Best car insurance in Michigan in May 2025
That's significantly higher than the national average of $2,692 for full coverage and $808 for minimum coverage. But Michigan's no-fault rules require personal injury protection (PIP), which can add to cost.
Thankfully, there are still ways to get the best bang for your buck. Here are CNBC Select's top picks for car insurance in the Great Lakes State. (See our methodology for more on how we made our picks.)
The best way to estimate your costs is to request a quote
Yes
Geico auto coverage is available in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. It offers 16 discounts and a variety of optional add-ons, such as emergency roadside assistance, rental car reimbursement and mechanical breakdown insurance.
Terms apply.
Read our Geico auto insurance review.
Who's this for? Geico has the lowest rates we've found in Michigan, along with dozens of discounts, including a multi-vehicle discount that can lower your bill by up to 25% if you insure more than one car.
Standout benefits: Geico's easy-to-use app lets you do everything from pay your bill to request roadside service.
The best way to estimate your costs is to request a quote.
Yes
Progressive offers an array of riders, including rideshare insurance and a Deductible Savings Bank that deducts $50 from your deductible each policy period you go without a claim.
Terms apply.
Read our Progressive auto insurance review.
Who's this for? If you own a house, boat or other high-value items you need to insure, Progressive's generous bundling discounts can help you save. On average, customers who bundle auto and home policies save more than 20%.
Standout benefits: Progressive's small accident forgiveness benefit keeps your premiums from rising after your first claim of $500 or less. After five years as a Progressive customer with no accidents or violations, your rates won't increase after your first claim of more than $500. You can also purchase additional accident forgiveness at renewal, to be used for one claim per policy term.
The best way to estimate your costs is to request a quote
Yes
The largest auto insurer in the U.S., State Farm has an excellent reputation for customer satisfaction and offers over a dozen discounts, including for safe driving, bundling and good students.
Terms apply.
Read our State Farm auto insurance review.
Who's this for? Teens are the most expensive demographic to insure, but State Farm's lower rates for younger drivers can ease that burden. The brand also has a discount of up to 25% for students with a B or better.
Standout benefits: State Farm's Steer Clear benefit can lower rates by up to 20% for a driver under 25 who completes an approved defensive driving course. The program also helps parents track their teen's driving and provides feedback for improved habits behind the wheel.
The best way to estimate your costs is to request a quote
Yes
Auto-Owners offers affordable premiums with high customer satisfaction ratings. There are 12 different types of discounts available, as well as various other types of insurance besides auto.
Terms apply.
Who's this for? If your new car is totaled or stolen, Auto-Owners' gap coverage will pay the difference between the vehicle's depreciated value and the remaining balance on your auto loan. There's also diminished value coverage, which compensates you for the loss in your vehicle's market value after an accident, even if it's fully repaired.
Standout benefits: Auto-Owners also provides coverage for classic cars, as well as vehicles that have been modified for accessibility.
The best way to estimate your costs is to request a quote
Yes
Nationwide offers near-nationwide availability and personalized services, such as On Your Side® Review, a free annual insurance evaluation to ensure you are adequately protected and are taking advantage of any discounts available to you.
Terms apply.
Who's this for? Nationwide is a great fit for older drivers, with a discount for drivers over 55 who take a driving safety course. If you're a retiree driving less than you used to, the SmartMiles pay-per-mile program can save you hundreds a year.
Standout benefits: Nationwide's add-ons include car key replacement and pet injury protection, which pays up to $1,000 if your pet is hurt in an accident.
Michigan's state laws require drivers to have liability coverage as well as personal injury protection (PIP) and property protection insurance (PPI).
The minimum requirements for liability coverage are:
This is sometimes written as 50/100/10.
For PIP coverage, which pays for medical expenses and things like lost wages, you can choose a limit that ranges from $50,000 to an unlimited amount, though some amounts below $250,000 require drivers to have access to certain eligible healthcare plans.
On top of PIP coverage, the state requires drivers to carry $1 million of PPI coverage, which can pay for damages to non-vehicle property in an accident.
Regardless of your driving history and situation, it's possible to save on car insurance in Michigan. Here are a few ways to lower what you'll pay:
Get quotes from several different insurers and compare them. Not all consider your driving history and situation the same, so you'll want to see which one offers you the best price.
Many insurers offer discounts for those who pay their premium upfront. This could be as much as 12%, according to car insurance comparison site The Zebra.
If you don't drive much, work from home or are retired, a pay-per-mile policy could be a good fit. These policies charge a base rate and then a few cents per mile driven. Nationwide's SmartMiles program is available in Michigan.
Your deductible is the amount you'll pay before your insurance kicks in. According to the Insurance Information Institute, bumping your deductible from $200 to $500 could reduce the cost of collision and comprehensive coverage by as much as 30%.
The average car insurance policy in Michigan costs $3,100 per year for full coverage and $883 per year for state minimum coverage
Michigan's no-fault car insurance laws and a high percentage of uninsured drivers make car insurance in this state expensive.
States with no-fault insurance require drivers to buy personal injury protection, which pays for your medical expenses and lost wages after an accident, regardless of who is found liable. If a collision results in serious injury or death, however, drivers can still sue for pain and suffering.
Money matters — so make the most of it. Get expert tips, strategies, news and everything else you need to maximize your money, right to your inbox. Sign up here.
At CNBC Select, our mission is to provide our readers with high-quality service journalism and comprehensive consumer advice so they can make informed decisions with their money. Every auto insurance review is based on rigorous reporting by our team of expert writers and editors with extensive knowledge of insurance products. To research the best insurance companies, we compiled over 100 data points on more than a dozen insurance companies. While CNBC Select earns a commission from affiliate partners on many offers and links, we create all our content without input from our commercial team or any outside third parties, and we pride ourselves on our journalistic standards and ethics.
CNBC Select analyzed a dozen insurance companies offering car insurance coverage in Michigan based on cost, coverage, discounts and standout benefits.
We also incorporated customer satisfaction ratings from J.D. Power and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners' complaint index, as well as financial strength ratings from A.M. Best. We also considered cost data from MarketWatch.
We considered CNBC Select audience data when available, such as general demographics and engagement with our content and tools.
Based on these criteria, our selections for the best auto insurance in Michigan are:
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Wall Street Journal
5 hours ago
- Wall Street Journal
Geico, Berkshire Hathaway's Car Insurer, Is on Recovery Road
Geico's comeback in the car-insurance wars is incomplete. The Berkshire Hathaway BRK.B -0.87%decrease; red down pointing triangle-owned company, known for its green gecko mascot, has pared staff, invested in technology and tweaked pricing models in ways that have made it a more profitable underwriter.
Yahoo
15 hours ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: Mayor Johnson offers multiple ideas to scare businesses out of Chicago
We wrote a few days ago that we'd wait to see what Mayor Brandon Johnson had in mind when he said he would pursue 'progressive revenue' options rather than a property tax hike to help plug Chicago's $1 billion-plus deficit for next year before passing judgment. It didn't take long for Johnson to put some meat on the bones. In outlining his ideas for reporters on Tuesday, the mayor opted not to wait for his mayorally appointed working group striving to meet an Aug. 31 deadline to report on initial ideas for making city government more efficient, as well as considering options to raise revenue. Among the possibilities the mayor said 'have to be on the table': reviving the corporate head tax; imposing a thinly disguised corporate income tax; and 'asking' universities, endowments and other large-scale nonprofits to pay substantial sums in lieu of the property taxes from which they are shielded. Before we get to the substance of these extraordinarily counterproductive ideas, let's address Johnson's foolishness in front-running the report his working group of business figures, labor leaders, nonprofit representatives and others are slated to produce in a month. The whole idea of creating that ad hoc group back in the spring was to try to forge some kind of rough consensus on how to dig the city out from its structurally imbalanced budgets year after year. The impetus was to avoid the sort of top-down budget dictates that got Johnson into so much political trouble when he broke his campaign promise not to raise property taxes and proposed a $300 million increase — which aldermen then unanimously rejected. So much for that approach. By saying he's on board with several highly controversial tax proposals before his group even weighs in, Johnson now has confirmed, at least in the minds of his numerous skeptics, that the exercise always was little more than window dressing for an administration bent on doing what it has wanted to do from the start — soak the 'rich' in order to bankroll an ever-growing government apparatus. We sought reactions to the mayor's remarks from several participants on that working group and were told they're operating under nondisclosure agreements. Of course such pacts don't apply to the mayor himself, who's free to undermine this effort before it produces anything while forcing those who've risked their reputations on behalf of the city to keep their mouths shut. We wouldn't want to be part of a group that wasn't given the freedom to reach its own conclusions before the boss had laid out his agenda. Of the various 'progressive' tax ideas available to Johnson and the dwindling number of aldermen who support him, the one with the fewest roadblocks is the corporate head tax, the per-job levy that Mayor Rahm Emanuel rightly killed in 2014. The obvious reason for ending the head tax back then is just as valid today: Taxing businesses based on the number of people they employ is a disincentive to hire people. As a matter of public policy, the city ought to be in the business of encouraging the private sector to employ more people, not giving businesses more reasons to reduce their head count. In 2025, the issue is starker than it was more than a decade ago. With the rise in artificial intelligence, companies nationwide already are laying off workers who are performing functions corporate leaders believe AI can do instead. If Johnson truly wants to jump-start AI-induced white-collar employment losses in Chicago, there are few more effective ways than bringing back the head tax. Will the City Council have any appetite to send such a terrible message to job creators at a time when Chicago's economy is flatlined (the mayor's Donald Trump-like claims that growth is surging here notwithstanding)? We doubt it. That leaves a more pernicious proposal pushed by the nonprofit Institute for the Public Good, which has a representative on the mayor's working group. Based on a tax Seattle approved several years ago, that group has floated an 'excise tax' on payrolls for those making $200,000 or more (including stock options and various forms of noncash compensation) — meant to substitute for a corporate income tax that Chicago doesn't have the legal authority to impose. The organization estimates a 5% payroll tax along those lines would generate $1.5 billion annually. Ald. Maria Hadden, 49th, who co-chairs the City Council's Progressive Caucus, told Crain's she'd consider such an approach if nonprofits like hospitals and universities were exempted. That still would generate more than $1.1 billion, she said. That proposal isn't likely to trip up on the AI issue outlined above, but also could be easily evaded by companies moving their operations outside the city and basing their more highly compensated employees in, say, Evanston, Oak Park or any other suburb. Especially given the ease of remote work these days, such moves wouldn't be difficult. The city already is seeing substantial reductions in its white-collar workforce, statistics show, a trend that surely exacerbates municipal revenue challenges and too much of the time keeps downtown Chicago something close to a dead zone. Any kind of excise payroll tax is a truly terrible idea. Johnson told reporters repeatedly that business people with whom he's interacted tell him they mainly care about violent crime and that the cost of doing business doesn't come up. 'Not that I know a bunch of millionaires,' he said. 'But you know what they talk about when they engage with me? They talk about community safety. They don't talk about taxes.' This is a mayor with no experience in the private sector, and it shows over and over again. To suggest businesses (or the 'ultra-rich,' as the mayor likes to call the wealthier among us) care not a whit about a key cost input like taxes is laughable. If aldermen out of desperation decide to try this gambit, the city will be sued and the matter will be tied up in the courts. At the very least, the 2026 budget hole won't be plugged this way. True to form, the mayor expounds at length on various and sundry ways to part people and businesses from their money and does little but nod briefly and generally to reducing the cost of government. The budget process hasn't even started, and Johnson already has ruled out any concessions from unionized city workers like layoffs or furloughs to balance next year's books. By once again focusing only on economically destructive taxes that we're guessing won't get far with skittish aldermen afraid to tie their political futures to a deeply unpopular mayor, Johnson risks a reprise of last year's eleventh-hour budget crisis. We're wasting time. Submit a letter, of no more than 400 words, to the editor here or email letters@ Solve the daily Crossword
Chicago Tribune
2 days ago
- Chicago Tribune
State lawmakers, officials seek input into how auto insurance rates are set
Just weeks after Gov. JB Pritzker called for action following State Farm's 27.2% rate hike for homeowners insurance, some state lawmakers and officials said they are renewing efforts to address the steady rise in auto insurance rates. Curbing the cost of auto insurance has been the subject of several legislative proposals in the last couple of years, but those measures have yet to go anywhere. The Illinois secretary of state's office, which has unsuccessfully promoted a measure that would eliminate factors such as credit scores and advanced age from being used as metrics to set car insurance rates, is set to launch a campaign to highlight why it thinks employing those factors is unfair to consumers. 'This, to me, is an economic justice issue. People are struggling to pay their bills. People are required to have car insurance, and it's becoming unaffordable for folks to have it,' Giannoulias said. 'So if the purpose of auto insurance is to protect the eight and a half million Illinois motorists, it only makes sense that their driving records … serve as the primary factor for setting their rates.' Car insurance rates have climbed across the country. According to the finance website the rates have increased at a slower pace compared to past years but from 2023 to 2024, full coverage auto insurance jumped by an average of 14% and by 12% from 2024 to 2025. The website, citing an official from the Insurance Information Institute, attributed the rising rates to some of the worst underwriting losses in decades. also suggested President Donald Trump's administration's tariffs on vehicles and auto parts could affect car insurance costs. Democratic state Rep. Will Guzzardi of Chicago, who has worked on legislation aimed at regulating car insurance rates, said he is optimistic there's enough will in the legislature to take on high costs of auto insurance, but acknowledged the need to do so without harming the insurers doing business in Illinois. 'We want to maintain a vibrant, competitive insurance market in Illinois, where companies are competing for your business, and that drives prices down,' Guzzardi said. 'Premiums are rising and Illinois consumers are bearing the brunt of it, and government needs to step in and protect us from those kinds of abuses.' A bill Guzzardi introduced in January would bar insurers from refusing to issue or renew a policy of auto insurance based in whole or in part on 'specified prohibited underwriting or rating factors.' The bill would require auto insurers to show that their handling of claims and algorithm models do not unfairly impact any group of customers based on factors including race, gender, religion or sexual orientation. The bill has been stalled in the House, and Guzzardi acknowledged the difficulty in getting such legislation passed given the insurance lobby's power in Illinois, which is home to both State Farm and Allstate. 'If it's a reasonable increase and (insurers) can justify it, then it's fine. But if they're just raising their rates to protect their profits and pad their CEO pay, then the state has the ability to veto or reduce those premium increases,' Guzzardi said. 'And it (seems) really unfair to base someone's car insurance premium on factors that are out of your control and have nothing to do with whether or not they're a good driver.' In a statement, the Illinois Insurance Association, along with the American Property Casualty Insurance Association and the National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies, said that 'Insurers are not permitted to use and do not use factors like race, income, religion, and/or ethnicity in setting rates. This is true in Illinois and in every state.' But the organizations defended the criteria that are used to set rates. 'Allowing insurers to continue using a wide set of objective criteria to determine risk and set rates will ensure this market can continue to flourish,' the statement read. 'We oppose efforts to limit the actuarial process that has driven companies out of other large states and led to increased premiums for the majority of policyholders.' Another bill that has languished in the legislature, which would affect homeowners as well as auto insurance, would require insurance companies to open their books so that state officials can assess whether the rate increases are too burdensome. Insurers would need to provide information on their rates to the state's Department of Insurance '60 days in advance of a proposed aggregate rate change of 5% or more.' This legislation has the backing of the Pritzker administration and could be the subject of debate during the two-week veto session in October since lawmakers and the insurance industry were busy during the spring session haggling over the bill's details. According to the secretary of state's office, Illinois is one of only two states, the other being Wyoming, that doesn't require a rate review process to protect auto insurance customers from excessive rates. The influence a person's economic status has on their insurance rates has long been a point of contention. Two years ago, the Consumer Federation of America issued a 25-page report showing the impact of car insurance rates when consumer credit information for good drivers who have decent or bad credit scores are factored in by insurers. The 2023 report showed that Illinoisans who were safe drivers with excellent credit paid an average annual premium of $424 for auto insurance, while consumers with a comparable driving record and fair credit paid around $607. At the same time, the report notes, safe drivers with poor credit paid an annual average of $915. These findings were echoed nationally, according to the report. 'These credit disparities are connected to systemic biases against Black, Latino, and Indigenous communities and long-standing structural hurdles to achieving financial stability for communities of color,' the report said. 'When credit information is used to construct credit-based insurance scores for underwriting and rating auto insurance, the result is higher auto insurance premiums for drivers of color.' 'Insurance companies use these rating factors, these non-rating factors, significantly, to set rates, and that can lead to both discriminatory and absurd outcomes,' said Abe Scarr, director of the Illinois Public Interest Research Group, which posted the report on its website. 'Also, it's, I think, somewhat less pronounced and maybe less investigated as well, but they're doing this with homeowners insurance as well.' Under a bill pushed by Giannoulias' office during the spring legislative session, the secretary of state, in partnership with the Office of Risk Management and Insurance Research at the University of Illinois, would look into 'the use of ZIP codes, credit scores, and age in ratemaking and whether the specific factor results in inequitable rates being assessed to certain populations.' The bill had 16 Democratic House sponsors and 17 Democratic Senate sponsors. It passed through the Democratic-controlled House in April on a 70-39 vote. But it never made it through the Senate. State Rep. Jeff Keicher, a Republican from Sycamore who sits on the House Insurance Committee and opposed the bill, said Illinois has one of the lowest rate environments 'given the factors that we are currently using.' The competitive market helps consumers because if the rates are too high with one carrier, they can easily move to another. He said eliminating factors such as where a customer lives and their credit score could increase the rates for suburban drivers. 'So you'd have a rate in Chicago the same as a rate in the middle of a cornfield in Illinois,' said Keicher, a 30-year insurance agent who said he was not speaking on behalf of the industry. 'The industry has proven time and again that that credit-based score is effective and accurate, and there have been no other challenges once regulators have looked at the direct correlation in accident propensity with the factors that insurance companies are currently using,' Keicher said. Kevin Martin, executive director of the Illinois Insurance Association, said there have been a number of studies over the years purported to show credit scores are an appropriate metric, including one that concluded 'better credit scores correlate with lower insurance risk.' As for Giannoulias' bill from the spring, Martin's group had concerns over whether the secretary of state's office's involvement in the study would've led to a 'very, very biased result,' noting the office has come out 'very much opposed to allowing us to use these factors.' 'We have no objections to having a study,' Martin said. 'We were opposed to any reference and any language that would have put (the) secretary of state's office in a position to conduct, lead and write the report.' Lou Sandoval, president and CEO of the Illinois Chamber of Commerce, which advocates for businesses in the state, echoed Martin's criticism of the bill. 'We're not against transparency of trying to say, 'Hey, listen, what should we get done?'' he said. 'What was problematic is the bill sought to do a study that basically abided with the (confirmation) bias of the bill itself.' 'It was like, 'we're going to do a study to confirm the fact that there's racist policies in place, not to identify what the policies are and whether they're racist or not.' It's like 'we have a thesis. The thesis is, this is racism, and that's the direction we're going,'' Sandoval continued. 'And you know, writ large, we have a problem with government basically stepping in and whacking industries that are major employers in the state.' The statewide advocacy campaign being launched by the secretary of state's office, dubbed 'Driving Change,' will ask state residents 'to share their stories about unfair and discriminatory ratemaking practices employed by auto insurance companies,' according to a news release from Giannoulias' office. There will be town halls on the issue over the next several weeks throughout the state, and the secretary of state's office would be conducting a study using feedback from residents to determine whether factors such as credit score, ZIP code and advanced age unfairly raise insurance premiums for residents. From there, the feedback could be used to aid in crafting new legislation over what factors to include when setting car insurance rates, the secretary of state's office said. Locations and times of the town halls would be posted on 'To me, it doesn't matter whether you live on the South or West side of Chicago or in rural southern Illinois,' said Giannoulias, whose name has been floated as a potential Chicago mayoral contender in 2027. 'Our point is, base it on driving record.'
