Tariffs may drive Washington car insurance rates higher
Why it matters: The analysis shows one more way that Americans pay for higher tariffs.
Driving the news: The average annual cost of full-coverage car insurance in Washington could rise by about 7% between June and December if tariffs stay in effect, compared to roughly 4% otherwise, per a new report from insurance-comparison platform Insurify.
In raw terms, the average cost statewide could hit $2,155 with tariffs, compared to $2,094 without them.
That's based on the tariff picture as of Aug. 1, reflecting the Trump administration's recently lowered rates on cars and auto parts from Japan, South Korea and Europe.
Between the lines: Tariffs affect insurance rates by increasing the costs of imported parts needed for repairs.
Inflation, accident frequency, and claims due to extreme weather also impact rates, among other factors.
What they're saying: "Initially, car insurance companies looked at 2025 as a year to keep insurance rates stable, or even cut them," per Insurify's report.
"Tariffs and inflation could derail that trend."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
8 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Trump, en route to Alaska, hints at tougher line with Putin on Ukraine
ANCHORAGE — President Trump is on his way to Alaska for a high-stakes summit with Vladimir Putin, indicating he will take a tougher line with the Russian leader over a ceasefire in Ukraine after three brutal years of war. Speaking with reporters aboard Air Force One, Trump said Putin would face 'economically severe' consequences if negotiations in Anchorage today fail to yield progress toward peace. He said that only Ukraine could decide whether to cede territory to Moscow. And he expressed support for U.S. security guarantees for Ukraine in any future peace agreement, so long as they fall short of NATO membership for the beleaguered nation. 'Yes, it would be very severe,' Trump said. 'Very severe.' Traveling from Moscow, Putin is bringing along several Russian business leaders, according to the Kremlin, a sign he hopes to begin discussions on normalizing relations with Washington. But Trump said he would not discuss business opportunities until the war is settled. It's a position that will relieve allies in Europe that have been hoping Trump would approach Putin with a firm hand, after months of applying pressure on Ukraine's president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to prepare to make concessions to Moscow. Zelensky was not invited to the Alaska negotiations. But Trump said he hoped his meeting on Friday would lead to direct talks 'very shortly.' Trump had said in recent days that a peace deal would include the 'swapping' of land, a prospect roundly rejected in Kyiv. The Ukrainian constitution prohibits territorial concessions without the support of a public referendum. 'They'll be discussed, but I've got to let Ukraine make that decision,' the president said of land swaps. 'I'm not here to negotiate for Ukraine. I'm here to get them to the table.' Trump will host Putin at the Elmendorf Air Force Base in Anchorage later on Friday, the first meeting between a U.S. and Russian president since 2021. Russian Foreign Ministry officials said Wednesday that Putin's war aims remain 'unchanged.' And an aggressive Russian advance along the front lines this week provided evidence to military analysts that Moscow has no plans to implement a ceasefire. The two leaders are expected to greet one another on the tarmac before meeting privately. Afterward, they will take an expanded lunch meeting with their aides, followed by a news conference, according to the White House.
The Hill
8 minutes ago
- The Hill
Social Security COLA projected to be slightly higher than 2025's, but ‘many will be disappointed,' group says
(NEXSTAR) – The Senior Citizen's League is pretty confident that many seniors receiving Social Security benefits will be 'disappointed' by next year's cost-of-living increase. In its latest projection, the senior advocacy group estimated that the 2026 cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) would amount to a 2.7% increase. This marks a bump over the increase that retirees saw in 2025 (2.5%), but it's still not enough to cover the ever-rising costs of goods and services that seniors are paying, TSCL believes. 'While a higher COLA would be welcome because their monthly benefits will increase, many will be disappointed,' Shannon Benton, the executive director of TSCL, was quoted as saying in a press release issued this week. 'TSCL's research shows that many seniors believe the COLA does not adequately capture the inflation they experience.' Senior group proposes 'one-time catch-up payment' for Social Security beneficiaries The research Benton refers to includes a survey of nearly 2,000 beneficiaries. Of those participants, 94% said they felt this year's COLA increase of 2.5% 'was too low and that their monthly Social Security checks would fall behind.' The survey also indicated that 57 percent of seniors live on less than $2,000 per month, and a good chunk of that group (about a fifth) said they spent half that on healthcare costs alone. These issues, TSCL argues, don't stem only from lower-than-desired COLA increases, but rather how those increases are calculated in the first place. TSCL has long argued that the metrics used to calculate the annual COLA (i.e., the Bureau of Labor Statistics' Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners, which itself is a measure of the change in prices for common consumer goods and services) do not take into account the costs that elderly Americans are paying for things like medicine, housing and groceries. In the aforementioned survey, the vast majority of Social Security beneficiaries agreed that the Bureau of Labor Statistics should consider using another set of data to calculate the COLA, like the Consumer Price Index for the Elderly, which focuses on costs affecting Americans ages 62 and up. In the absence of any real movement on that idea, TSCL has also been advocating for a 'one-time catch-up payment' of $1,400 to be sent to everyone who qualifies for Social Security, pointing to 2009's Economic Recovery Payments or the COVID-era Economic Impact Payments as evidence of the government's previous efforts to provide direct financial assistance to citizens. 'A catch-up payment would help restore that lost value and provide urgently needed relief for retirees living on fixed incomes.' A representative for the Social Security Administration did not return a request for comment on the proposal. The amount of next year's COLA increase won't be officially announced by the Social Security Administration until October. The 2026 increase is based on Labor Department data from the third quarter (July, August and September) of 2025.
Boston Globe
8 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Forget about Epstein. This 20-point polling gap should really worry Trump.
Almost impressively, Trump has gone on the offensive to push the Epstein story (and the awkward ties to his former friend) out of the daily news cycle. In recent weeks, we've seen aggressive ICE raids, threats to charge former President Barack Obama with treason, gerrymandering fights across the country, a federal takeover of the Washington police force, and now a high-profile meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin. The tactic seems to be working: Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up But Trump can't simply wish away persistent inflation concerns — both real and perceived. And in an environment where economic sentiment often drives elections, this could soon become a much bigger problem for Trump and Republicans. Advertisement The latest government report showed a key measure of inflation Advertisement Polls suggest voters have noticed. Trump's approval rating has been sliding since April. Today, about 46 percent of Americans approve of his job performance, while 52 percent disapprove, according to the In other words, the political danger here is not speculative. It's already measurable. It's also, like the Epstein problem, self-inflicted. Trump clearly fueled the Epstein controversy, both while out of office and now through his decision to break a campaign promise. Economists say his policies are doing the same for inflation. Tariffs have always been politically risky; they function as a tax on imports that eventually trickles down to consumers. Trump, however, has shown no sign of abandoning them. It's worth noting the contrast with Joe Biden's presidency, when inflation became a central political liability heading into the midterms and last year's election. Biden's inflation spike was largely attributed to snarled supply chains as the economy reopened from the pandemic and the spike in oil prices from the Ukraine war, exacerbated by the massive COVID relief spending he pushed. By comparison, Trump's inflation problem appears to be rooted more completely in his own policy choices, particularly on trade. Advertisement The irony is that Trump's 2024 victory was powered more by economic discontent than any other factor. Now, less than a year into his second term, those same voters may be reassessing that assumption as prices continue to rise. Two questions loom. First, what, if anything, will Trump do to bring prices down? So far, there's little indication he plans to soften his tariff stance. Second, will Democrats seize this moment to hammer inflation as a clear and objective failure of Trump's leadership? History suggests they might and that voters could respond. The Epstein headlines may fade, but prices for a wide variety of consumer goods don't appear to be. James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.
