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 ArticleFCA Publishes Feedback on Smarter Digital Regulatory Reporting
FCA and PRA in the UK, FED in the US, and the authorities in Singapore have fined Goldman Sachs for risk management failures in connection with the 1Malaysia Development Berhad (1MDB).
BCBS announced that OSFI and the Bank of Canada hosted the 21st International Conference of Banking Supervisors (ICBS) virtually on October 19-22, 2020.
FCA proposed guidance on how firms should continue to seek to help customers who hold insurance and premium finance products and may be in financial difficulty because of COVID-19, after October 31, 2020.
EBA issued an opinion on prudential treatment of the legacy instruments as the grandfathering period nears an end on December 31, 2021.
ESRB published the fifth issue of the EU Non-bank Financial Intermediation Risk Monitor 2020 (NBFI Monitor).
HM Treasury announced that the new Financial Services Bill has been introduced in the Parliament.
APRA announced that it has increased the minimum liquidity requirement of Bendigo and Adelaide Bank for failing to comply with the prudential standard on liquidity.
PRA published the consultation paper CP17/20 to propose changes to certain rules, supervisory statements, and statements of policy to implement elements of the Capital Requirements Directive (CRD5).
US Agencies adopted a final rule that applies to advanced approaches banking organizations and aims to reduce interconnectedness in the financial system as well as to reduce contagion risks associated with the failure of a global systemically important bank (G-SIB).
US Agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) adopted a final rule that implements the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) for certain large banking organizations.