CIAT takes issue with much of the paper's contents, including the author's assertion about reinsurers' response in the event of an attack without TRIA in place. "There are indications that private reinsurers would fill much of the gap in supply left by TRIA's expiration, but that outcome is not certain," David Torregrosa, author of the CBO paper, concludes. But such is not the case, CIAT retorts. "Policymakers represented by CIAT have seen little evidence to suggest that reinsurers are any closer to returning to the market they fled after the attack on America," says CIAT spokesperson Martin L. DePoy, vice president for government relations at the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts. Additionally, DePoy claims the conclusions in the study have not changed since the last official assessment.

There is a consensus on one matter. CIAT and the author of the CBO study are in agreement that another terrorist attack in the absence of TRIA would produce the same climate of limited coverage and uninsured assets that existed following September 11, 2001. The paper makes no recommendations about renewal of the legislation.