Insurance premium is higher for a single person than a married or living with someone ! Why is that and is it legal
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Insurers commonly charge single drivers higher auto premiums because actuarial data show married drivers file fewer claims and are, on average, lower risk—so most U.S. insurers use marital status as a rating factor and it is legal in most states [1] [2] [3]. That practice is not universal: some insurers don’t use marital status, and several states limit or ban using it, while consumer advocates and regulators continue to challenge the fairness of the rule [4] [5] [6].
1. Why insurers treat marriage as a discount: statistical risk and underwriting logic
Insurance pricing is built on risk pools and statistics, and multiple industry analyses and consumer groups report that married people file fewer claims and get into fewer crashes, so carriers treat marriage as a proxy for lower risk and often charge married drivers less as a result [1] [2] [3]. Academic and industry studies cited by outlets such as The Zebra and the Insurance Information Institute show average savings for married drivers—figures vary by study and company, but the consistent pattern is lower average premiums for married versus single drivers [7] [3] [8]. Insurers defend the distinction as actuarially justified: if a characteristic correlates with fewer claims, it can be reflected in price.
2. Is it legal? Mostly yes—state rules matter
Legal permissibility is set state-by-state: most states allow insurers to use marital status as one of many rating factors, so higher premiums for single people are generally lawful in those jurisdictions [1] [2]. However, a number of states restrict or ban marital-status rating or have protections that prevent sudden rate hikes after a spouse’s death, and consumer groups are pressing legislatures in places like Oregon to curb the practice [5] [2] [6]. That means whether a single person can successfully challenge a higher premium depends on state law, regulatory filings, and insurer-specific practices.
3. Important caveats and counterexamples—marriage isn’t an automatic win
Being married doesn’t guarantee cheaper coverage: insurers consider a bundle of factors—age, driving record, credit in some states, vehicle, ZIP code and the spouse’s record—and adding a high-risk spouse can raise premiums or eliminate discounts [7] [9] [10]. Some companies simply do not use marital status at all, and rates can vary widely across insurers; quoting multiple companies can offset any “marriage effect” [4]. Regulators and researchers also point out anomalies—widows or divorced drivers sometimes see spikes in rates—illustrating the bluntness of using marital status as a proxy [11].
4. Practical responses for singles and policy considerations
For single drivers facing higher premiums, common tactics include shopping multiple carriers, asking about discounts and multi-vehicle or bundling savings, excluding a risky spouse on a policy, or maintaining separate policies when that’s cheaper—strategies recommended across consumer guides [1] [9] [10] [12]. At the policy level, critics including the Consumer Federation of America argue marital-status rating can be unfair and should be limited or removed; proponents counter that banning a statistically predictive factor can force higher rates for lower-risk drivers or push insurers to raise base rates to cover uncertainty [6] [11].
5. What the reporting leaves unanswered
The sources document the empirical link between marital status and claims and show the patchwork of state rules, but do not settle normative questions about fairness or provide exhaustive listings of which states ban marital-status rating; readers seeking a state-by-state legal answer must consult local regulators or insurer filings. The cited reporting also varies in methodologies and dates—rate gaps depend on insurer, location and time—so any specific premium difference for an individual must be verified through quotes or a regulator’s rate filings rather than national averages [7] [3] [4].