Majority Support Mandatory Flood Insurance for Natural Disasters
Four in ten homeowners and tenants in Germany welcome the new government's proposal for mandatory insurance against floods and natural disasters, according to a representative survey by Verivox. The survey, conducted by Innofact, involved over 2,000 respondents aged 18 to 79 in May 2025.
The government's initiative follows the escalating costs associated with disaster relief after significant flood events, which have imposed billions in costs on both federal and state governments. While support for the mandatory insurance is substantial, there are concerns about affordability, with nearly 45% of homeowners either unable or unwilling to bear additional costs.
Germany is among several European countries adopting measures to manage flood risk, with countries like Belgium, France, the Netherlands, and the UK implementing systems that range from private insurance with state reinsurance to mandatory coverage. The UK's Flood Re program, for instance, keeps premiums affordable for high-risk properties while encouraging risk reduction measures.
Debate around the proposed insurance scheme covers various issues, including affordability and fair sharing of costs across society. The German Insurance Science Association (DAV) argues that demographic pressures and climate change necessitate changes to how insurance against natural catastrophes is structured.
The survey results reveal that homeowners and tenants broadly support the introduction of compulsory insurance against natural hazards, including floods. However, opinions differ on the question of cost, with 15.9% of homeowners stating they cannot bear any additional costs, and another 28.5% expressing reluctance.
Central questions regarding the implementation of the mandatory insurance remain unanswered. It is yet unclear whether homeowners will be required to take out elemental insurance in the future, or if the coalition plans to allow loopholes for the recalcitrant. German insurers have generally abandoned their previous fundamental resistance to mandatory insurance but have demanded a comprehensive concept including stricter urban planning measures.
The proposed construction stop in flood-prone areas is another point of contention. Building in floodplains is currently prohibited in Germany, but this ban is porous due to exceptions in the Water Management Act. Studies show that over 300,000 buildings in Germany are in dangerously situated areas, with 80% of them having been provisionally or finally designated as floodplains.
Further debate surrounds the question of who will ultimately pay for the insurance: homeowners or tenants as well. Property owners can pass on the costs of building insurance, including elemental damages, to tenants. However, the German Tenants' Association has already advocated for this practice to be removed from the operating cost regulation.
The German Homeowners' Association, on the other hand, opposes the introduction of mandatory insurance and the removal of elemental insurance from the list of recoverable operating costs. Instead, the association calls for a comprehensive prevention package against floods, including refraining from building new areas in known danger zones and improving technical flood protection through dyke construction, river renaturation, and other measures.
The timeline for when the government's plan will become legislation is still uncertain. The Federal Ministry of Justice is said to be actively working on its implementation, but further details have not been disclosed due to the early stage of the process.
- In the fuller debate surrounding the proposed insurance scheme, the German Insurance Science Association (DAV) highlights the necessity of adjusting insurance structures against natural catastrophes due to demographic pressures and climate change, in the same vein as the Flood Re program in the UK.
- Furthermore, discussions when considering the implementation of the mandatory insurance scheme encompass not only affordability concerns but also who will ultimately bear the costs - be it homeowners, tenants, or property owners - in light of potential changes to the recoverable operating costs.
