EIOPA Reviews Supervisory Practices of National Competent Authorities
EIOPA published a peer review report assessing how national competent authorities supervise and determine whether an insurer's setting of key functions fulfills the legal requirements of Solvency II, with an emphasis on proportionality. The report includes findings from a comparative analysis of the key functions, identifies best practices and, presents an overview of recommended actions addressed to the national competent authorities and EIOPA.
The peer review examines the practices regarding the following:
- Combining key functions under one holder
- Combining key functions with administrative, management, or supervisory body (AMSB) membership or with carrying out operational tasks
- Subordination of one key function under another key function
- Split of one key function among several holders
- Assessment of the fitness of key function holders
- Outsourcing of key functions
The review finds that the national competent authorities have adopted similar approaches in assessing how insurers manage key functions and applied the principle of proportionality in their assessment. Four best practices have been identified, providing guidance to the national competent authorities for a more systematic approach on the principle of proportionality and ensuring consistent and effective supervisory approaches. Additionally, the report identifies certain weaknesses and presents the resulting recommendations for the national competent authorities. It was found that certain national competent authorities had not yet assessed key functions according to the Solvency II requirements. Other national competent authorities had weaknesses regarding the depth assessment and mitigating measures demanded from insurers—for example, in cases where combinations exist.
The areas of recommended actions have been linked with the supervisory approach of national competent authorities, the different combinations of key function holders including the internal audit function and AMSB membership, and the fitness of the key function holders and outsourcing. Consequent to this peer review, many national competent authorities have already undertaken actions to improve supervisory practices. These improvements will be taken into consideration in the follow-up to this review. The period examined under the scope of this peer review was 2016 but also covered supervisory practices executed before 2016 in the preparatory stage of Solvency II. The peer review was conducted among national competent authorities from the European Economic Area on the basis of the EIOPA Methodology for conducting Peer Reviews.
Related Links
Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Solvency II, Peer Review, Supervisory Practices, Proportionality, EIOPA
Featured Experts
Paul McCarney
Insurance product strategist; insurance domain expert; extensive experience developing risk assessment frameworks for insurers
Brian Robinson
Actuary; risk management specialist; corporate and capital modelling expert
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
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.
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
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.
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
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).
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.
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.
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.
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.
