Industry Feedback: Building Resources to Meet Advances in Global Insurance Supervision

Similar documents
GUERNSEY AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF GLOBAL AND EUROPEAN INSURANCE CAPITAL STANDARDS

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY

Policy Statement PS7/18 Model risk management principles for stress testing. April 2018

Progress report Equivalence assessment of the Bermudian supervisory system in relation to articles 172, 227 and 260 of the Solvency II Directive

IMPLEMENTATION OF GUERNSEY FINANCIAL ADVICE STANDARDS

Submission on Issues Paper: Review of the Insurance (Prudential Supervision) Act 2010 (Issues Paper)

Final Report. Public Consultation No. 14/042

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY

Policy Statement PS16/16 Implementing audit committee requirements under the revised Statutory Audit Directive. May 2016

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY INSURANCE DIVISION GUIDANCE NOTES FOR RECLASSIFICATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INSURANCE AMENDMENT ACT 2008

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE SUPERVISORS

Consultation Paper. ESMA Guidelines on enforcement of financial information. 19 July 2013 ESMA/2013/1013

Consultation Paper. the draft proposal for. Guidelines. on reporting for financial stability. purposes

Re: The consultation paper entitled Economic Balance Sheet Framework issued December 2014

Feedback Statement on CP109 Consultation on Potential Changes to the Investment Framework for Credit Unions

Final Report Guidelines on Internalised Settlement Reporting under Article 9 of CSDR

Regulatory Update February 2006

Consultation Paper Review of Article 26 of RTS No 153/2013 with respect to MPOR for client accounts

Joint Consultation Paper

Statement of Board Assurance provided to the Water Services Regulation Authority Indicative Wholesale charges

2011 Casualty Loss Reserve Seminar. Bermuda Insurance Framework. Navid Zarinejad, FCAS, MAAA Assistant Director, Actuarial Services

The 2017/18 Levy Policy Statement

EIOPA-CP-14/ November 2014

Financial Conduct Authority 25 The North Colonnade Canary Wharf London E14 5HS. 26 January 2018

Gibraltar Financial Services Commission. Response Paper Funding Review Consultation

COMMITTEE OF EUROPEAN SECURITIES REGULATORS

British Virgin Islands. Financial Services Commission

No. Name Reference Comment Resolution 1. ABI General Comment

Consultation and decision paper CP17/44. PSR regulatory fees

Consultation Paper Proposed fee amendments for financial services providers

Policy Statement PS25/17 Solvency II: Data collection of market risk sensitivities. October 2017

Policy Statement PS28/17 PRA fees and levies: model transaction fees, fees and FSCS levies for insurers and fees for designated investment firms

Feedback statement August 2017

Policy Statement PS1/18 Strengthening individual accountability in insurance: optimisations to the SIMR. February 2018

POSITION PAPER NO On the Review of Financial Advice

The Payment Systems Regulator s Financial Penalty Scheme

Consultation Paper CP31/16 Solvency II: updates to SS25/15 and SS26/15

VAT registration threshold: call for evidence Response by the Chartered Institute of Taxation

Advice to the European Commission on the review of the Financial Conglomerates Directive 1

May 2018 Basis for Conclusions: APES 310 Client Monies

Consultation Paper. the draft proposal for. Guidelines. on the implementation of the long term. guarantee adjustments and transitional.

EBA FINAL draft implementing technical standards

Final Report CSDR Guidelines on Access by a CSD to the Transaction Feeds of a CCP or of a Trading Venue under Regulation (EU) No 909/2014

Annex I - SUPERVISORY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS FOR LIQUIDITY COVERAGE AND STABLE FUNDING RATIO

Opinion Draft Regulatory Technical Standard on criteria for establishing when an activity is to be considered ancillary to the main business

The Future of Financial Reporting in the UK and Republic of Ireland

12 February International Accounting Standards Board 30 Cannon Street London EC4M 6XH United Kingdom. Dear Mr Hoogervorst,

Final Report. Public Consultation No. 14/036 on. Guidelines on the loss-absorbing. capacity of technical provisions and.

1. Indirect Clearing. 2. Straight Through Processing (RTS 26)

BREXIT AND ALTERNATIVE ASSET MANAGERS

Final report on public consultation No. 14/051 on the implementing. technical standards with regard to. procedures for the application of

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY

INSURANCE: Bermuda Issues Guidance Notes

This document summarises the comments received and responses by the Regulatory Authority on three Consultation Papers released on 18 September 2014:

Keynote Address. AFME European Compliance and Legal Conference London. Verena Ross Executive Director. Ladies and gentlemen,

Final Report on public consultation No. 14/049 on Guidelines on the implementation of the long-term guarantee measures

Reply form for the Consultation Paper on Benchmarks Regulation

Will Solvency II give full recognition to third-country

IFPHK s Response to the Insurance Authority s. Consultation Paper on Draft Insurance (Maximum. Number of Authorized Insurers) Rules

Consultation Paper CP29/17 International banks: the Prudential Regulation Authority s approach to branch authorisation and supervision

Short selling EBF Response to CESR Consultation Paper on a Proposal for a Pan-European Short Selling Disclosure Regime Key Points:

Feedback Statement on CP Consultation on Second Edition of the Central Bank Investment Firms Regulations including changes related to MiFID II

Discussion Paper on Proposals to Create a Single Fiduciary Handbook and Revise Pension Rules

Interim Report Review of the financial system external dispute resolution and complaints framework

Financial services regulation what impact will Brexit have on regulated firms established in the UK, Europe & third country jurisdictions?

CONSULTATION PAPER NO BANKING: FINANCIAL REPORTING AND DISCLOSURES

RTS AND GL ON GROUP FINANCIAL SUPPORT EBA/CP/2014/ October Consultation Paper

FEEDBACK ON THE CONSULTATION PAPER ISSUED BY THE GUERNSEY FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Directorate-General for Financial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union

Solvency II Update. Latest developments and industry challenges (Session 10) Réjean Besner

July 2012 Explanatory Memorandum: Exposure Draft 03/12 APES 230 Financial Planning Services

Background information about Guidelines on preparing for Solvency II

EIOPACP 13/010. Guidelines on Submission of Information to National Competent Authorities

Simplifying Transactions in Securities Legislation. Consultation Document 31 July 2009

Consultation on the Protection of Retail Investors in relation to the Distribution of CFDs. Consultation Paper 107

Introduction and legal basis. EBA/Op/2014/ October 2014

EBF Response to EBA Consultation on draft ITS amending ITS on supervisory reporting on Liquidity Coverage Ratio (EBA/CP/2014/45)

Consultation Paper. Clearing Obligation under EMIR (no. 6) 11 July 2018 ESMA

(Non-legislative acts) REGULATIONS

Consultation Paper EBA/CP/2016/ November 2016

BIBA s response to HM Treasury consultation A new approach to regulation building a stronger system

Final Report. Implementing Technical Standards

BRITISH BANKERS ASSOCIATION

IAIS: Enterprise Risk Management for Capital Adequacy & Solvency Purposes. George Brady. IAIS Deputy Secretary General

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY GUIDELINES ON STRESS TESTING FOR THE BERMUDA BANKING SECTOR

INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE SUPERVISORS

GUIDANCE NOTE ON LICENSED INSURERS OWN SOLVENCY ASSESSMENT

JC FINAL draft Regulatory Technical Standards

Opinion On the European Commission s proposed amendments to SFTR reporting standards

PROPOSED REVISIONS TO THE REGULATORY REGIME ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF GUERNSEY FINANCIAL ADVICE STANDARDS

Policy Statement PS16/17 Dealing with a market turning event in the general insurance sector. July 2017

GUIDELINE ON OUTSOURCING

INSURANCE BULLETIN. Insurance/ Reinsurance. 18 June 2015

Final Report Draft regulatory technical standards on indirect clearing arrangements under EMIR and MiFIR

Insurance alert. also decided that acquisition costs should be presented as part of the margin liability rather than as an asset and that,

Regulatory Impact Statement. Shipping (Charges) Regulations 2000: Maritime Operator Safety System fees

Reducing Red Tape: Results of Consultation Process and Invitation to Comment on Additional Rule and Procedure Changes Guidance Note 1 Admission as a

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS MODULE

EBA final draft implementing technical standards

FEEDBACK STATEMENT ISSUED

Transcription:

17 th November 2008 Industry Feedback: Building Resources to Meet Advances in Global Insurance Supervision On 12 th September 2008, the Bermuda Monetary Authority ( BMA ) released a consultation paper entitled Building Resources to Meet Advances in Global Insurance Supervision. The focus of this consultation paper was to set out proposals for amendments to supervisory fees paid by the commercial insurance sector. These funds would be used to support further enhancements to the insurance supervisory regime as the BMA paves the way for effective mutual recognition with other international regulators. Views were sought generally on whether or not proposed amendments to the existing supervisory fee structure: reflect the variable costs of supervising different company types and sizes of insurers; cover in the aggregate those costs associated with building the foundational elements of the enhanced commercial sector supervisory regime, and costs of implementation, and; are competitive, when compared to supervisory fees charged by other financial centres with a global insurance market. Firms primarily affected by these proposals will be the large insurers in the new class 3B. There have also been modest proposed increases in fees for class 3A and long-term insurers. Our proposals do not impact the captive sector, as it is our clear policy objective to leave the existing regulatory framework and fee structure for captives broadly unchanged. The BMA received three submissions in response to the consultation paper. Two of the responses were made by representative bodies on behalf of their membership (the Bermuda Insurance Managers Association - BIMA has 47 member organizations which, in turn, represent more than 1200 Bermuda insurers, and the Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers - ABIR has 23 member companies). It has not been possible to summarise all of the responses according to the consultation questions (set out at the annex A) as the format of the majority of the responses did not follow the questions asked. Rather respondents detailed their comments either in connection with a specific area of focus or offered more general comments, observations and concerns. Generally, there was widespread support for the BMA to have sufficient funding to support ongoing enhancements to the regulation and supervision of Bermuda s commercial insurance

sector. Respondents highlighted their support for the work that has already been undertaken and the ongoing work that will be necessary to ensure that the BMA continues to supervise to an internationally compliant level and that Bermuda continues to be a premier jurisdiction for all financial services. Respondents generally agreed with the 2009 proposed fee increases for class 3A, class 3B and long-term insurers. However, all respondents voiced a word of caution about the timing and level of any future fee increases, in light of any further fallout experienced from the global financial crisis. Other key concerns/issues highlighted by respondents are shown below: 1. A question was raised as to whether all sectors of Bermuda s commercial insurance market should be asked to fund increased supervisory costs associated with mutual recognition related initiatives. 2. It was a suggested that other costs associated with having a company registered in Bermuda should be considered when proposals are put forward to increase fees associated with insurance supervision. This would ensure that all jurisdictional costs are appropriately analysed, and that Bermuda remains a competitive place for international business. 3. The class 3 sector raised some concern about the appropriateness of the class 3B supervisory framework, mirroring that imposed on class 4 insurers. 4. It was also felt by some respondents that companies writing US related risks will not have the same expectation in terms of the supervisory burden, as those insurers that will operate within the EU. Further, it was suggested that pure writers of US risks should not be required to fund supervisory enhancements that are geared to supporting an equivalency assessment under EU standards. 5. Both associations proposed a fees for services approach, where companies are charged transactional fees for supervision. One example put forward was to institute an onsite inspection fee. 6. The class 4 sector suggested that there should be full parity between the annual fees charged to class 4 and class 3B insurers. 7. One group of firms accepted the case for parity but asked for a delay beyond 2010 to achieve this. Another group opposed the principle of convergence of the fee structure and asked that no further increases be made in 2010. 8. The BMA should consider ways to give companies a rebate if fees generated in a given year exceed supervisory related expenses in that year. In addressing the class 3 sector concerns one must first take into account the work undertaken to craft industry guidance to support the re-registration of class 3 insurers. The BMA, through the assistance of the representative bodies of the class 3 sector, was able to provide a substantial amount of certainty to affected stakeholders about which company types would require reclassification into the new class 3A and class 3B sub-classes. These guidance notes were released on 12 th September 2008, and not only provided detail on the application process, but further clarity as to how the BMA would treat the various company types that currently are

licensed as class 3 insurers. A brief synopsis of what has been communicated through the guidance notes follows: Class 3 insurers will include: - All Captives writing more than 20% and less than 50% unrelated business. - All insurers writing business arising out of the operations of their owners and not qualifying for licensing as a class 2 insurer. - Rent-a-captives and S-A-C companies. Class 3A insurers will include: - All non-class 4 commercial insurers writing 50% or more unrelated business, totaling less than $50 million in net premiums written. - Affiliated reinsurers where other unrelated business does not exceed $50 million in net premiums written. Class 3B insurers will include: - All non-class 4 commercial insurers writing 50% or more unrelated business, totaling more than $50 million in net premiums written. Many of the initial concerns raised by the class 3 sector have been addressed through the introduction of the above-referenced guidance notes, but as was mentioned above there remained substantive concern about the timing of convergence of class 3B and class 4 supervisory fees. The original fee proposal introduced an annual business fee for Class 3B and Class 4 insurers that would be set according to a sliding scale, reflecting that the cost of supervision may vary with the volume of gross premium written. This new structure was meant to align the scale of annual fees more directly to an insurer s size and company type, whilst retaining as much simplicity as possible. The existing disparity between class 3B and class 4 would become de minimus over the next 2 years, as a further assessment of class 3B fees was planned for 2009 to ensure parity between class 3B and class 4 constituents by 2010. As a result of the feedback received through this consultation process the BMA has determined not to proceed with full convergence of the fee structure for class 3B and class 4 insurers at this juncture, and will commit to consulting on this matter again in 2010. The BMA has also removed from the proposal any increases in annual business fees for the class 4 sector. It clearly is not the intent of the BMA to place any undue burden on its licensees, but to ensure that the supervisory costs for licensees more closely reflect the relative supervisory risks posed by the different categories and sizes of entities. The BMA is committed to ensuring that Bermuda's financial markets remain competitive and that the costs of supervision are reasonable, and we will continue to ensure effective management and cost control so that market participants can be assured that the BMA is discharging its responsibilities as efficiently and effectively as possible. In response to concerns about the associated costs of the significant work involved with the drive towards mutual recognition, it should be noted that the BMA firmly believes this to be an important priority for all Bermuda constituents. The costs associated with the proposed fee increases is considerably outweighed by the benefits of Bermuda receiving a favorable mutual

recognition assessment, in terms of reduced regulatory costs for firms, continuing market access and favorable counterparty and investor sentiment towards Bermuda-based firms. The BMA also amended the draft of the fees proposal to include a provision for fee remittance in those instances where the payment of the annual fee in whole or in part would be detrimental to an insurer s business. This would allow for flexibility in those instances where a company enters run-off, and/or some other state of dormancy. Other key amendments to the initial draft of proposals are shown below: 1. No proposed increases to annual business fees for class 4 insurers. 2. A new fee for mutual recognition initiatives will be assessed to the Class 4 sector in 2009 and 2010. This new fee would amount to $40,000 per company per annum and will not exist beyond 2010. 3. Annual business fees for Class 3A and long-term insurers have been reduced from the original proposal to $19,000. 4. Additional service fees have been introduced and/or amendments made to existing service fees in the following areas: Service Existing Fee Proposed Fee Applying for registration as- 1. insurer 2. insurance manager, broker or agent Re-registration as a different class of insurer Applying for an extension to the statutory filing deadline Applying for a reduction in statutory capital under section 31C Applying under section 56: 1. for an exemption from filing a loss reserve specialist opinion 2. for an alteration and/or clarification of statutory accounting provisions 3. modifying the minimum solvency margin calculation 4. modifying the content of the statutory financial return $140.00 $140.00 $525.00 $300.00 $368.00 $525.00 $210.00 $525.00 $210.00 $525.00

Applying to have an admitted asset designated as a relevant for the purpose of calculating the liquidity ratio Applying for other fixed capital approval *Notifying the BMA of new or increased shareholder control under section 30D *Applying to cancel registration under section 41(1)(a) *Applying for approval of an insurer s internal model under the provisions of section 6A * - new form of application $210.00 $525.00 $210.00 $350.00 $50,000.00 The BMA is extremely appreciative to all respondents for their comments, and to Insurance Advisory Committee members, who assisted the BMA in formulating the initial policy and draft legislative amendments. All of the feedback was considered useful and assisted in shaping the final proposals of the BMA to support the building of sufficient resources to meet advances in global supervisory standards.

Annex A CONSULTATION QUESTIONS In responding to this consultation paper, respondents are asked to consider the following questions, in addition to any other comments they may wish to make. Comments must be received by the BMA by 10th October 2008. Overall Approach Q.1 Do you agree that the objective of mutual recognition is a major jurisdictional priority? Q2 Do respondents broadly agree with the overall approach taken in framing the proposed new fees for Class 3B and Class 4 insurers namely, a sliding scale system based on the guiding principles noted above? Q.3 If the answer to Q. 2 is no, which alternative approach(es) would respondents propose instead? Q.4 Are any of the guiding principles identified irrelevant, in the view of respondents, and/or are there any other principles that respondents believe should have been taken into account? Specific parameters chosen Q.5 Do respondents broadly agree with the fee bands set for different Class 3B and Class 4 insurers? Q.6 If the answer to Q.4 is no, what alternatives would respondents propose, and what would be their rationale? Q.7 Are there any specific anomalies created by the fee structure proposed? Q.8 Do respondents have views on the proposals as they impact long-term insurers and Class 3A commercial insurers? Practical implementation Q.9 Would the new system be reasonably straightforward to apply? Q.10 Are there any specific questions or difficulties that respondents wish to raise, in terms of understanding how to apply the new system in practice? Other Issues Q.11 Are there any other issues not covered above that respondents wish to comment on?