EIOPA published a report on group supervision and capital management of (re)insurance undertakings and on specific topics related to Freedom to Provide Services (FoS) and Freedom of Establishment (FoE) under the Solvency II Directive (2009/138/EC). Based on the findings presented in the report, EIOPA concludes that the tools developed by EIOPA to strengthen group supervision and supervision of cross-border issues contributed to substantial progress in the convergence of practices of national competent authorities, but significant challenges remain.
In the report, EIOPA identifies that effective supervision of insurance groups will benefit from a harmonized approach for early intervention, recovery and resolution, the assessment of group own funds, supervisory colleges, and cross-border business activities provided by groups and solo undertakings through FoS and FoE. EIOPA finds a number of gaps in the regulatory framework that lead to divergent supervisory practices in the following:
- Definition of intra-group transactions
- Assessment of availability of eligible own funds at group level
- Treatment of Insurance Holding Companies and Mixed Activity Insurance Holding Companies in the scope of group supervision
- Inclusion of holding companies, which are not licensed insurance undertakings in the scope of group supervision
- Adequate application of the combination of methods to calculate the group solvency requirements
- Referencing from the Solvency II framework to other financial sectors
- Application of the mutatis mutandis to groups that fall under the scope of the Solvency II framework
EC is required by Article 242 (2) of the Solvency II Directive to make an assessment of the benefit of enhancing group supervision and capital management under Solvency II. This report is the response to the EC request of June 07, 2018 and is based on the list of specific items that EC identified for the scope of the review.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Solvency II, Recovery and Resolution, Early Intervention Measures, EIOPA
Previous ArticleBCBS Reports to G20 Leaders on Implementation of Basel III Reforms
BIS published a paper that provides an overview on the use of big data and machine learning in the central bank community.
APRA finalized the reporting standard ARS 115.0 on capital adequacy with respect to the standardized measurement approach to operational risk for authorized deposit-taking institutions in Australia.
ECB published a guide that outlines the principles and methods for calculating the penalties for regulatory breaches of prudential requirements by banks.
MAS and The Association of Banks in Singapore (ABS) jointly issued a paper that sets out good practices for the management of operational and other risks stemming from new work arrangements adopted by financial institutions amid the COVID-19 pandemic.
ACPR announced that a new data collection application, called DLPP (Datalake for Prudential), for collecting banking and insurance prudential data will go into production on April 12, 2021.
BCB announced that the Financial Stability Committee decided to maintain the countercyclical capital buffer (CCyB) for Brazil at 0%, at least until the end of 2021.
EIOPA has launched a European-wide comparative study on non-life underwriting risk in internal models, also kicking-off of the data collection phase.
SRB published an overview of the resolution tools available in the Banking Union and their impact on a bank’s ability to maintain continuity of access to financial market infrastructure services in resolution.
EBA is consulting on the implementing technical standards for Pillar 3 disclosures on environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks, as set out in requirements under Article 449a of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
ESAs Issue Advice on KPIs on Sustainability for Nonfinancial Reporting