FCA authorised · FRN 724952 0117 325 0027Quote & buy →
Economic consultants
Yes, economists who sell their analysis need professional indemnity insurance. Courts, regulators, clients and funders act on your numbers: a damages figure, a market definition, an impact estimate or a demand forecast. If one is wrong because of a modelling error or an assumption no competent economist would make, the loss is financial and can dwarf your fee. Public liability does not cover that. PI does, subject to the policy terms, and it matters most when you give expert evidence or let others rely on your work.
Part of: Professional indemnity for consultants
In short
Economic consultants quantify damages, analyse competition, assess economic impact, prepare regulatory submissions and build forecasts that investors and lenders rely on. Claims allege errors in models or data, unreasonable assumptions, or reports used by people the economist did not expect to rely on them. In civil proceedings in England and Wales, an expert’s duty to help the court overrides any obligation to the client under CPR rule 35.3, and since the Supreme Court’s 2011 decision in Jones v Kaney, expert witnesses can be sued by their own clients for negligence. Since 1 January 2025 the CMA can penalise anyone who, without reasonable excuse, supplies materially false or misleading information in a merger case.
Last reviewed 5 October 2026 by the Apex professional indemnity team.
Professional indemnity (PI) insurance usually covers your legal liability, and the cost of defending yourself, when someone says your professional work was negligent and lost them money. For an economist that work is analysis that other people act on: an overcharge estimate in a cartel claim, a counterfactual in a lost-profits dispute, a market share analysis for a merger filing, an impact assessment behind a funding bid, a cost of capital estimate for a regulator, or a demand forecast in a lender’s credit file.
Public liability (PL) insurance has a narrow job. It covers accidental injury to people and accidental damage to their property, such as a visitor slipping at your office. Economists rarely cause either. Their exposure is that a spreadsheet, a regression or a judgement call turns out to be wrong after someone has relied on it, and PL says nothing about that.
The loss is rarely proportionate to the fee. A modest engagement can support a claim worth many times its value, a transaction or a regulatory settlement. That gap between what you are paid and what you can be blamed for is the reason PI exists, and why clients and funders ask to see it.
The examples below are illustrative. They describe the kinds of allegation economic consultants face; they are not real claims.
A forecast that turns out wrong is not negligence by itself. Each of these claims turns on whether your method, data and assumptions met the standard of a competent economist at the time.
Most economic consultancy is unregulated, but work done for courts, tribunals and competition authorities is governed by procedural rules and statute. These are the ones most likely to matter in a claim.
| Rule or authority | What it says | Why it matters to your PI |
|---|---|---|
| Civil Procedure Rules, rule 35.3 | Experts have a duty to help the court on matters within their expertise, and it overrides any obligation to the person who instructs or pays them. | Your client may not like your honest answer, but you must give it. |
| Practice Direction 35, paragraphs 2 and 3 | Expert evidence should be the independent product of the expert, uninfluenced by the pressures of litigation; experts should not act as advocates. Reports carry a statement of truth, and contempt proceedings may be brought for a false statement made without an honest belief in its truth. | Partisan or careless reports are criticised in judgments, and that criticism becomes the evidence in a claim against you. |
| Jones v Kaney [2011] UKSC 13 | The Supreme Court abolished the immunity from suit for breach of duty, in contract or negligence, that expert witnesses had enjoyed in relation to their participation in legal proceedings. Absolute privilege against defamation claims remains. | Your own client can sue you over your evidence, including joint statements with the other expert. |
| Competition Act 1998, sections 47A and 47B | Claims for damages for infringements of the Chapter I and Chapter II prohibitions can be brought in the Competition Appeal Tribunal, including collective proceedings on an opt-in or opt-out basis. | Quantification is central to these cases, and a class claim can turn on one expert’s method. |
| Enterprise Act 2002, sections 110(1A) and 117 | Since 1 January 2025 the CMA can impose a penalty on anyone who, without reasonable excuse, supplies materially false or misleading information in connection with its merger functions, including information supplied to someone else knowing it will go to the CMA. Doing so knowingly or recklessly is an offence. | Penalties fall outside PI, but a client’s losses from your error may not. |
In arbitration and other forums, check which rules on expert evidence apply and what your terms of appointment say before you accept the instruction.
Expert witness work is the part of an economist’s practice that underwriters look at most closely, because it combines high values with a public record. Judgments name experts and say what the court made of their evidence.
Rule 35.3 makes your duty to help the court override your obligations to the client. Practice Direction 35 expects you to consider all material facts, including those that cut against your opinion, to say when a question falls outside your expertise, and to tell the parties without delay if your view changes. A report that does these things is harder to attack, and so is the economist who wrote it.
Before 2011 an expert could not be sued by the client over the evidence they gave. Jones v Kaney ended that. The case itself arose from a joint statement signed after a meeting of experts, which is a reminder that the risk sits in the pressured moments of a case: experts’ discussions under rule 35.12, concessions in joint statements, and answers given under concurrent evidence, the procedure Practice Direction 35 allows for experts from like disciplines to give evidence together.
If a judgment criticises your evidence, tell your insurer straight away. Criticism is often the first sign of a claim, and notifying it as a circumstance helps protect your cover even if the client has not complained.
| Usually covered by PI | Often excluded or limited | Needs a different policy |
|---|---|---|
| Errors in models, code, data handling and calculations | Fines and penalties, including CMA information penalties | Accidental injury or property damage at your office or a client’s (public liability) |
| Negligent expert evidence and joint statements, where the policy covers expert witness work | Claims brought in the USA or under US law, unless agreed | Injury to your own staff (employers’ liability) |
| Unreasonable assumptions in forecasts and impact assessments | Guarantees that a forecast or outcome will be achieved | Leaked client data or a cyber attack (cyber insurance) |
| Claims by third parties who relied on your report, where reliance was agreed | Liability accepted in reliance letters beyond what the law would impose | Claims against you as a director or trustee of a client body (directors’ and officers’ liability) |
| Defence costs, including responding to criticism in a judgment | Investment advice and other regulated activities | Libel claims from your published commentary, unless your PI includes it (media liability) |
Every policy is different, and cover depends on the insurer’s acceptance and the wording. Make sure the business description names expert witness work, competition advice and forecasting if you do them; a description that says only “economic consultancy” may be read narrowly.
No regulator sets a PI limit for economists. Limits come from the people who instruct you: law firms appointing experts, public bodies running consultancy frameworks, regulated companies, and lenders asking for reliance. Each may set a minimum in its terms, and some ask for a higher limit for a particular engagement.
Size your limit to the value your work supports, not to your fee. Expert evidence on a large damages claim, or a forecast behind a project financing, can expose you to claims far above what you were paid. Check whether your limit applies to each claim or in the aggregate, and whether your contracts include a liability cap your clients have accepted; see when a contract requires a higher PI limit.
PI is claims-made, so the policy that responds is the one in force when the claim is made. Economic work has a long tail. Litigation can take years to reach judgment, and a forecast is only tested when the outcome arrives. Keep cover continuous, keep your retroactive date when you change insurer, and arrange run-off when you retire or close a practice: run-off cover explained.
A complete proposal gets better terms than a bare one, and a broker can only present what you tell us. Have these ready:
Speak to a broker
PI for economists, placed by a named broker
Start the online proposal and save it as you go, or leave your number and a named broker will call you back, usually the same working day.
Apex Insurance Brokers is an independent insurance broker based in Bristol, established in 2009 and authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. We are not tied to one insurer: we work with over 30 markets, including Lloyd’s syndicates through wholesale brokers, and every client has a named broker who handles the placement, mid-term changes, certificates for clients and the renewal.
Yes, if clients, courts, regulators or funders act on your analysis. An error in a model, a dataset or an assumption causes financial loss rather than accidental damage, so public liability does not respond. PI covers your legal liability for that loss and your defence costs, subject to the policy terms.
No law or regulator requires economic consultants to hold PI. In practice it is required by those who instruct you: law firms appointing experts, public bodies, regulated companies and lenders who rely on your reports. Many set a minimum limit in their terms and ask for evidence before work starts.
Yes. In Jones v Kaney in 2011 the Supreme Court abolished the immunity from suit for breach of duty that expert witnesses had in relation to their participation in legal proceedings. Absolute privilege against defamation claims remains. Make sure your PI covers expert witness work and that your insurer knows you do it.
Not because it was wrong. PI responds to an allegation that you were negligent, for example that you used bad data or assumptions no competent economist would make. State your assumptions and limits clearly, and agree who may rely on the forecast, because reliance letters widen the circle of people who can claim.
PI wordings commonly exclude fines and penalties, so a penalty imposed on you is unlikely to be covered. A client’s claim that your error caused it losses, such as wasted deal costs, may be covered, subject to the policy terms. Check your data before anything goes to the CMA.
Yes. Proposal forms usually ask separately about expert witness and litigation support work, the forums and jurisdictions involved, and the values at stake. Undisclosed work can leave you without cover. Include arbitration, adjudication and work for overseas proceedings, not just English court cases.
Apex arranges professional indemnity insurance for economists across the UK. Tell us about your work and we’ll find cover that fits. Or call 0117 325 0027.
Start your PI proposal Call 0117 325 0027Apex Insurance Brokers Limited is authorised and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Registered in England and Wales, company number 07014570. This page is general information, not advice on your individual circumstances. Cover is always subject to the insurer’s acceptance and the policy terms, and this page does not guarantee that cover will be available or on what terms.
