Posts Tagged ‘NAIC’



July 11th, 2018

Developments in the Data Privacy Regulatory Landscape

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

The recently enacted European Union (EU) General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) Model Law and the New York State Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) Cybersecurity Act all address data privacy (the personal information of individuals) and data protection (using such personal information for business objectives), but from different perspectives.

Continue reading…

February 21st, 2017

Solvency II Equivalence In The International (Re)insurance Landscape: Part III: The US and Solvency II Equivalency

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

andrew-cox-952graham-jones-102x1172lobel_myra-sm-1172eddy-vanbeneden-sm-1172sumner-sm-1172Andrew Cox, Managing Director; Graham Jones, Senior Vice President; Myra E. Lobel, Managing Director; Eddy Vanbeneden, Managing Director and Steven Sumner, Oliver Wyman, Actuarial Consulting

Contact

Separate but related negotiations continue between the EC, European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority, and in the United States, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and the Federal Insurance Office (FIO).

Continue reading…

September 15th, 2016

Solvency II Equivalence In The International (Re)insurance Landscape

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

andrew-cox-951graham-jones-95lobel_myra-smeddy-vanbeneden-sm22sumner-smAndrew Cox, Managing Director; Graham Jones, Senior Vice President; Myra E. Lobel, Managing Director; Eddy Vanbeneden, Managing Director and Steven Sumner, Oliver Wyman, Actuarial Consulting

Contact

The concept of equivalence under Solvency II determines to what extent (re)insurance entities outside Europe can operate within the European Union (EU) while relying solely on their local solvency standards. The ability to operate in the EU is a significant issue that impacts multinational (re)insurance companies and groups.

Continue reading…

May 10th, 2016

The Value of Adopting Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

Here we review recent GC Capital Ideas posts examining the benefits to (re)insurers adopting Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) standards.

Continue reading…

February 3rd, 2016

Solvency Regimes: Third-Country Equivalence

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

Current capital requirements in the United States are set at a legal-entity level. Yet there are currently no global requirements for companies that operate in more than one country, and calculation formulas for capital requirements typically vary in each jurisdiction. Solvency II is the closest to mandating a group standard. Solvency II uses the concept of “equivalence” to deal with differing capital regimes between the European Union and the rest of the world including the United States, instead of forcing Solvency II standards on a third country.

Continue reading…

February 2nd, 2016

Addressing Own Risk and Solvency Assessment/Enterprise Risk Management and Insurance Capital Standard Globally

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

In accordance with the objectives of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) and European Insurance and Occupational Pension Authority (EIOPA), Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) is “people and risk-centric,” primarily employing a principles-based approach, as opposed to a rules-based approach. This means that decisions on matters related to risks are largely based on the judgment of individuals relying on underlying facts, as opposed to decisions being made mostly by following intricate sets of rules. This is similar to the principles-based approach taken by International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS). Although the calculation of the Solvency Capital Requirements (SCR) under Solvency II is rules based, like Insurance Capital Standard (ICS), Solvency II can be a “one size fits all” rules-based approach to capital, especially if the standard formula is used. (Re)insurers will need to find a way to incorporate ICS into their ORSA processes and the vehicle to accomplish this may be through the internal model.

Continue reading…

January 27th, 2016

Gaining Optimum Value from ORSA

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) was first introduced as a regulatory requirement as a result of Solvency II. (Re)insurers would be wise to take note of the many similarities between Solvency II and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ (NAIC) ORSA and, where possible, avoid reinventing the wheel when trying to implement them. Now, and especially with the introduction of the Insurance Capital Standard (ICS), it is increasingly important for (re)insurers to avoid unnecessary, redundant and duplicative activity in the attainment of regulatory satisfaction by striving for a uniform framework to establish risk management and controls, corporate governance, transparency and disclosures across borders. In so doing, (re)insurers will gain optimum value from their ORSA.

Continue reading…

January 26th, 2016

Managing the Demands of Global and Domestic Regulation

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

There is very little doubt that (re)insurers face and will continue to face growing regulation and scrutiny both domestically and internationally. Therefore, (re)insurers should seek the most effective and efficient way to meet the growing demands of increased global regulation. What follows below is a brief discussion of the overlap of some of these new global regulatory requirements and thoughts on how (re)insurers might go about approaching them.

Continue reading…

January 18th, 2016

Regulatory Developments in the United States: Group Supervision and ORSA

Posted at 1:00 AM ET

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) has stipulated that “the solvency framework of the U.S. system of state-based Insurance regulation has included a review of the holding company system for decades, with an emphasis placed on each insurance legal entity. In light of the 2008 financial crisis and the globalization of insurance business models, as discussed in this report, U.S. insurance regulators have begun to modify their group supervisory framework and have been increasingly involved in developing an international group supervisory framework (1).”

Continue reading…