Featured Product

    EIOPA Publishes Opinion on Supervision of Remuneration Principles

    April 07, 2020

    EIOPA published an opinion on the supervision of remuneration principles in the insurance and reinsurance sectors in EU. The opinion addresses how to ensure consistent practices in application of the remuneration principles included in Solvency II and offers guidance to national supervisory authorities on how to challenge the application of certain principles. EIOPA also published a feedback statement on the comments received on the opinion. EIOPA will start monitoring the application of this opinion by the supervisory authorities two years after its publication. Supervisory authorities should collect qualitative and quantitative data, enabling them to perform supervisory review of the remuneration principles in accordance with this opinion. Instruments for data collection might be either the regular supervisory reporting or a specific request.

    EIOPA delivered this opinion on the basis of Solvency II Directive and the Commission Delegated Regulation in line with the relevant provisions of Directive 2017/828/EC on remuneration. While the Solvency II framework provides for provisions of remuneration for sound and prudent management, the remuneration principles defined in the Delegated Regulation are high-level and leave considerable discretion to undertakings and supervisory authorities. To promote a proportionate approach, the opinion focuses on the staff members identified as potential higher profile risk-takers, including those whose annual variable remuneration exceeds EUR 50,000 and represents more than one-third of the total annual remuneration. These include administrative, management, and supervisory body members, other executive directors who effectively run the undertaking, key function holders as defined in the EIOPA Guidelines on System of Governance, and categories of staff whose professional activities have a material impact on the undertakings' risk profile. Among others, the opinion states the following:

    • Where remuneration schemes have fixed and variable components, these components should be in such a proportion that the employees do not become overly dependent on the variable components.
    • When assessing the adequacy of the deferral period with regard to the nature of the undertakings’ business, its risks, and the activities of the employees in question, supervisory authorities should keep in mind that undertakings have different deferral periods depending on the risks they enter into and that deferral period may or may not vary depending on the categories of staff.
    • Where variable remuneration is performance-related, the total amount of variable remuneration has to be based on a combination of the assessment of the individual’s performance, the performance of the business unit concerned, and the overall result of the undertaking or group to which the undertaking belongs.
    • Financial and non-financial criteria should be appropriately balanced. For instance, where the criteria is 80% financial and 20% non-financial, supervisory authorities may come to the conclusion that the assessment framework is not appropriately balanced.
    • For the supervisory dialog with undertakings, supervisory authorities should consider, as part of the term downward adjustment, all kind of adjustments—for example, malus clawback and in-year adjustments.
    • The supervisory assessment of the undertakings’ remuneration policies should cover the policy for the possible use of termination payments, which should contain guidance of the maximum payment or the criteria for determining the amount of the payment.

    For members of the administrative, management, and supervisory body and the most highly paid employees of global systemically important undertakings, besides the guidance provided in this opinion, supervisory authorities should take into account the FSB Principles and Standards for sound compensation practices if these principles and standards apply in the respective jurisdiction. The benchmarks or thresholds included in this opinion should be considered for supervisory dialog and not as hard targets for the practical implementation of the remuneration principles. These indicative benchmarks or thresholds do not in any way restrict the supervisory authorities from having stricter practices—that is, lower benchmarks or thresholds—to trigger a supervisory dialog with undertakings if it is deemed appropriate based on a risk-based approach. In this context, supervisory authorities may also adopt a proportionate and more flexible approach in the supervision of the remuneration principles when undertakings are categorized as low risk, including the design of the remuneration policy.

     

    Related Links

    Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Solvency II, Remuneration Principles, Reporting, FSB, EIOPA

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles
    News

    BCBS Amends Guidelines on Sound Management of AML/CFT Risks

    BCBS amended the guidelines on sound management of risks related to money laundering and financing of terrorism (ML/FT).

    July 02, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    US Agencies Finalize Amendments to Swap Margin Rule

    US Agencies (Farm Credit Administration, FDIC, FED, FHFA, and OCC) finalized changes to the swap margin rule to facilitate implementation of prudent risk management strategies at banks and other entities with significant swap activities.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    PRA Letter Sets Expectations on Approach to Managing Climate Risks

    PRA published a letter that builds on the expectations set out in the supervisory statement (SS3/19) on enhancing banks' and insurers' approaches to managing the financial risks from climate change.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EBA Guidelines on Treatment of Structural Foreign Exchange Under CRR

    EBA finalized the guidelines on treatment of structural foreign-exchange (FX) positions under Article 352(2) of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FSB Issues Statement on Impact of COVID-19 Crisis on Benchmark Reform

    FSB published a statement on the impact of COVID-19 pandemic on global benchmark transition.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IAIS Publishes List of Internationally Active Insurance Groups

    IAIS published the list of Internationally Active Insurance Groups (IAIGs) publicly disclosed by group-wide supervisors.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    FED Temporarily Revises FR Y-9C With Respect to PPPLF and CARES Act

    FED has temporarily revised the reporting form on consolidated financial statements for holding companies (FR Y-9C; OMB No. 7100-0128).

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    EC Launches Consultation on Review of Solvency II Directive

    EC launched a consultation on the review of the key elements of Solvency II Directive, with the comment period ending on October 21, 2020.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    ECB Consults on Supervisory Approach to Consolidation in Banking

    ECB launched a consultation on the guide that sets out supervisory approach to consolidation projects in the banking sector.

    July 01, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    News

    IAIS on Package for 2020 Data Collection on ICS and Aggregation Method

    IAIS published technical specifications, questionnaires, and templates for 2020 Insurance Capital Standard (ICS) and Aggregation Method data collections.

    June 30, 2020 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 5425