link to page 2 
INSIGHTi
What Happens If the National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP) Lapses?
Updated September 8, 2023
This Insight provides a short overview of what would happen if the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) were not to be reauthorized by September 30, 2023, and allowed to lapse.
Expiration of Certain NFIP Authorities
The NFIP is authorized by the National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 (Title XIII of P.L. 90-448, as
amended, 42 U.S.C. §§4001 et seq.). The NFIP does not contain a single comprehensive expiration,
termination, or sunset provision for the whole of the program. Rather, the NFIP has multiple different
legal provisions that tie to the expiration of key components of the program.
Since the end of FY2017, 25 short-term NFIP reauthorizations have been enacted (Table 1). The NFIP is
currently authorized until September 30, 2023.
Unless reauthorized or amended by Congress, the following will occur on September 30, 2023:
• The authority to provide new flood insurance contracts will expire. Flood insurance
contracts entered into before the expiration would continue until the end of their policy
term of one year.
• The authority for NFIP to borrow funds from the Treasury will be reduced from $30.425
billion to $1 billion.
Other activities of the program would technically remain authorized, such as the issuance of Flood
Mitigation Assistance Grants. However, the expiration of the key authorities listed above would have
potentially significant impacts on the remaining NFIP activities.
Congressional Research Service
https://crsreports.congress.gov
IN10835
CRS INSIGHT
Prepared for Members and
Committees of Congress
Congressional Research Service
2
Table 1. Short-term Extensions of the NFIP Since End of FY2017
Public Law
Date To Which Authorization Was Extended
P.L. 115-56
December 8, 2017
P.L. 115-90
December 22, 2017
P.L. 115-96
January 19, 2018
NFIP lapsed January 20 to January 22, 2018
P.L. 115-120
February 8, 2018
NFIP lapsed for 8 hours on February 9, 2018
P.L. 115-123
March 23, 2018
P.L. 115-141
July 31, 2018
P.L. 115-225
November 30, 2018
P.L. 115-281
December 7, 2018
P.L. 115-298
December 21, 2018
P.L. 115-396
May 31, 2019
P.L. 116-19
June 14, 2019
P.L. 116-20
September 30, 2019
P.L. 116-59
November 21, 2019
P.L. 116-69
December 20, 2019
P.L. 116-94
September 30, 2020
P.L. 116-159
September 30, 2021
P.L. 117-43
December 3, 2021
P.L. 117-70
February 18, 2022
P.L. 117-86
March 11, 2022
P.L. 117-95
March 15, 2022
P.L. 117-103
September 30, 2022
P.L. 117-180
December 16, 2022
P.L. 117-229
December 23, 2022
P.L. 117-264
December 30, 2022
P.L. 117-328
September 30, 2023
Source: CRS analysis.
If there were to be a lapse in authorization on or after September 30, 2023, with borrowing authority
reduced to $1 billion, FEMA would continue to adjust and pay claims as premium dollars come into the
National Flood Insurance Fund (NFIF) and reserve fund. As of August 16, 2023, there was $994 million
in the NFIF and $2.7 billion in the reserve fund. If the funds available to pay claims were to be depleted,
claims would have to wait until sufficient premiums were received to pay them unless Congress were to
appropriate supplemental funds to the NFIP to pay claims or increase the borrowing limit.
The NFIP is the primary source of flood insurance coverage for residential properties in the United States.
The NFIP has 4.7million flood insurance policies providing $1.28 trillion in coverage, with 22,594
communities in 56 states and jurisdictions participating. The program collects about $4.6 billion in annual
premium revenue and fees.
Congressional Research Service
3
The cancellation of $16 billion of NFIP debt in November 2017 (P.L. 115-72) had no effect on NFIP
authorization. Reauthorization of the NFIP has no impact on the implementation of Risk Rating 2.0.
The Mandatory Purchase Requirement
The expiration of the NFIP’s authority to provide new flood insurance contracts has potentially significant
implications due to the mandatory purchase requirement (MPR). By law or regulation, federal agencies,
federally regulated lending institutions, and government-sponsored enterprises must require certain
property owners to purchase flood insurance as a condition of any mortgage that these entities make,
guarantee, or purchase. Property owners, both residential and commercial, are required to purchase flood
insurance if their property is identified as being in a Special Flood Hazard Area (SFHA, which is
equivalent to having an estimated 1% or greater risk of flooding every year) and is in a community that
participates in the NFIP. Without available flood insurance, real estate transactions in an SFHA potentially
would be significantly hampered.
Federal agencies may accept private flood insurance to fulfill the MPR if the private flood insurance
meets the conditions defined in statute. Although the private flood insurance market is growing, the MPR
is still generally met through NFIP coverage. FEMA does not enforce the MPR, but lenders must continue
their regulatory requirements during a lapse, including MPR enforcement.
Past Lapses of the NFIP
The NFIP was extended 17 times between 2008 and 2012, and lapsed 4 times: March 1 to March 2, 2010;
March 29 to April 15, 2010; June 1 to July 2, 2010; and October 1 to October 5, 2011. In most cases when
the NFIP lapsed, Congress reauthorized the NFIP retroactively. In 2018, P.L. 115-120 also authorized
FEMA to honor all policy-related transactions accepted during the NFIP lapse. During these NFIP lapses,
the FDIC issued guidance to lending institutions, and the Federal Reserve also issued informal guidance
to lenders. In addition, FEMA provided guidance for the Write-Your-Own (WYO) Program, where private
insurance companies are paid to write and service NFIP policies.
In past NFIP lapses, borrowers were not able to obtain flood insurance to close, renew, or increase loans
secured by property in an SFHA until the NFIP was reauthorized. During the lapse in June 2010,
estimates suggest over 1,400 home sale closings were canceled or delayed each day, representing over
40,000 sales per month. These figures applied to residential properties, but commercial properties were
also affected by the NFIP lapse. In addition, the largest WYO insurer left the NFIP in 2011, reportedly
because of the administrative burden associated with very short-term reauthorizations and lapses in
authorization. Although no detailed analysis of the NFIP lapses in 2010-2011 has been undertaken, the
economic impact could have been broader than the reported effects on the domestic real estate market.
Congressional Research Service
4
Author Information
Diane P. Horn
Specialist in Flood Insurance and Emergency
Management
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff
to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of
Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of
information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role.
CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United
States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However,
as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the
permission of the copyright holder if you wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
IN10835 · VERSION 43 · UPDATED