APRA issued a letter to general insurers and life insurers, outlining observations from a recent thematic review on recovery planning by insurers. The attachment to the letter presents key observations of APRA, along with certain best-practice examples. APRA conducted this thematic review with a group of in-scope large and medium-size general insurers and life insurers, assessing their recovery plans against the recovery planning guidance provided to the in-scope insurers. APRA will use the outcomes of the thematic review to inform its development of a prudential framework for recovery and resolution, which will include a prudential standard and the accompanying guidance. APRA plans to consult on this framework next year.
APRA observed that the recovery planning process has assisted in-scope insurers to advance their overall approach to risk management and to build a better understanding of the importance of recovery planning. However, considerable scope for improvement remains, before in-scope insurers can be assessed to have credible plans in place that are effectively integrated with the risk management framework. APRA considers usability of the recovery plan as a key factor in assessing its credibility. APRA expects recovery planning to be a dynamic process, wherein the plans continue to be assessed, tested, and improved with ongoing board oversight. The key observations include the following:
- Governance. Robust governance arrangements are essential both for effectively developing and maintaining the recovery plan and for ensuring that appropriate monitoring and escalation processes are in place to allow for timely implementation of recovery options. This includes integration with risk management framework; monitoring, escalation, and activation processes; and operational testing.
- Trigger frameworks. The trigger framework should operate in a manner that reflects the escalating nature of stress events, to facilitate timely contingency planning and the intensifying of responses as the severity increases. The areas of better practice are related to a range of metrics and timely trigger points.
- Recovery options. The core element of a credible recovery plan is a comprehensive menu of realistic recovery options, supported by the requisite level of supporting analysis required to assess and implement the options. APRA lists areas of better practice with respect to menu of recovery options, valuations and assumptions of recovery options, and supporting analysis for recovery options.
- Scenario analysis. The use of scenario analysis provides an important mechanism to help assess the credibility of the recovery plan, in particular the calibration of the trigger framework and feasibility of recovery options. The scenarios, therefore, need to be sufficiently severe to activate the recovery plan.
Related Link: APRA Letter (PDF)
Keywords: Asia Pacific, Australia, Insurance, Recovery and Resolution, Thematic Review, Governance, Recovery Planning, APRA
Previous ArticleSEC Adopts Rules and Amendments Under Regulatory Regime for Swaps
EBA issued a revised list of validation rules with respect to the implementing technical standards on supervisory reporting.
EBA published its response to the call for advice of EC on ways to strengthen the EU legal framework on anti-money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism (AML/CFT).
NGFS published a paper on the overview of environmental risk analysis by financial institutions and an occasional paper on the case studies on environmental risk analysis methodologies.
MAS published the guidelines on individual accountability and conduct at financial institutions.
APRA published final versions of the prudential standard APS 220 on credit quality and the reporting standard ARS 923.2 on repayment deferrals.
SRB published two articles, with one article discussing the framework in place to safeguard financial stability amid crisis and the other article outlining the path to a harmonized and predictable liquidation regime.
FSB hosted a virtual workshop as part of the consultation process for its evaluation of the too-big-to-fail reforms.
ECB updated the list of supervised entities in EU, with the number of significant supervised entities being 115.
OSFI published the key findings of a study on third-party risk management.
FSB is extending the implementation timeline, by one year, for the minimum haircut standards for non-centrally cleared securities financing transactions or SFTs.