Featured Product

    EIOPA Publishes Results of Peer Review on Regular Supervisory Report

    June 18, 2020

    EIOPA published the findings of a peer review on the Regular Supervisory Report. The peer review examined how and, to what extent, the proportionate approach set out under the Delegated Regulation 2015/35, which supplements Solvency II Directive, has been implemented among national competent authorities. EIOPA suggested a number of recommended actions that the national competent authorities should take to bring about greater convergence in their approaches and a more consistent implementation of the principle of proportionality. National competent authorities are expected to have implemented the recommended actions targeting supervisory shortcomings by 2022.

    In the peer review, EIOPA analyzed the legal and regulatory frameworks, along with the national supervisory practices, across 31 national competent authorities. The reference period for the peer review was from the entry into force of Solvency II to the end of March 2019. Given that the reference period for this peer review concluded before January 31, 2020, the UK PRA also participated in full and its results are included in the report. EIOPA issued 51 recommended actions, addressed to national competent authorities in 26 countries. A full list of the recommended actions and countries to which they have been issued can be found in Annex IV of the report on findings of peer review. The recommended actions can be grouped into four categories: 

    • Proportionality—EIOPA issued 36 recommended actions in the area of proportionality. Most of the recommended actions in this area relate to achieving a more appropriate implementation of the principle of proportionality by requiring submission of the Regular Supervisory Report more frequently than the minimum of every three years. These recommended actions involve either a change to the local legislation or the adoption of an internal policy to accelerate the process of introducing different frequencies of submission of the full Regular Supervisory Report. Some of these recommended actions relate to the use of a risk-based approach when deciding on the different frequencies of submission of the Regular Supervisory Report, in particular when there is a lack of any IT or risk assessment system underpinning decision-making.
    • Communication of material changes—EIOPA issued nine recommended actions in this area. To enhance the effectiveness of supervision, recommended actions have been issued to all of the national competent authorities that do not require undertakings to submit a formal notification of "no material change" to ensure that in future they do so.
    • Communication of the decision—Three recommended actions have been issued in this category. The recommended actions have been issued to national competent authorities that are group supervisors and that do not collect information on and do not communicate the frequency of submission of the Regular Supervisory Report to ensure that in future they do so.
    • Country-specific recommended actions—EIOPA has issued four country-specific recommended actions. Some recommended actions were issued to France, Luxembourg, Malta, and Poland to address specificities observed in individual countries’ practices. 

    EIOPA has concluded, based on the issues observed in several countries in relation to proportionality in setting the frequency of submission of the Regular Supervisory Report, that the Solvency II legislation needs to be further clarified. As a result of the findings of the peer review, EIOPA will take the following actions:

    • Introduce supervisory guidance by keeping the minimum requirement for submission of the full Regular Supervisory Report as once every three years but requiring a mandatory assessment by national competent authorities and communication of the frequency of the Regular Supervisory Report.
    • Include in its guidelines or supervisory handbook guidance on issuing exemptions from annual or biennial submission of the full Regular Supervisory Report based on a list of events that are specific to the undertaking (e.g. mergers/acquisitions).
    • Develop further guidance in relation to the communication to the group supervisor and college in the context of Guideline 23, paragraph 1.58, of the EIOPA guidelines on supervisory review process, by either updating this guideline or including this aspect in the supervisory handbook.

    Related Links

    Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Solvency II, Regular Supervisory Report, Peer Review, Proportionality, Supervisory Practices, EIOPA

    Featured Experts
    Related Articles

    BIS and Central Banks Experiment with GenAI to Assess Climate Risks

    A recent report from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) Innovation Hub details Project Gaia, a collaboration between the BIS Innovation Hub Eurosystem Center and certain central banks in Europe

    March 20, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    Nearly 25% G-SIBs Commit to Adopting TNFD Nature-Related Disclosures

    Nature-related risks are increasing in severity and frequency, affecting businesses, capital providers, financial systems, and economies.

    March 18, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    Singapore to Mandate Climate Disclosures from FY2025

    Singapore recently took a significant step toward turning climate ambition into action, with the introduction of mandatory climate-related disclosures for listed and large non-listed companies

    March 18, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    SEC Finalizes Climate-Related Disclosures Rule

    The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has finalized the long-awaited rule that mandates climate-related disclosures for domestic and foreign publicly listed companies in the U.S.

    March 07, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    EBA Proposes Standards Related to Standardized Credit Risk Approach

    The European Banking Authority (EBA) has been taking significant steps toward implementing the Basel III framework and strengthening the regulatory framework for credit institutions in the EU

    March 05, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    US Regulators Release Stress Test Scenarios for Banks

    The U.S. regulators recently released baseline and severely adverse scenarios, along with other details, for stress testing the banks in 2024. The relevant U.S. banking regulators are the Federal Reserve Bank (FED), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).

    February 28, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    Asian Governments Aim for Interoperability in AI Governance Frameworks

    The regulatory landscape for artificial intelligence (AI), including the generative kind, is evolving rapidly, with governments and regulators aiming to address the challenges and opportunities presented by this transformative technology.

    February 28, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    EBA Proposes Operational Risk Standards Under Final Basel III Package

    The European Union (EU) has been working on the final elements of Basel III standards, with endorsement of the Banking Package and the publication of the European Banking Authority (EBA) roadmap on Basel III implementation in December 2023.

    February 26, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    EFRAG Proposes XBRL Taxonomy and Standard for Listed SMEs Under ESRS

    The European Financial Reporting Advisory Group (EFRAG), which plays a crucial role in shaping corporate reporting standards in European Union (EU), is seeking comments, until May 21, 2024, on the Exposure Draft ESRS for listed SMEs.

    February 23, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News

    ECB to Expand Climate Change Work in 2024-2025

    Banking regulators worldwide are increasingly focusing on addressing, monitoring, and supervising the institutions' exposure to climate and environmental risks.

    February 23, 2024 WebPage Regulatory News
    RESULTS 1 - 10 OF 8957