How to Cut Your Homeowner’s Insurance in Half

How to Cut Your Homeowner’s Insurance in Half

iStockphoto
By Beth Braverman

That lousy credit score is costing you more than a good rate on a loan.

Insurance premiums for homeowners with excellent credit are half the price of premiums for homeowners with poor credit, according to a new report by insuranceQuotes.com. Homeowners with median credit pay about a third more than those with excellent credit.

The difference in premiums varies by state, with homeowners with poor credit in 38 states paying at least twice as much those with excellent credit. Homeowners in West Virginia have the biggest premium gap, with those with poor credit paying more than three times what homeowners with excellent credit pay.

Homeowners in Washington, D.C., and Ohio had the next highest gap in premiums (185 percent), followed by Montana (179 percent).

Related; The Easiest Way to Cut Your Home Insurance Premiums

In general, insurers are putting a higher emphasis on credit scores than they did last year, with scores having a bigger impact this year than last in 29 states. “It’s more important than ever to maintain a solid credit rating by paying their bills on time, keeping their balances low, and correcting errors on their credit reports,” Laura Adams, insurangeQuotes.com senior analyst said in a statement.

California, Massachusetts and Maryland do not allow insurers to consider credit in setting prices, and insurers in Florida don’t use it.

The average U.S. homeowner’s insurance premium is around $950. In addition to making an effort to boost their credit, homeowners should shop around every few years to see if they can find a better rate.

Top Reads from the Fiscal Times:

Marco Rubio Says There’s No Proof Tax Cuts Are Helping American Workers

U.S. Republican presidential candidate Marco Rubio speaks during a rally at the Texas Station Hotel and Casino in North Las Vegas, Nevada
STEVE MARCUS
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) told The Economist that his party’s defense of the massive tax cuts passed last year may be off base: “There is still a lot of thinking on the right that if big corporations are happy, they’re going to take the money they’re saving and reinvest it in American workers,” Rubio said. “In fact they bought back shares, a few gave out bonuses; there’s no evidence whatsoever that the money’s been massively poured back into the American worker.”

For Richer or Poorer: An Updated Marriage Bonus and Penalty Calculator

iStockphoto/The Fiscal Times
By The Fiscal Times Staff

The Tax Policy Center has updated its Marriage Bonus and Penalty Calculator for 2018, including the new GOP-passed tax law. The tool lets users calculate the difference in income taxes a couple would owe if filing as married or separately. “Most couples will pay lower income taxes after they are married than they would as two separate taxpayers (a marriage bonus), but some will pay a marriage penalty," TPC’s Daniel Berger writes. “Typically, couples with similar incomes will be hit with a penalty while those where one spouse earns significantly more than the other will almost always get a bonus for walking down the aisle.”

Trump Administration Wants to Raise the Rent

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Ben Carson speaks to employees of the agency in Washington, U.S., March 6, 2017. REUTERS/Joshua Roberts
JOSHUA ROBERTS
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Housing and Urban Development Secretary Ben Carson will propose increasing the rent obligation for low-income households receiving federal housing subsidies, as well as creating new work requirements for subsidy recipients. Some details via The Washington Post: “Currently, tenants generally pay 30 percent of their adjusted income toward rent or a public housing agency minimum rent not to exceed $50. The administration’s legislative proposal sets the family monthly rent contribution at 35 percent of gross income or 35 percent of their earnings by working 15 hours a week at the federal minimum wage -- or approximately $150 a month, three times higher than the current minimum.” (The Washington Post

New Push for Capital Gains Tax Cut

iStockphoto/The Fiscal Times
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Anti-tax activists in Washington are renewing their pressure on lawmakers to pass new legislation indexing capital gains taxes to inflation. The Hill provided an example of such indexing that Grover Norquist recently sent to Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin: “Under current policy, someone who made an investment of $1,000 in 2000 and sold it for $2,000 in 2017 would pay capital gains taxes on the $1,000 difference. But if capital gains were indexed, the investor would only pay taxes on $579, since $1,000 in 2000 would be equivalent to $1,421 in 2017 after adjusting for inflation.” Proponents of indexing say it’s just a matter of fairness, but critics claim that it would be just another regressive tax cut for the wealthy. Indexing would cost an estimated $10 billion a year in lost revenues. (The Hill)

Bernie Sanders to Propose Plan Guaranteeing a Job for Every American

U.S. Sen. Bernie Sanders is interviewed by Reuters reporters at his office on Capitol Hill in Washington
ERIC THAYER
By The Fiscal Times Staff

Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT) is preparing to announce a plan for the federal government to guarantee a job paying $15 an hour and providing health-care benefits to every American “who wants one or needs one.” The jobs would be on government projects in areas such as infrastructure, care giving, the environment and education. The proposal is still being crafted, and Sanders’ representative said his office had not yet come up with a cost estimate or funding plan. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) last week tweeted support for a federal jobs guarantee, but Republicans have long opposed such proposals, saying they would cost too much. (Washington Post)