Terrorism insurance

[citation needed] This combination of uncertainty and potentially huge losses makes the setting of premiums a difficult matter.

A Swiss report[citation needed] suggested that in this case where demand is greater than the supply for terrorism coverage that a short-term solution is possible: a mix of government and private resource to make easy the transition.

As a non-profit-making Economic Interest Grouping mandated by its Members, GAREAT returns to the latter that part of the premiums which are not used to finance the reinsurance coverage at the close of each year.

The law extends the temporary federal Program that provides for a transparent system of shared public and private compensation for insured losses resulting from acts of terrorism.

Soon after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, economist Edwin Mills expressed concern over whether private developers could build real estate without subsidies for insurance.

Initially TRIREA contained several new provisions including a mandatory 'make available' clause for NCBR coverage (Nuclear, Chemical, Biological and Radiological) and the ending of the distinction between domestic and foreign events.

[10] Up until the 2014 expiration, many experts warned that "construction projects could be stalled and commercial loans on shopping malls, utilities and skyscrapers could be in jeopardy."

In addition, according to the Baltimore Sun, the National Football League denied rumors that it would cancel the Super Bowl over the issue.