Repetitive Loss Properties Drain 30% of NFIP Claims Despite Being 1% of Policies

Approximately 30,000 'repetitive loss' and 'severe repetitive loss' properties -- homes that have flooded and been rebuilt multiple times -- account for roughly 1% of all NFIP policies but consume nearly 30% of all claims dollars paid out. Some individual properties have received more in cumulative NFIP payouts than the home is worth on the open market. One frequently cited example: a $70,000 home in Mississippi received over $660,000 in NFIP claims over multiple flooding events. This is not just a fiscal absurdity -- it represents a moral hazard that actively harms the communities where these properties sit. Every dollar spent rebuilding a house in a location that will flood again next year is a dollar not spent on buyouts, elevation, or mitigation that would permanently solve the problem. The neighbors of repetitive loss properties watch their own premiums rise to subsidize someone else's refusal to relocate or elevate. The human cost is also severe for the repetitive loss property owners themselves. These are often elderly, low-income homeowners who cannot afford to move and do not have the resources to elevate their homes. They are trapped in a cycle of flooding, filing claims, waiting months for payments, living in damaged or moldy homes during reconstruction, and then flooding again. The psychological toll of repeated displacement is devastating -- studies link repetitive flooding to PTSD, depression, and substance abuse. This persists because FEMA's buyout and mitigation programs are drastically underfunded relative to demand. The Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) typically has a 3-5 year backlog. Local governments must provide a 25% cost share for buyouts, which many flood-prone rural communities cannot afford. And the political will to tell constituents 'your home should not exist in this location' simply does not materialize until after the next disaster.