DNB published results of the EIOPA stress testing exercise for the Dutch pensions sector. The results show that the financial position of the Dutch pensions sector is vulnerable to financial market shocks. A highly adverse stress scenario, which involves sharp equity price declines and rapidly widening spreads, showed that the year-on-year impact of a financial market shock on the Dutch economy through the pension funds is limited, but will be felt for many years.
DNB disclosed the list of the stress test participants, which represent 60% of the Dutch pensions sector. The results of the stress test, which looks at the figures as of year-end 2018, show that Dutch pension assets appear to be vulnerable under a major shock. In such a scenario, the capital positions of Dutch pension funds are severely hit. This impact is due to the large portfolio of variable-yield investments they maintain to fund their indexation ambition. On average, the funding ratio of participating pension funds drops by nearly 23 percentage points, which roughly equals their required own funds. This means that the pension funds could have absorbed the impact of the shock almost fully using their buffers, had they maintained the required own funds. With the buffer lacking and the assumed funding ratio averaging 99%, the shock forces them to apply immediate benefit curtailments.
The stress scenario sees assets of the Dutch premium pension institutions, or PPIs, drop by nearly 30%, primarily due to the equity shock. The premium pension institutions tend to allocate a large proportion of their investments to variable-yield assets on account of the relatively high share of young pension scheme members they represent. The stress test also considered the impact of the stress scenario on replacement ratios (excluding state pensions). The outcomes showed a large variety because the premium pension institutions differ widely.
Related Link: DNB Analysis of Results
Keywords: Europe, Netherlands, Insurance, Pensions, Stress Testing, Defined Benefit, Own Funds, Defined Contribution, DNB
Previous ArticlePRA Keeps Systemic Risk Buffer Rates for Ring-Fenced Banks Unchanged
ESAs published the final draft implementing technical standards on reporting of intra-group transactions and risk concentration of financial conglomerates subject to the supplementary supervision in EU.
EBA published the annual report on asset encumbrance of banks in EU.
FED updated the reporting form and instructions for the FR Y-9C report on consolidated financial statements for holding companies.
EBA issued a consultation paper on the guidelines on monitoring of the threshold and other procedural aspects of the establishment of intermediate EU parent undertakings, or IPUs, as laid down in the Capital Requirements Directive.
EC published Regulation 2021/25 that addresses amendments related to the financial reporting consequences of replacement of the existing interest rate benchmarks with alternative reference rates.
BIS published a bulletin, or a note, that examines the cyber threat landscape in the context of the pandemic and discusses policies to reduce risks to financial stability.
HM Treasury, also known as HMT, has updated the table containing the list of the equivalence decisions that came into effect in UK at the end of the transition period of its withdrawal from EU.
EBA published an erratum for technical package on phase 1 of the reporting framework 3.0.
APRA updated a frequently asked question (FAQ), for authorized deposit-taking institutions, on the measurement of credit risk weighted assets.
ECB published a letter from Andrea Enria, the Chair of the Supervisory Board of ECB, answering questions raised by the President of the Bundestag (the German federal parliament) on how ECB assesses the financial stability of the euro area in the context of the significant level of nonperforming loans.