PRA published its statement on the response of ACPR to EIOPA recommendations for the insurance sector, in the light of Brexit. ACPR announced that it does not intend to comply with the sixth recommendation of EIOPA on insurance policies originally sold in the UK by UK insurers to policyholders now resident or established in France. As per the ACPR statement, to make use of the French Run-Off Ordinance, UK insurers must have appropriate passports to carry out business in France in place at UK exit day.
The EIOPA recommendation states that "where a policyholder with habitual residence or, in the case of a legal person, place of establishment in UK concluded a life insurance contract with a UK insurance undertaking and afterward the policyholder changed its habitual residence or place of establishment to a EU 27 member state, competent authorities should take into account in the supervisory review that the insurance contract was concluded in the UK and the UK insurance undertaking did not provide cross-border services for the EU 27 for this contract." ACPR cannot comply with this recommendation, taking into account the French regulatory and case-law provisions determining that, in the case mentioned in the recommendation, the place of the risk, initially located in UK or Gibraltar, is modified and is now situated in France. Accordingly, this must be covered by insurance entities authorized to exercise in France under Article L 310-2 of the Insurance code.
In a Brexit without agreement context, the Brexit Ordinance allows undertakings in the UK and Gibraltar operating in France before the Brexit date, via the European passport, which have not envisaged or finalized a contingency plan on that date, to pursue contracts subscribed before Brexit in extinctive management, until termination. Such contracts cannot be renewed or give rise to the issue of new premiums, which, however, does not prohibit the payment of mandatory premiums payable by the subscriber under the contract. This Ordinance would also apply to contracts subscribed with UK or Gibraltarian insurance undertakings by policyholders whose habitual residence or place of establishment is located in the UK or Gibraltar, and moving thereafter to France, before contract termination, provided that the insurance undertakings are, on the date of a Brexit, authorized to exercise in France by means of the European passport for freedom of establishment or freedom to provide services. Therefore, UK and Gibraltarian insurance undertakings affected by this situation are invited to proceed to passporting notifications to their home competent authorities in the coming weeks and before Brexit date, to benefit from French Brexit Ordinance regime.
This regime would allow them to continue honoring their contracts covering policyholders having moved or moving to France after Brexit date. In response to this, PRA and FCA encourage firms to seek legal advice and consider any risk arising from ACPR approach to affected policyholders as soon as possible. This should include consideration of whether a firm may wish to have any passports to carry out business in France in place prior to exit day to enable the use of the French Run-Off Ordinance. When considering passporting applications, insurers should look to submit applications only for classes of business they have previously written or currently write. Firms wishing to apply for passports should complete all relevant questions on the cross-border services notification form, along with the additional information required under paragraph 3.2.1 of the Decision on the collaboration of the insurance supervisory authorities (EIOPA-BoS-17/014).
Keywords: Europe, EU, UK, Insurance, Brexit, Gibraltar, Passporting Regime, Brexit Ordinance, PRA, FCA, ACPR, EIOPA
Previous ArticleBoE Publishes Draft of Version 1.1.0 of Form AS/FV Taxonomy
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) published the final policy statement PS21/21 on the leverage ratio framework in the UK. PS21/21, which sets out the final policy of both the Financial Policy Committee (FPC) and PRA
The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) proposed to amend Regulation B to implement changes to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (ECOA) under Section 1071 of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) decided to maintain, at the 2019 levels, the buffer rates for the Other Systemically Important Institutions (O-SII) for another year, with no new rates to be set until December 2023.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) published a progress report on implementation of its high-level recommendations for the regulation, supervision, and oversight of global stablecoin arrangements.
In a letter to the authorized deposit taking institutions, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) announced an increase in the minimum interest rate buffer it expects banks to use when assessing the serviceability of home loan applications.
The Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) and the International Organization of Securities Commissions (IOSCO) are consulting on the preliminary guidance that clarifies that stablecoin arrangements should observe international standards for payment, clearing, and settlement systems.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) and the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) have set out their respective work priorities for 2022.
The Malta Financial Services Authority (MFSA) updated the guidelines on supervisory reporting requirements under the reporting framework 3.0, in addition to the reporting module on leverage under the common reporting (COREP) framework.
The European Commission (EC) published the Implementing Decision 2021/1753 on the equivalence of supervisory and regulatory requirements of certain third countries and territories for the purposes of the treatment of exposures, in accordance with the Capital Requirements Regulation or CRR (575/2013).
EC published the Implementing Regulation 2021/1751, which lays down implementing technical standards on uniform formats and templates for notification of determination of the impracticability of including contractual recognition of write-down and conversion powers.