EIOPA, as part of the 2020 Solvency II reporting and disclosure review, launched a field test on the revised and newly proposed reporting templates. The aim of the field test is to provide undertakings the possibility to implement the new and revised reporting requirements, to identify main issues, and to report on these issues. The field test is open for all solo undertakings and service providers. Feedback received until January 31, 2020 will support EIOPA in ongoing discussions with stakeholders. However, EIOPA will also welcome feedback after January 31, 2020, which will be considered for future development of the implementing technical standards on reporting and disclosures.
The field test includes templates related to solvency capital requirement, detailed analysis per period for life insurance and reinsurance undertakings, cyber risk, and internal models. The field test is based on the templates and instructions as published in the consultation on supervisory reporting and public disclosure. The taxonomy package consists of DPM Excel files, XBRL files, and database. Certain templates—namely S.01.01, S.01.02, S.01.03, and T.99.01—were added to the package to ensure that the field test DPM and XBRL taxonomy consist of the same functional templates as the officially released taxonomy packages. The Excel files include annotated templates and DPM dictionary; list of the same data points included in the Annotated templates file, and suggestions about potential validation checks that have been added as comments. The field test does not aim for national competent authorities to receive real data.
Although there is no intention to collect real data during the field test exercise, the 2.4.0 taxonomy architecture has been used, including its 2.4.0 Filing rules. Experience shows that many important questions and concerns, including those linked with the interpretation of which information is requested, are raised during implementation. To address these questions and concerns, EIOPA is conducting this field test and welcomes any feedback on the questions, concerns, and any problem encountered during the test phase.
Keywords: Europe, EU, Insurance, Reinsurance, Solvency II, Field Test, Reporting, Disclosures, SFCR, Quantitative Reporting Templates, Cyber Risk, DPM, XBRL, EIOPA
Previous ArticleIMF Publishes Reports on the 2018 Article IV Consultation with Japan
Next ArticleECB Publishes the Risk Assessment Report for 2019
The finalization of the two sustainability disclosure standards—IFRS S1 and IFRS S2—is expected to be a significant step forward in the harmonization of sustainability disclosures worldwide.
Decentralized finance (DeFi) is expected to increase in prominence, finding traction in use cases such as lending, trading, and investing, without the intermediation of traditional financial institutions.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) published reports that assessed the overall implementation of the net stable funding ratio (NSFR) and the large exposures rules in the U.S.
At the global level, supervisory efforts are increasingly focused on addressing climate risks via better quality data and innovative use of technologies such as generative artificial intelligence (AI) and blockchain.
The finalization of the IFRS sustainability disclosure standards in late June 2023 has brought to the forefront the themes of the harmonization of sustainability disclosures
The European Banking Authority (EBA) recently issued several regulatory publications impacting the banking sector.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) launched a consultation on revisions to the core principles for effective banking supervision, with the comment period ending on October 06, 2023.
The U.S. banking agencies (FDIC, FED, and OCC) recently proposed rules implementing the final Basel III reforms, also known as the Basel III Endgame.
The Financial Stability Board (FSB) recently published the second annual progress report on the July 2021 roadmap to address climate-related financial risks.
The recognition of climate change as a systemic risk to the global economy has further intensified regulatory and supervisory focus on monitoring of the environmental, social, and governance (ESG) risks.