e.g., Oregon, Vermont): 6–7 weeks on average.
  • High Duration States (e.g., the Carolinas, Georgia): 15 weeks on average.

Local care protocols, administrative efficiency, and attorney involvement amplify these disparities, with durations of litigated claims averaging six months longer than non-litigated counterparts.

“The time to close a workers’ compensation claim shows wide variation across jurisdictions: an additional 9 to 25 weeks after all medical services have been delivered”, said Raji Chadarevian, NCCI executive director for actuarial research. “That can have a meaningful impact on the cost of the claim.”

Industry-Specific Trends

At an industry level, claim trends diverge significantly from national averages:

  • Construction remains the largest industry sector by premium volume at 27 percent and achieved the largest drop in claim frequency at approximately 7 points between 2023 and 2024. Frequency decreased across each of its 10 largest job classifications, though medical severity remained the highest of any industry sector, driven by severe fall-from-height hazards. Notably, medical claim severity rose by a substantial 13 points between 2023 and 2024, with over half of the top ten construction classes reporting double-digit severity increases.
  • Health Care is, on average, a higher-frequency industry. Breaking from historical declines, claim frequency increased slightly in 2024, driven by significant multi-year employment growth that introduced a high volume of inexperienced, short-tenured workers. This was the sole sector that meaningfully contributed to job growth in 2025.
  • Office & Clerical roles are a historically low-frequency, low-exposure sector. Following a significant drop in frequency in 2020 due to widespread pandemic-related remote work, and a subsequent rebound in 2021, frequency decline has continued to outpace most other sectors. However, the sector recorded a slight increase in frequency in late 2024, primarily from a spike in motor vehicle accident claims for clerical workers whose professions involve driving.

Learn More:

Core Drivers and Emerging Risks for Workers’ Comp

Triple-I State of the Line Issues Brief: Workers’ Comp (members only)

Facts + Statistics: Workplace Safety/Workers’ Comp

Spotlight On: Workers’ Compensation


Core Drivers and Emerging Risks for Workers’ Comp

By William Nibbelin, Head of Industry Data and Actuarial Science, Triple-I 

Factors driving stability in the workers’ compensation line were a central focus at the NCCI Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2026 – a key event for the workers’ comp industry. In aggregate, workers’ comp welcomed its 11th consecutive year of net underwriting profitability in 2025, continuing to outpace the broader property/casualty industry.

Alongside this success, industry leaders and actuaries provided insights into the underlying trends and emerging risks to watch going forward for the line.

Key Findings

  • Premium: Workers’ comp net written premium decreased by 1.5 points in 2025, to $45.6 billion. For private carriers, this decrease was 0.2 points, to $41.6 billion.
  • Changes in premium include a 6-point decline in 2025 bureau loss costs and payroll growth of 4.8 points, comprising 0.5 points in employment and 4.3 points in wage rate.
    • Despite an overall decrease in premium, the residual market share declined to just 5 percent in 2025.
  • Profitability: The 2025 calendar year net combined ratio of 92.8 was an increase of 4.0 points over 2024 at 88.8. For private carriers, the net combined ratio of 91 was an increase of nearly 5 points over 2024 at 86, marking 12 consecutive years of underwriting gains. The accident year combined ratio of 102 is projected to develop downward by 5 to 6 points based on historical reserve experience.
  • Reserves: NCCI estimates a net redundant industry reserve position of $14 billion for private carriers.
  • Severity Trends: Both medical and indemnity severity increased by 4 points in 2025.
  • Frequency Trends: Lost-time claim frequency decreased by 2 points in 2025, compared to a decrease of 5.9 points in 2024. This represents a more moderate decrease in frequency compared to the long-term average annual decline of 3.8 points.

Economic Uncertainty

NCCI filed a 5 percent decrease in loss costs effective in 2026, marking the 13th consecutive year of declines. These results are a product of rising payroll and long-term frequency improvements, coupled with favorable reserve development expectations, which together have outpaced severity increases.

However, underwriting margins face clear headwinds from economic uncertainty, including the significant rise in energy prices and the potential for stagflation. In a stagnant economy, businesses stop growing, unemployment rises, and prices increase.

Yet, as NCCI Practice Leader and Senior Economist Stephen Cooper noted, the economy has remained resilient in 2026, despite these risks.

“Employment growth on a month-to-month basis has been volatile over the past year, with most growth concentrated in one sector,” Cooper explained. “Overall, however, the labor market remains in balance, as both supply and demand have evened out and there have been early signs of the labor market potentially strengthening in 2026.”

Evolving Risks

The symposium highlighted several structural and technological changes altering the nature of workers’ comp risk:

Pain Management: Pain management protocols have increasingly shifted toward holistic treatment methods, including extended physical therapy and topical solutions. Major surgery utilization has dropped by 8 points since 2016, whereas physical therapy utilization has expanded considerably, driven by a greater intensity of procedures per session, rather than an increase in session frequency.

Delivery of Care: Medical benefits are heavily impacted by the broader U.S. healthcare delivery system. Over the past decade, private equity firms have invested more than $1 trillion into independent ambulatory surgery centers, specialty practices, and outpatient clinics. Simultaneously, massive hospital networks are consolidating or restricting health care access in rural communities. These changes contributed to a 5-point drop in the share of workers visiting emergency departments on the day of their injury.

Remote Work: Work-from-home options are increasingly used as “reasonable accommodations” for injured employees in some industry sectors. By eliminating commuting constraints, remote work structures allow injured employees to perform tasks virtually, mitigating lost-time indemnity claims.

AI: Beyond general system performance optimization, AI tools are being deployed for early-stage claim triage, automated medical bill auditing, and identification of potential litigation vulnerability. NCCI has also instituted formal governance structures for digital assets and initiated programs that leverage machine learning models to streamline the risk classification code assignment process.

Aging Workforce: Employees aged 55 and older now account for nearly one-quarter of the total labor force, a segment that will expand over the next decade. While the experience of older workers minimizes injury frequency, their physiological responses are more complex, yielding higher average medical costs and prolonged recovery periods.

“Demographic forces help to shape the workers’ compensation claim environment,” said Paul Hendrick, NCCI Practice Leader and Senior Actuary. “Factors such as employee tenure or the aging workforce are not abstract economic concepts; they have a real, tangible impact on the nature and frequency of claims that occur every day in the workers’ comp system.”

Learn More:

Steady Workers Comp Performance Masks Uneven Industry Realities

Triple-I State of the Line Issues Brief: Workers’ Comp (members only)

Facts + Statistics: Workplace Safety/Workers’ Comp

Spotlight On: Workers’ Compensation

Illinois Bill Would Hurt Insurers and Customers

By Jeff Dunsavage, Head of Research Publications and Insights

Senate Bill 1486 – currently moving through the Illinois General Assembly – would unnecessarily burden insurers and hurt the customers it is intended to protect.

“The measure would add new regulatory layers that could impede the accurate pricing of risk while doing nothing to address the underlying causes of rising premiums,” Triple-I said in a recently published Policy Brief. “Premiums are increasing at different rates across the country, reflecting a mix of factors that include climate events, shifting populations, rising costs to repair and replace property, and legal system abuse.”

All these factors drive up the number and the cost of claims and, if not properly addressed, could erode the policyholder surplus insurers are required to keep on hand to pay claims. If surplus declines below levels mandated by regulators, insurers must raise rates or rethink their appetite for writing coverage in riskier states.

Neither option is good for consumers.

If affordability is the goal, the most effective path is cost reduction. Illinois leaders should model the behavior of states that are addressing the root causes of rising insurance premiums – not just treating the symptoms.

The brief also points out that both homeowners’ and personal auto insurance in Illinois is more affordable than the U.S. average, when measured as a ratio of average insurance expenditures to median household income.

Learn More:

Trends and Insights: Illinois (Members-only content)

Illinois Storms Highlight Severe Weather Losses

Triple-I Legal System Abuse Awareness Campaign Enters California, Illinois

Illinois Lawmakers Reject Risk-Based Pricing Challenge

New Illinois Bills Would Harm — Not Help — Auto Policyholders

Welcome Back, BRIC

By Jeff Dunsavage, Head of Research Publications and Insights, Triple-I

The restoration of FEMA’s Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program after its sudden cancellation a year ago is good news for communities that will benefit from the program.

Congress established BRIC through the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 to ensure a stable funding source to support mitigation projects annually. Before its cancellation on April 4, 2025, the program had allocated more than $5 billion for investment in mitigation projects to alleviate human suffering and avoid economic losses from floods, wildfires, and other disasters.

At the time the program was cancelled, Chad Berginnis, executive director of the Association of State Floodplain Managers (ASFPM), was critical of the decision.

 “Although ASFPM has had some qualms about how FEMA’s BRIC program was implemented, it was still a cornerstone of our nation’s hazard mitigation strategy, and the agency has worked to make improvements each year,” Berginnis said.

A coalition of 23 states challenged the cancellation and secured a court order requiring FEMA to restore billions in funding to communities that rely on the hazard-mitigation program. In a March 6 ruling, a U.S. district judge Richard G. Stearns gave FEMA 21days to unfreeze the approximately $750 million in grants that have been in limbo since the cancellation, which it did on March 31.

Tighter scrutiny

The restored BRIC program is largely the same statutory program, but now it operates under tighter judicial and congressional scrutiny. FEMA also explicitly states that the restored program:

  • Prioritizes infrastructure and construction projects that deliver immediate, measurable risk reduction;
  • Limits capability‑ and capacity‑building activities to those directly tied to infrastructure; and
  • Excludes stand‑alone planning activities not connected to physical mitigation outcomes

“BRIC isn’t a perfect program, but it’s a necessary one,” said Daniel Kaniewski, CEO of Northstar Risk & Resilience, a former FEMA deputy administrator, and a Triple-I non-resident scholar. “It was formed to help drive investment in creating disaster-resilient communities – a very real need.”

Kaniewski drew comparisons with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) “Risk Rating 2.0” reforms, which aligned NFIP premiums more closely with the risk characteristics of insured properties. Before the reforms, lower-risk property owners frequently subsidized the coverage of higher-risk homes. Risk Rating 2.0 made rates fairer and the program more fiscally sound. But further reforms to NFIP are necessary, just as BRIC may need to be updated based on lessons learned from the first few years of the program’s implementation. 

Kaniewski offered a final caution.

“BRIC alone – or any federal program on its own – isn’t going to close the nation’s disaster resilience gap,” he said. “It’s going to take community leaders, emergency managers, businesses, nonprofits – and, of course, the insurance industry – pulling in the same direction. The burden can’t exclusively fall on the property owners and federal taxpayers.”

Learn More:

BRIC Funding Loss Underscores Need for Collective Action on Climate Resilience

Convective Storm Losses: Historic 3-Year Streak

Flash Floods Set Records in 2025, Inland Risk Surges

Claims Leaders Take Charge on Climate-Resilient Rebuilding

Climate Nonprofits Take Responsibility for Terminated U.S. Databases

Resilience Investment Payoffs Outpace Future Costs More Than 30 Times

Oil Prices Might Reduce
Accidents, But Severity Would Offset Impact

By Jeff Dunsavage, Head of Research Publications and Insights, Triple-I

If oil prices continue to rise due to hostilities in the Middle East, fewer drivers on the road could lead to fewer accidents and insurance claims. However, increased severity – driven by rising replacement costs – would likely overwhelm any decrease in frequency over time, according to Patrick Schmid, Triple-I’s chief insurance officer.

“Even before the war, repair costs were rising more than twice as fast as general inflation,” Schmid said.  “From the supply-chain disruptions of COVID through the past year’s economic policy uncertainty with tariffs, as well as legal system abuse, upward pressure on claim costs has been unrelenting.”

Indeed, more costly gas might not affect driving as much as one might expect. According to the American Public Transportation Association, a 10 percent rise only reduces driving by 0.2 to 0.3 percent. Even if high prices continue, the average drop is just 1.1 to 1.5 percent.

“People still need to get to work and run their lives,” Schmid said. “Gas price alone isn’t enough to dramatically change that.”

Research shows wealthier drivers cut back on driving more than lower-income drivers – who tend to have fewer choices as to how they get to and from work – when gas gets expensive. Policyholders who can’t easily reduce their driving are often the ones with tighter budgets and older, less safe vehicles.

Oil prices don’t just affect how much people drive — they also flow through the entire repair supply chain. The cost of auto maintenance and repair climbed roughly 10 percent from 2023 to 2024 alone, a trend pushed higher by inflation and a shortage of skilled technicians.

What does this mean for policyholders?

The factors that influence premiums vary widely by state, and accident frequency is just one of them.  Louisiana – one of the least-affordable states – has recently seen declines in premiums as a result of both reduced frequency and severity.  

A major contributor to high premiums is the prevalence of fraud and legal system abuse in those states. States like Florida that have proactively sought to address these factors through legal system reforms, have begun to see rate declines. Since Florida’s reforms, nearly 20 new property insurers have entered the state and existing carriers have expanded their market share, driving renewed competition in the private market. This facilitated the lowest number of policies administered by Citizens Property Insurance Corp. – the state-run insurer of last resort – in over a decade.

“It’s encouraging to see other states beginning to follow Florida’s lead,” Schmid said. “It’s important for policymakers to follow successful examples.”

Learn More:

Lessons for Texas from Florida’s Legal System Reforms

Florida Premiums Drop Amid Post-Reform Stability

Uber Joins Effort to Drive Legal System Reform

Auto Premium Growth Slows as Policyholders Shop Around, Study Says

Even With Recent Rises, Auto Insurance Is More Affordable Than During Most of Century to Date

New York Among Least Affordable States for Auto Insurance

Louisiana Auto Insurance Rates Benefit from Declines in Frequency, Severity

Revealing Hidden Cost to Consumers of Auto Litigation Inflation

Uber Joins Effort to Drive Legal System Reform

Legal System Abuse, Artificial Intelligence Cloud 2026 Outlook

Triple-I Legal System Abuse Awareness Campaign Enters California, Illinois

Georgia Targets Legal System Abuse

Legal System Abuse Awareness Campaign Spreads Across U.S.

By Jeff Dunsavage, Head of Research Publications and Insights, Triple-I

Triple-I’s awareness-building campaign around legal system abuse and its impact on consumers and businesses – including driving up insurance premiums – continues to spread across the nation.

Over the past several weeks, brick-and-mortar highway billboards and digital displays have appeared in areas of Missouri, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin. This follows the campaign’s February expansion into California and Illinois. Kicked off in 2024 in the Capitol District of Atlanta, the campaign also includes a dedicated online consumer-education resource:  StopLegalSystemAbuse.org and targeted social media messaging.

By demonstrating the direct link between lawsuit abuse and increased insurance premiums, Triple-I aims to catalyze legislative action and economic relief.

 “We have already seen how meaningful tort reform in states like Florida, Georgia, and Louisiana can stabilize the insurance market and provide direct financial relief to consumers,” said Triple-I CEO Sean Kevelighan. “Triple-I remains committed to educating lawmakers and the public on the high cost of legal system abuse, addressing the critical issue of affordability for families, and driving legislative progress that restores balance to the national economy.”

The pain is real

Affordability – including insurance costs – is a nationwide issue, and consumers’ pain is real. Unfortunately, many legislative proposals aimed at easing that pain would have the opposite effect.  As Bloomberg warned in a January 2026 editorial, policymakers should resist politically popular but “simplistic solutions, such as capping premiums, subsidizing homebuyers, or punishing investors.”

Instead, it recommends taking steps to increase investment in catastrophe resilience and mitigate cost drivers like legal system abuse.

“In many states,” the editorial said, “underwriters must contend with laws that favor plaintiffs, outsized jury awards, and a proliferation of funds that specialize in financing lawsuits. Research suggests that such costs have been the single biggest driver of premium increases in recent years.”

Also feeding higher premiums are increased replacement costs related to inflation.

Model what’s working

As policymakers seek ways to address these influences, it’s important to learn from states that are succeeding. Florida has a long history of man-made problems caused by insurance fraud and litigation abuse that have contributed to upward pressure on insurance rates. More recently, the state’s legislative reforms to address fraud and tort reform have made the Sunshine State a national model for getting at the root causes of high premiums, instead of merely treating the symptoms.

Since reforms were enacted following a 2022 special session of the Florida Legislature, nearly 20 new property insurers have entered the state and existing carriers have expanded their market share, driving renewed private competition. That shift has facilitated a deep reduction in the number of policies administered by Citizens Property Insurance Corp. – the state-run insurer of last resort.

Other states would do well to pay attention to Florida’s blueprint and learn from these and other successes.

Learn More:

Lessons for Texas in Florida Legal Reforms

Florida Premiums Drop Amid Post-Reform Stability

Uber Joins Effort to Drive Legal System Reform

Legal System Abuse, Artificial Intelligence Cloud 2026 Outlook

Claims Leaders Take Charge on Climate-Resilient Rebuilding

Triple-I Legal System Abuse Awareness Campaign Enters California, Illinois

Take Care in Addressing Homeowners’ Premiums, Bloomberg Cautions Policymakers

New York Among Least Affordable States for Auto Insurance

Louisiana Auto Insurance Rates Benefit From Declines in Frequency, Severity

Inflation, Replacement Costs, Climate Losses Shape Homeowners’ Insurance Options

Workers’ Comp:
Quiet Overachiever
in P/C Insurance

By William Nibbelin, Senior Research Actuary, Triple-I

While personal auto and home insurance tend to be the focus of most insurance-related headlines, workers’ compensation has quietly become a model of stability and profitability. According to Triple-I’s latest Issues Brief, 2024 marked the third-best underwriting performance for the line in two decades, with a net combined ratio of 87.8.

That’s a full decade of underwriting profit for the industry. Since 2015, workers’ comp has consistently outperformed the property and casualty (P/C) insurance market. Combined ratio is the most common measure of insurer underwriting profitability. It is calculated by dividing the sum of the claim-related losses and expenses by premium. In its simplest form, a combined ratio under 100 means the insurer is making an underwriting profit; over 100 means the insurer is paying out more than it’s taking in.

The Jobs Engine and Premium Growth

Workers’ comp premiums are tied directly to the workforce. When more people work and wages rise, premiums generally follow. Only in 2020, because of the COVID-19 pandemic, employment numbers shrank in at least 15 years. Since 2020, the years 2021 through 2024 have seen the highest year-over-year increases in payroll in over two decades. However, premiums aren’t growing as fast as they are for other types of insurance, suggesting that the cost of coverage isn’t increasing though more people are working.

Safer Workplaces

Claims “frequency” — the measure of how often they happen — has been dropping steadily at an annual compound rate of -5.6 percent from 2015 to 2024, indicating work is getting safer. However, the “severity” of claims — the average cost of each claim — has been increasing.

When compared to the overall economy (GDP), however, the average cost of claims is decreasing. Therefore, the rising costs of individual claims are being driven more by general inflation in the economy than by workplace safety getting worse.

A More Competitive Market

One measure of industry competition is market concentration, which can be determined by the Herfindahl-Hirschman Index (HHI). The higher the index, the more market share is concentrated in fewer companies, implying less competition. The workers’ comp market has become much more competitive over the last 10 years. This is partly because states are moving away from government-run systems. For example, Missouri recently privatized its state fund in early 2025. Today, only 18 states have a competitive state fund. The direct combined ratio for fully privatized states has outperformed these states eight of the last 10 years. Fortunately, the direct written premium for these competitive funds as a percentage of total workers’ comp premium has dropped from 14.9 percent in 2015 to 12.9 percent in 2024.

Learn More:

NCCI Sees Underwriting Profitability Continuing for Workers Comp Line

NCCI AIS 2025: Key Insights on Workers Comp

Workers Comp Premium, Loss, Market Trends Support Its Ongoing Success

Triple-I Legal System Abuse Awareness Campaign Enters California, Illinois

By Lewis Nibbelin, Research Writer, Triple-I

As part of its continuing effort to highlight the impacts of legal system abuse, Triple-I has launched public awareness campaigns on the need for legal reforms in Los Angeles, Calif., and Cook County, Ill., which includes Chicago. The campaigns comprise brick-and-mortar billboards and digital scapes in high-traffic areas across both regions, all of which promote Triple-I’s updated StopLegalSystemAbuse.org microsite.

California and Illinois are perennial members of the American Tort Reform Foundation’s (ATRF) annual list of “judicial hellholes,” or jurisdictions where the organization believes legal system abuse runs rampant. Los Angeles topped its most recent list due to frequent nuclear verdicts and “novel theories of product and environmental liability” to the disadvantage of defendants, ATRF says, with Cook County ranked seventh.

A consumer guide co-authored by Triple-I and Munich Re outlines how such practices fuel rising insurance premiums and other cost burdens throughout the country, to the tune of $6,664 in added annual costs for an American family of four and 4.8 million in jobs lost nationwide. Per resident, these annual costs amount to $2,566.70 in California and just over $2,000 in Illinois, with both states losing hundreds of thousands of jobs every year.

Billboard lawyers blur reality

Attorney advertising often obfuscates this reality, implying plaintiffs win big rather than receive only a fraction of awarded damages. Triple-I’s most recent Issues Brief on legal system abuse notes that legal service providers spent $2.5 billion on millions of ads in 2024 largely to tout this messaging, which research suggests increases the number of plaintiffs in multidistrict litigation (MDL), or large, complex lawsuits consisting of multiple civil cases in different districts.

Additional research from Triple-I and the Casualty Actuarial Society (CAS) estimates that excessive litigation drove $231.6 billion to $281.2 billion in increased liability insurance losses from 2015 to 2024, a finding that economic inflation alone cannot explain. A separate Triple-I report on civil case filings reinforces the trend, revealing an estimated $42.8 billion in excess litigation value from motor vehicle tort cases filed between 2014 and 2023 in the federal and state civil courts.

Gaining momentum

Triple-I’s new campaigns build on the momentum of its parallel efforts in Georgia and Louisiana, where state lawmakers successfully passed sweeping legal system abuse reforms last year. Both states, for instance, have established greater oversight of third-party litigation funding to prevent outside investors from gaming the court system for profit. Though the reforms remain too recent to fully affect premiums, legal reforms in Florida model the kinds of subsequent market improvements these states can later expect.

Families and businesses across the country are grappling with rising costs. By distorting loss trends and propelling claims expenses, unnecessary and drawn-out litigation serves only to exacerbate the strain. Addressing these pressures requires ongoing dialogue between regulators, consumers, industry leaders, and other stakeholders to ensure fairness in the court system while supporting a stable insurance environment that keeps coverage accessible.

Learn More:

Take Care in Addressing Homeowners’ Premiums, Bloomberg Cautions Policymakers

Revealing Hidden Cost to Consumers of Auto Litigation Inflation

Litigation Reform Works: Florida Auto Insurance Premium Rates Declining

New Consumer Guide Highlights the Economic Impact of Legal System Abuse and the Need for Reform

Triple-I Brief Highlights Legal System Abuse and Attorney Advertising

Significant Tort Reform Advances in Louisiana

New Triple-I Issue Brief Puts the Spotlight on Georgia’s Insurance Affordability Crisis

Amid Data Boom, Actuarial Analysis Belongs in the Forefront

By Lewis Nibbelin, Research Writer, Triple-I

Given the growing ubiquity of artificial intelligence, its practical applications may seem self-evident. But for actuaries – whose work hinges on rigorous modeling and explainable risk assessment – translating AI-driven insights into analysis may pose as many challenges as solutions. A well-defined balance between technological capability and ongoing actuarial judgement is essential to navigating this shift.

“The challenge is not that there’s too much data – it’s having an awareness of what you’re looking for and then finding it,” said Dr. Michel Léonard, Triple-I chief economist and data scientist, in a recent interview for the Casualty Actuarial Society (CAS) Institute’s Almost Nowhere podcast. “If you look at all the data and it’s not focused and translated, the signal is not going to be what you need.”

Noting that many AI models train on varied language sources, Léonard stressed that data understanding and preparation are crucial to confronting the “black box,” or opacity surrounding the training and internal decision-making processes of complex algorithms. To integrate AI into risk assessment, carriers will need to demonstrate the mechanisms and actuarial record behind the models they deploy, especially for regulators and the broader public.

Though dynamic wildfire models, for instance, “very clearly show that the risk is more frequent and severe,” ongoing transparency around how these models work will be key to building “a bridge between regulators and the industry,” Léonard said.

While such models have facilitated greater access to granular, real-time data, critical information gaps continue to impede effective risk forecasting, especially following the 2025 federal government shutdown. Beyond being the longest federal closure in U.S. history, the shutdown also delayed or left permanent gaps in crucial survey data on employment, inflation, and other economic indicators, fueling more uncertainty for decision makers heading into 2026.

“Because of this uncertainty, we’re forecasting on the trend, which means that we cannot stress test or include validation for those stress tests,” Léonard said. “The lack of data on the U.S. economy is the main challenge for us right now.”

Current tariff policies – especially those targeting materials used in repairing and replacing property after insured events – add to the ambiguity. Though insurers appeared to avoid “the worst-case scenario” of COVID-19 levels of market instability last year, strategic stockpiling of imported goods to circumvent later post-tariff prices may have obscured their full impact, Léonard explained.

A pending Supreme Court ruling will determine the future of these policies, leaving global markets and consumers braced for potentially rising costs. Yet Léonard emphasized the insurance industry’s resilience in managing such “extreme, black swan-type events,” pointing out “that’s why we have a reasonable and adequate policyholder surplus” and other assets to ensure consumers remain protected.

Listen to Podcast: Spotify, Apple, YouTube

Learn More:

Tariffs, Shutdown Cloud 2026 Insurance Outlook

Triple-I Brief Explains Benefits of Risk-Based Pricing of Insurance

Tech — Especially A.I. — Is Top of Mind for Global Insurance Executives

JIF 2025 “Risk Takes”: Data Solutions for Today’s Challenges

L.A. Homeowners’ Suits Misread California’s Insurance Troubles

Data Granularity Key to Finding Less Risky Parcels in Wildfire Areas

Executive Exchange: Insuring AI-Related Risks