California's Perilous Future

“California is a place where the wilderness, exquisite and terrifying, whispers both promise and peril. To live here is to embrace the beauty that can turn against you at any moment.”  - Robinson Jeffers

Burning Costs

The fierce wildfires that swept through Los Angeles this season have scorched not only the landscape but also the region’s economic foundations, potentially leaving a financial legacy as enduring as the devastation on the ground. Insured losses from the blazes are projected at a staggering $30–45 billion—potentially making this the costliest wildfire event in the history of the Golden State.1 

Beyond the immediate destruction lies a deeper structural challenge: California’s insurance ecosystem, long battered by regulatory constraints, climate pressures, and soaring claims, is now on the brink of systemic failure.

The Flight of the Insurers

In recent years, insurers have steadily retreated from California’s most fire-prone regions. State Farm, the state’s largest homeowner insurer, discontinued coverage for approximately 72,000 properties in 2023 alone.2 In some of Los Angeles’s most affluent zip codes, including Brentwood, Calabasas, and Pacific Palisades, over 2,000 policies were dropped last year. By July, an additional 1,600 households in Pacific Palisades found themselves without coverage. As a result, the number of properties in these areas relying on the state’s last-resort insurer, the FAIR Plan, has more than quadrupled since 2020, from 1,400 homes to over 6,000 by late 2024.

The FAIR Plan’s limitations are becoming painfully clear. Originally designed as a stopgap for high-risk homeowners, it now covers 450,000 homes across the state—double its count from four years ago. Yet its coverage ceiling of $3 million is laughably inadequate for many high-value properties, such as those in Malibu or Beverly Hills, where average home values often exceed $5 million.

The FAIR Plan’s reserves, a modest $200 million bolstered by $2.5 billion in reinsurance, pale in comparison to the billions in claims it now faces. To compound matters, private insurers, who contribute to the FAIR Plan’s funding, are increasingly passing these costs onto their own policyholders. Californians who may never set foot in a fire zone are seeing their premiums rise as insurers spread the financial burden of wildfire losses across the state.

A Precarious Equilibrium

The cracks in California’s insurance framework stem not only from the rising tide of claims but also from decades of regulatory inertia. Proposition 103, enacted in 1988, prohibited insurers from using forward-looking models to price risks, forcing them instead to rely on historical data.3 

Let’s look at this more simply. Imagine you run a lemonade stand at a mall. You make money from the stand and keep most of your earnings, but in order to ensure customers pay an affordable price, the well-meaning owner of the mall says you can only sell lemonade at $3 per glass, based on the historical average price of the main ingredients (lemon, sugar and water) over the past 20 years. 

These ingredients used to cost $2, so you were happy selling your lemonade for $3. But over time the price of lemons and sugar gradually increases, and you realise that it now costs $5 to produce a glass of lemonade that you can only sell for $3. Do you keep selling lemonade at a loss? No - you pack up your stall and move to the next door mall where the relatively laissez-faire landlord allows you to charge enough to make a profit. The thirsty patrons of the first mall are now left unable to buy lemonade, even if they wanted to pay more to get it.

That’s what Proposition 103 did to home insurers. California state regulation stopped them charging enough in premiums to cover their expected payouts and make a profit, so instead of offering policies at an expected loss they just left the state altogether. 

While suitable for static risks like earthquakes, this approach has proven untenable in the era of climate change, where wildfire frequency and severity are climbing sharply. The state’s recent reversal of Proposition 103 will allow insurers to incorporate more predictive models and pass on reinsurance costs, but the result will likely be even higher premiums.

The impact on property values is palpable. Without insurance, mortgages are nearly impossible to secure, pushing home prices in high-risk areas into freefall. In the wealthiest enclaves, the market has fractured into stark tiers: those able to self-insure and those forced to sell at deep discounts. At the lower end, some homeowners are leaving California altogether, exacerbating the state’s well-documented migration trends.

Compounding the Damage

The repercussions of these fires extend beyond the housing market. Rental prices have surged in the wake of widespread displacement. In neighborhoods spared by the flames, rental listings now attract dozens of applicants, with prospective tenants bidding up monthly rents by thousands of dollars. One luxury rental that previously languished at $20,000 a month saw a frenzy of offers, prompting the landlord to double the asking price.4

The fires also devastated local utilities. Southern California Edison, a major regional provider, is under investigation for potentially sparking the inferno. Its stock has tumbled nearly 30% since the fires began, wiping out billions in market value.

This echoes the plight of Pacific Gas & Electric, which filed for bankruptcy in 2019 after facing $30 billion in wildfire liabilities.5 The $21 billion California Wildfire Fund, established that same year to buffer utilities against future claims, is now under strain. Ratepayers and utility shareholders alike have shouldered the costs, with wildfire-related charges accounting for up to 13% of the average electricity bill by 2023.6 As climate-driven disasters escalate, the fund’s current size appears insufficient to absorb the next major conflagration.

The Future

California’s wildfire-induced insurance crisis demands a response as robust and multi-faceted as the threat itself. Raising the FAIR Plan’s coverage limits, increasing the state’s wildfire fund, and mandating more resilient building standards are all steps in the right direction. However, such measures will take time—and money. In the interim, the state faces a grim calculus: either spread costs across all residents through higher premiums and taxes, or accept the further erosion of its housing market and economic stability.

The LA fires are a harbinger of a hotter, more perilous future. If California’s insurers, regulators, and policymakers fail to adapt quickly, the state’s economy will continue to burn long after the flames have been extinguished.

Read More About the Impact of Tariffs…