Christina Urias SMI Task Force Chair Director, Arizona Department of Insurance

Similar documents
Country: Bermuda. Solvency Modernization Initiative Country Comparison Analysis November 2009 (Note: Portions excerpted directly from BMA materials.

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

An Introduction to Solvency II

International Regulatory Developments

Advanced Methods in Insurance Capital Requirements

The Solvency II project and the work of CEIOPS

29th India Fellowship Seminar

Solvency Assessment and Management: Steering Committee Position Paper 73 1 (v 3) Treatment of new business in SCR

Gregg Clifton. CFO Aurigen Reinsurance

ORSA An International Development

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

A (personal) view. Philip Whittingham, European Chief Enterprise Risk Officer. 22 March 2010

Actuaries and the Regulatory Environment. Role of the Actuary in the Solvency II framework

Life under Solvency II Be prepared!

Solvency Assessment and Management: Steering Committee Position Paper 34 1 (v 5) Own Risk and Solvency Assessment

Solvency and financial condition report 2017

Opinion of the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority on the group solvency calculation in the context of equivalence

Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)

Link between Pillar 1 and Pillar 2

Solvency II update. Shirley Beglinger Shires Partnership Ltd Global Association of Risk Professionals. December 2014

Developments & Insights in Singapore RBC 2 and Overview of ORSA across Regions

BERMUDA INSURANCE (GROUP SUPERVISION) RULES 2011 BR 76 / 2011

Guideline. Own Risk and Solvency Assessment. Category: Sound Business and Financial Practices. No: E-19 Date: November 2015

Framework for a New Standard Approach to Setting Capital Requirements. Joint Committee of OSFI, AMF, and Assuris

Group Solvency and Financial Condition Report

Solvency II overview

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

Solvency II Detailed guidance notes

Solvency II Insights for North American Insurers. CAS Centennial Meeting Damon Paisley Bill VonSeggern November 10, 2014

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

NAIC OWN RISK AND SOLVENCY ASSESSMENT (ORSA) GUIDANCE MANUAL

Solvency Assessment and Management: Pillar 2 - Sub Committee ORSA and Use Test Task Group Discussion Document 35 (v 3) Use Test

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE

Solvency II dragging Australia into Europe once again

Solvency II Update. Craig McCulloch

Results of the QIS5 Report

Solvency & Financial Condition Report Centrewrite Limited

GUERNSEY NEW RISK BASED INSURANCE SOLVENCY REQUIREMENTS

Southeastern Actuaries Conference 2012 Annual Meeting. Jeffrey S. Schlinsog, CFA, FSA, MAAA

Solvency II Primer Regulatory Update September 2015

TABLE OF CONTENTS. Lombardi, Chapter 1, Overview of Valuation Requirements. A- 22 to A- 26

1. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 2. DEFINITIONS

Western Captive Insurance Company DAC. Solvency and Financial Condition Report. For Financial Year Ending 31 st December 2016 (the reporting period )

Solvency II developments in selected European countries Brian Morrissey, KPMG 2004 Life Convention 7-9 November. EICC Edinburgh Scotland

SOLVENCY ASSESSMENT AND MANAGEMENT (SAM) FRAMEWORK

ASSAL. Reinsurance. Walter Bell Alabama Commissioner of Insurance NAIC President

BERMUDA MONETARY AUTHORITY

We referred to ICP 20 which deals with public disclosures and is therefore directly comparable to the SFCR.

Solvency II. Insurance and Pensions Unit, European Commission

Webinar. The Gibraltar Financial Services Commission. Solvency II Implications for Non-Executive Directors (NEDs) 28 th May 2015

DEVELOPING A GROUP CAPITAL CALCULATION

SOLVENCY AND FINANCIAL CONDITION REPORT EUROLIFE LTD

Proposal for the Quality Assurance of the Solvency II capital requirements, own funds and balance sheet

Group Solvency and Financial Condition Report

Modernising Insurance Solvency Regimes Key Features of Selected Markets A STUDY BY THE GENEVA ASSOCIATION

Lessons from the ICAS regime for UK insurers

OUTLINE BACKGROUND: REGULATORY ENVIRONMENT SII/ERM IMPLEMENTATION: BUSINESS MANAGEMENT INTEGRATION IS KEY SII AND CAPITAL REQUIREMENTS

Bermuda s Insurance Solvency Framework The Roadmap to Regulatory Equivalence. September

Solvency Assessment and Management: Steering Committee Position Paper (v 4) Life SCR - Retrenchment Risk

Becare DAC. Solvency and Financial Condition Report ( SFCR ) for the financial year ended 31 December Page 1

EIOPA's Supervisory Statement. Solvency II: Solvency and Financial Condition Report

GUIDANCE NOTE ON LICENSED INSURERS OWN SOLVENCY ASSESSMENT

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

Society of Actuaries in Ireland Solvency II for Beginners. Mike Frazer. 19 May 2011

Tara Insurance DAC. Solvency & Financial Condition Report (SFCR) 31 August, 2016

Karel VAN HULLE. Head of Unit, Insurance and Pensions, DG Markt, European Commission

Appendix 2: Supervisory Statements

The Society of Actuaries in Ireland

WHITE PAPER. Solvency II Compliance and beyond: Title The essential steps for insurance firms

CAPTIVE BEST PRACTICE GUIDELINES

Solvency II. New Rules in Europe for the Insurance Industry. Lecture at UConn Law, January 28, 2013

TYRE REINSURANCE (IRELAND) DAC. Solvency and Financial Condition Report. For Financial Year Ending 31 st December 2016 (the reporting period )

SOLVENCY AND FINANCIAL CONDITION REPORT EUROLIFE LTD

Community Trust Company Basel III Pillar 3 Disclosures December 31, 2017

Practice Education Course Finance and Investments Exam June 2014 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Solvency and Financial Condition Report 20I6

Community Trust Company Basel III Pillar 3 Disclosures March 31, 2017

Regulatory Disclosures March 31, 2018

Solvency and Financial Condition Report. The United Kingdom Mutual Steam Ship Assurance Association (Europe) Limited

Accounting Matters and Disclosure and Internal Control

Solvency II. Yannis Pitaras IACPM Brussels, 15 May 2009

PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES

FSA Consultation Paper enhanced capital requirements and individual capital assessments for non-life insurers

17/06/2012. Solvency II: Implementation Challenges & Opportunities. What is Solvency II about?

Life 2008 Spring Meeting June 16-18, Session 14, Key Issues Arising from Solvency II. Moderator Marc Slutzky, FSA, MAAA

SOLVENCY ADVISORY COMMITTEE QUÉBEC CHARTERED LIFE INSURERS

PILLAR 3 Disclosures

COVER NOTE TO ACCOMPANY THE DRAFT QIS5 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES

Solvency Monitoring and

GreyCastle Life Reinsurance (SAC) Ltd. Financial Condition Report

Actuaries Club of the Southwest

Legal and General Assurance (Pensions Management) Limited. Solvency and Financial Condition Report 31 DECEMBER 2018

Increased Corporate Governance Requirements for Insurers

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc. PILLAR 3 DISCLOSURES

Société d'assurances Générales Appliquées (SAGA) dac. Solvency and Financial Condition Report ( SFCR ) for the financial year ended 31 December 2016

Financial Condition Review

Session 032 PD - Life Insurance Capital Framework in Canada. Moderator: Benjamin L. Marshall, FSA, CERA, FCIA, MAAA

Vital Blue Insurance DAC

Re: Consultation Paper on Commercial Insurer s Solvency Self Assessment ( CISSA CP )

Transcription:

May 21, 2010 TO: Christina Urias SMI Task Force Chair Director, Arizona Department of Insurance FROM: RE: Mary A. Weiss, Ph.D. Distinguished Scholar, CIPR NAIC Country Solvency Comparisons Materials for Developing U.S. ORSA The purpose of this memo is twofold: (1) to provide a high-level summary of the key characteristics of solvency regulation in several countries: Canada, Bermuda, Australia, and the United Kingdom, as well as Solvency II 1 ; and (2) to provide some suggestions for material that might be considered for inclusion in a U.S. ORSA document. 1. Country Comparisons of Key Solvency-related Characteristics A numbered, bullet point approach is used below to present the Key Solvency-related Characteristics of the United Kingdom, Bermuda, Australia, and Canada. Key Solvencyrelated Characteristics for Solvency II are reviewed also. Some similarities tend to occur across the systems evaluated, extending beyond the use or potential use of internal models. More specifically, all of the systems reviewed either use or allow the option of using a risk-based-capital approach for determining minimum capital or target capital. An emphasis on insurer corporate governance and risk management is stressed in all solvency regulation reviewed, with Australia producing specific risk management and corporate governance standards that insurers must comply with. Most regulatory systems make a distinction between the quality of different types of capital by classifying the different sources of capital (e.g., ordinary shares, perpetual cumulative preferred stock) into different tiers. Calibration of models and stress tests also tend to be incorporated into solvency requirements. Solvency systems differ as to whether operational risk is treated quantitatively (e.g., in Bermuda and Australia it is treated quantitatively). 1 A webinar for the Swiss system has been produced previously. 1

United Kingdom Key Regulatory Solvency-related Characteristics 1. The UK has the Individual Capital Adequacy Standard (ICAS). This standard is made up of two components: a. Insurer management must carry out a self assessment of how much capital the firm needs given its business model and risk appetite. This amount is known as the Internal Capital Assessment (ICA). For each major source of risk identified, appropriate stress tests and scenario analyses must be performed. Through the ICA the firm should be able to demonstrate a level of solvency which can be compared to a 99.5% probability of remaining solvent over one year. b. A supervisory tool, Individual Capital Guidance (ICG), in which firms are given guidance on their ICA by the FSA, is used. In evaluating an insurer s ICA, the FSA is interested in the answer to three main questions: Is there senior management engagement, including the Board? How are the ICA principles and models being used for ongoing management purposes? How are the ICA results used to influence risk management goals and prioritize activity? The ICAs are reviewed for capital adequacy. In the course of doing this, the firm s overall operations are reviewed, including risk management and corporate governance processes. Guidance from the FSA may entail increased capital for the firm. 2. Minimum Capital Standards exist. a. Two tests are implemented for life insurers that have with profits (participating business). The first is a test based on Solvency I, and the other is a test based on realistic values for assets and liabilities (FSA test). The second test applies only to the largest with profits firms. b. Nonlife firms must hold the greater of the Minimum Capital Requirement (based on Solvency I) or the Enhanced Capital Requirement (ECR). The ECR uses a factor-based approach, similar to risk based capital. It is not meant to be a true risk-based capital standard but it is intended to be better than the EU s Solvency I requirement. 3. The Annual Return has detailed information on premiums and claims for each line of business. It includes audited financial statements, a management or directors report, and responsibility statements made by the people responsible within the insurer. 4. The FSA assesses insurer risk by the impact and probability of failure. (It does this through the ARROW framework.) 5. Depending on a firm s ARROW rating, it may receive an on-site visit. An on-site visit may also be part of the ICAS process. 6. Two tiers of capital are used for insurers, with Tier 1 capital including ordinary shares, member contributions, and audited reserves. Lower tiers of capital (such as long-term or perpetual subordinated debt) are subject to limits or require a waiver to be included in capital resources. 2

Solvency II Key Regulatory Solvency-related Characteristics 1. Solvency II is designed to replace Solvency I, with one of its goals being to more fully apply modern risk management, actuarial, accounting and governance standards. 2. An Own Risk Self Assessment (ORSA) report is required. 3. Solvency II consists of three pillars. Pillar I is concerned with minimum capital requirements (MCR), solvency capital requirements (SCR), reserves and funds eligible to count as capital. Pillar II s scope is supervisory review (including review of an insurer s Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)). Pillar III deals with public transparency and market discipline through public reporting standards. 4. The Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR) is based on the economic capital needed at a certain ruin probability (0.5%) over a one year time horizon. 5. Insurers may compute SCR using a standard model, an internal model or a combination of the standard and internal model. a. The standard model is a risk-factor based model that takes into account nonlife, life, and health underwriting risk; market risk, credit risk, and operational (including legal) risk. b. Use of an internal model requires supervisory approval. In order to obtain supervisory approval, the insurer must meet certain requirements such as documented, well functioning risk management and governance systems, statistical quality standards, calibration standards, validation standards, documentation standards, and a use test for the model. 7. Scenario testing is required whether the firm uses a standard or internal model. 8. A capital-add on may be required if the insurer s governance system is perceived as inadequate or if the assumptions of the standard model do not fit the firm well. 9. Market consistent values of liabilities and assets are used in all reports. 10. The insurer s capital is divided into three tiers according to the extent to which it can be counted on when the firm is in financial distress. 11. The annual Solvency and Financial Condition Report (SFCR) (to be made public) requires the insurer to provide financial information and to give complete information about governance. It should indicate the main drivers and trends that may affect the firm (either positively or negatively) over the firm s planning horizon. For different, significant risks faced by the firm, the firm must indicate the risk exposure, concentration, mitigation and sensitivity of the firm to the exposure. 12. Public disclosure of internal models is not required nor is the ORSA report. 3

Canada Key Regulatory Solvency-related Characteristics 1. Insurance is regulated at the provincial and federal level. However, most insurers are federally registered, and as such are regulated for solvency purposes by OSFI. 2. OSFI considers corporate governance, risk management, financial analysis, internal audits, board oversight, and compliance with applicable laws and regulations as key components of ensuring insurer solvency. 3. Capital available to be used to meet solvency requirements is divided into Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. Tier 1 (core capital) and Tier 2 (supplementary) capital are meant to be similar to the capital tiers under Solvency II. 4. Capital requirements are expressed as a ratio of actual capital to required capital. 5. The life capital test uses four types of approaches to find the Minimum Continuing Capital and Surplus Requirements (MCCSR). a. a factor approach based on assets or liabilities is used for credit, market (interest rate) and pricing risks b. a formula approach is used for mortality insurance risks c. a scenario approach is used for insurance lapse risks d. a mixed approach (company model or factors based on industry model) is used for Segregated Fund guarantees. 6. The property & casualty capital test, the Minimum Capital Test (MCT), is a riskbased test that focuses on the credit and liability risk of property casualty insurers. 7. The minimum capital standard is set at 120% of the MCCSR (life) or MCT (property & casualty). 8. In the future it is anticipated that internal models will gradually be allowed. However, full-blown internal models will not come into use all at once. Instead, internal models may be added for one type of risk at a time. For example, to start, an internal model for market risks only is anticipated to be available for qualified insurers in the near future. 9. OSFI relies heavily on the actuarial and accounting profession in its regulatory framework. 10. Federally registered insurers are required to file quarterly and annual financial statements, and the accounting system is Canadian GAAP. 11. ISFR will be used starting in 2011. 12. Insurers are required to report on their corporate governance, risk management, internal audits and board oversight. 13. Federally registered insurers are examined at least once every 3 to 5 years. 14. As off-site analysis, each federally registered institution is rated by OSFI according to its net risk. Net risk is obtained by offsetting the aggregate quality of risk management against the aggregate level of inherent risk of the insurer. 4

Bermuda Key Regulatory Solvency-related Characteristics 1. Insurers in Bermuda are categorized into several classes. The objective of the class system is to retain light regulation for firms such as single captives, which insure only the risks of the parent corporation, while increasing the regulatory stringency for firms that write business more broadly (e.g., reinsurers). 2. The risk-based capital requirement is called the Bermuda Solvency Capital Requirement (BSCR). It incorporates eight Capital Risk Charges, calibrated at 99% Tail VaR. The eight Capital Risk Charges are for fixed investments risk, equity investments risk, interest rate risk, premium risk, credit risk, reserve risk, catastrophe risk and operational risk. 3. Insurers with minimum capital and surplus of $100M and underwriting direct excess liability and/or property catastrophe reinsurance may use an internal model, but they must meet certain requirements. For example, the insurer must demonstrate that a comprehensive and effective approach to risk management is used and that a prudent approach to capital management is used (e.g., in terms of minimum calibration levels). 4. Insurers must submit a statutory financial return. 5. Stress testing is conducted. 6. Insurers must submit a Capital and Solvency Return which includes a description of the risk management program, risk exposures, and stress tests/scenario analysis. 7. A formalized on-site inspection program exists and applies to all insurer classes. Inspections are conducted at least once every three years. 8. Off-site analysis is conducted which involves assessment of the insurer s inherent risk. Factors such as quality of corporate governance, quality of risk management, and capital support are offset against the inherent risk to come up with a composite insurer rating. 9. Capital add-ons are applied as deemed necessary. 10. Benchmarking/ peer group comparisons are conducted to identify outliers. 5

Australia Key Regulatory Solvency-related Characteristics 1.One of three approaches can be used to determine minimum levels of capital: a. Internal model based (IMB) method use of an IMB requires regulatory approval. As of 10/2009 no companies have been approved although several applications to use the IMB method are expected. Insurer must have an appropriate Economic Capital Model to use IMB. The insurer s Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR) must be an amount of capital sufficient for the probability of default to be 0.05 or less. b. Prescribed Method a factor-based approach is used to determine capital charges for Insurance risk, Investment risk, and Concentration risk. c. Combination of IMB and Prescribed Methods. An insurer must hold capital at least equal to the minimum. 2. As part of its solvency guide, APRA has issued standards relating to corporate governance and risk management. a. governance standard. The governance prudential standard sets out the minimum foundation for good governance of insurers and includes, for example, specific requirements with respect to Board size and composition. b. risk management standard. This aims to ensure that the insurer has systems for identifying, assessing, mitigating, and monitoring risks. Among other things, the standard requires that the insurer have a documented Risk Management Strategy. 3. An insurer must have an Appointed Auditor and an Appointed Actuary. 4. Annual and quarterly statutory returns reported on the basis of modified IFRS must be filed. 5. APRA has created a risk rating model called Probability and Impact Rating System or PAIRS. This model evaluates insurers on the basis of their likely failure rate and on the impact should they fail. 6. An insurer is mapped into one of four supervisory stances based on the PAIRS rating: normal, oversight, mandated improvement, restructure. 7. Capital is divided into two tiers. Tier 1 capital includes, for example, ordinary paid up shares, retained earnings, and current year s earnings. Tier 2 capital includes items such as term subordinated debt and perpetual cumulative preferred shares. 6

2. Suggestions for items to be included in an U.S. ORSA document While we have yet to hear about the components of ORSA under Solvency II, the Swiss have already implemented requirements that conceivably could constitute at least part of an ORSA Report. The following publications provide potentially interesting and useful suggestions for material to include in an ORSA: (1) White Paper of the Swiss Solvency Test (http://www.finma.ch/archiv/bpv/download/i/whitepapersst_en.pdf). (2.) Swiss Quality Assessment Corporate Governance Tool (attached file: SQA_CG_Tool_EN.pdf); and (3) Swiss Quality Assessment Risk Management/ Internal Control System Tool (RM/ICS Tool) (attached file: SQA_RM_IKS_Tool_EN.pdf). As part of the Swiss Solvency Test (SST), insurers are required to submit An SST Report to the regulator. The SST Report consists partly of explanations relating to the SST such as explanations of the valuation methodologies and assumptions underlying the market consistent valuation of assets and liabilities. However, it asks for other types of information which might be useful for an ORSA: a. Description of company specific scenarios conducted by insurer b. Description of risk mitigation, including reinsurance programs, securitization, pooling, and other risk mitigation c. Description of the main risks of the insurer and an assessment as to whether these risks are adequately reflected in the SST d. Description of concentration of risk e. Description of operational risks f. Assessment of other relevant risks (e.g., strategic, political, etc.) as well as possible future relevant risks to which the insurer might be exposed. The other two reports mentioned above are part of Swiss Quality Assessment (SQA).The Swiss Quality Assessment consists of two annual questionnaires a corporate governance questionnaire and a risk management/internal control system questionnaire. The corporate governance questionnaire must be completed by the parent company of an insurance group AND by each insurance company in the group under Swiss regulatory supervision. The risk management and internal controls system questionnaire must be completed only at the group level in the usual case. These reports are designed to answer the following questions: a. Does the insurer have documented procedures on corporate governance, risk management, and internal controls? b. Are the documented procedures in each of these areas followed? c. Does the insurer consider its procedures and practices appropriate to achieve the relevant objectives? 7