BaFin published an "interpretation decision" related to the Solvency II supervisory regime and this decision is addressed to all insurers subject to the Solvency II supervisory regime. The decision makes the clarifications about how insurance companies should examine the appropriateness of the valuation methodology for insurance reserves.
The interpretation decision addresses, inter alia, the notion of "error" used in Article 56 (2) of Regulation (EU) 2015/35 on Solvency II, which plays a central role in assessing the adequacy of the method. It also highlights the consequences of applying Article 56 to other areas as well as specifics of application for life assurance obligations. Within the Solvency II framework, actuarial provisions must be formed for all insurance obligations to policyholders and beneficiaries. The methods used to calculate the provisions must be appropriate in relation to the nature, extent, and complexity of the risks underlying the insurance obligations. When determining an appropriate method of calculation, undertakings shall carry out an audit in accordance with Article 56 of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/35. In doing so, entities should examine risks of the underlying obligations and assess errors in the results of the method that may result from differences between the underlying assumptions of the method and the risks identified.
Related Links (in German)
Keywords: Europe, Germany, Insurance, Solvency II, Interpretation Decision, Underwriting Provisions, BaFin
Previous ArticleEIOPA Calls for Input on Reporting and Disclosures Under Solvency II
PRA published the policy statement PS8/21, which contains the final supervisory statement SS3/21 on the PRA approach to supervision of the new and growing non-systemic banks in UK.
EBA published a report that sets out the final draft regulatory technical standards specifying the conditions according to which consolidation shall be carried out in line with Article 18 of the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR).
EBA updated the list of other systemically important institutions (O-SIIs) in EU.
BCBS published two reports that discuss transmission channels of climate-related risks to the banking system and the measurement methodologies of climate-related financial risks.
UK Authorities (FCA and PRA) welcomed the findings of FSB peer review on the implementation of financial sector remuneration reforms in the UK.
PRA and FCA jointly issued a letter that highlights risks associated with the increasing volumes of deposits that are placed with banks and building societies via deposit aggregators and how to mitigate these risks.
MFSA announced that amendments to the Banking Act, Subsidiary Legislation, and Banking Rules will be issued in the coming months, to transpose the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5) into the national regulatory framework.
EC finalized the Delegated Regulation 2021/598 that supplements the Capital Requirements Regulation (CRR or 575/2013) and lays out the regulatory technical standards for assigning risk-weights to specialized lending exposures.
OSFI launched a consultation to explore ways to enhance the OSFI assurance over capital, leverage, and liquidity returns for banks and insurers, given the increasing complexity arising from the evolving regulatory reporting framework due to IFRS 17 (Insurance Contracts) standard and Basel III reforms.
ECB published results of the benchmarking analysis of the recovery plan cycle for 2019.