ESRB published a report that examines tools to enhance the macro-prudential dimension of Solvency II for the insurance sector. This report is intended to inform the review of Solvency II in such a way as to enable it to enhance the regulatory framework for the insurance sector with tools that reflect macro-prudential considerations. The report sets out solvency, liquidity, and horizontal tools based on macro-prudential considerations. These tools are a subset of the broader set of tools identified in an earlier ESRB report and focus on the types of risk that are not necessarily specific to the insurance sector and reflect the risk profile and the business model of insurers and reinsurers in some way.
In line with its strategy for expanding macro-prudential policy beyond banking, ESRB believes that the review of the Solvency II regulatory regime for insurance in EU, which is to be completed by the end of 2020, should result in a revised framework that better reflects macro-prudential considerations. To deal with systemic risk in the insurance sector, the report considers three types of tool that competent authorities should be able to use:
- Solvency tools to prevent and mitigate procyclical investment behavior of insurers. The volatility adjustment should be reviewed and made symmetric, so that it can also build up resilience when the prices of fixed income assets are rising. A symmetric volatility adjustment may also counter procyclical investment behavior in all phases of the financial cycle.
- Liquidity tools to address risks arising on the assets and liabilities side. Enhanced Solvency II reporting would allow authorities to measure liquidity risk stemming from these activities. Such reporting could be provided on an annual, semi-annual, or quarterly basis, depending on the vulnerability of the liquidity risk profile. The provisions on managing liquidity risk should also be reinforced, in particular by requiring vulnerable (re)insurers to carry out internal stress testing. The financial stability implications of liquidity risk should also be assessed via supervisory stress tests. Supervisors should have the power, through new Pillar 2 provisions, to require insurers with a vulnerable liquidity profile to hold a liquidity buffer.
- Horizontal tools to address risks stemming from the provision of credit to the economy. Capital-based tools targeting (sub-)sectoral exposures would complement the treatment of credit risk under Solvency II and correct inconsistencies between the insurance and banking frameworks. For residential mortgage loans, the report suggests setting an loss given default, or LGD, floor that could be modified by authorities for financial stability reasons. For other loans and for corporate bonds, authorities should have the power to impose a (sub-)sectoral systemic risk buffer.
These proposals, in addition to the previous work of ESRB on insurance, were summarized in the response of ESRB to EIOPA consultation on the review of Solvency II, which ESRB submitted in January 2020. The response focuses on three areas that ESRB considers most pertinent in terms of their systemic impact. These include the need to better reflect macro-prudential considerations in Solvency II, establish a harmonized recovery and resolution framework in EU, and continue ensuring that risks are appropriately captured in Solvency II.
- Press Release
- Enhancing Macro-Prudential Dimension of Solvency II (PDF)
- Macro-Prudential Tools for Insurance, 2018 (PDF)
Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Macro-Prudential Policy, Solvency II, Solvency II Review, Stress Testing, Systemic Risk, Capital Requirements, Systemic Risk Buffer, Reporting, Liquidity Risk, EIOPA, ESRB
Previous ArticleBoE Seeks Feedback on SONIA Compounded Index and Period Averages
In a letter addressed to the industry, the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) set out an updated schedule of policy priorities for the banking, insurance, and superannuation industries.
The European Commission (EC) adopted a comprehensive review package of Solvency II rules in the European Union.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued Versions 1.0 of the "Earnings" and "Regulatory Reporting" booklets of the Comptroller's Handbook.
The European Central Bank (ECB) published results of its economy-wide climate stress test, which aimed to assess the resilience of non-financial corporates and euro area banks to climate risks.
The European Banking Authority (EBA) published a report on the use of digital platforms in the banking and payments sector in European Union.
The Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) published updates on the policy measures that were announced in context of the ongoing pandemic.
The International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA), along with several other associations, submitted a joint response to the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) consultation on preliminary proposals for the prudential treatment of cryptoasset exposures.
BIS published the September issue of the Quarterly Review, which contains special features that analyze the rapid rise in equity funding for financial technology firms, the effectiveness of policy measures in response to pandemic, and the evolution of international banking.
The Basel Committee for Banking Supervision (BCBS) met in September 2021 and reviewed climate-related financial risks, discussed impact of digitalization, and welcomed efforts by the International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) Foundation to develop a common set of sustainability reporting standards
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) issued a Cease and Desist Order against MUFG Union Bank for deficiencies in technology and operational risk governance.