The Impact of Solvency II Regulations on Life Insurers' Investment Behaviour

Author(s):  
Graeme Douglas ◽  
Joseph Noss ◽  
Nicholas Vause
2018 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 36-66
Author(s):  
Kangjing Tan ◽  
Aaron Bruhn

AbstractThe European-centric Solvency II and Australian-centric Life and General Insurance Capital regimes are two examples of risk-based approaches to capital determination and risk management for life insurers. Both consist of a three-pillar structure covering capital, risk management and disclosure requirements. We apply the capital requirements of each regime to three synthetic sets of insurance policies, including a risk, annuity and combined portfolios, and consider the impact on capital arising from three separate and relatively severe stress events. Results highlight the relatively capital intensive nature of annuities, the differences between different capital regimes, the significance of solvency II’s matching adjustment and the robustness of each regime to both pandemic and economic stresses. Results also highlight the nature of diversification benefits from within each capital regime, on overall capital requirements.


Risks ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 7 (3) ◽  
pp. 72
Author(s):  
Antonio Pallaria ◽  
Nino Savelli

Solvency II requirements introduced new issues for actuarial risk management in non-life insurance, challenging the market to have a consciousness of its own risk profile, and also investigating the sensitivity of the solvency ratio depending on the insurance risks and technical results on either a short-term and medium-term perspective. For this aim, in the present paper, a partial internal model for premium risk is developed for three multi-line non-life insurers, and the impact of some different business mixes is analyzed. Furthermore, the risk-mitigation and profitability impact of reinsurance in the premium risk model are introduced, and a global framework for a feasible application of this model consistent with a medium-term analysis is provided. Numerical results are also figured out with evidence of various effects for several portfolios and reinsurance arrangements, pointing out the main reasons for these differences.


2020 ◽  
Vol 25 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. J. Pelkiewicz ◽  
S. W. Ahmed ◽  
P. Fulcher ◽  
K. L. Johnson ◽  
S. M. Reynolds ◽  
...  

Abstract For life insurers in the United Kingdom (UK), the risk margin is one of the most controversial aspects of the Solvency II regime which came into force in 2016. The risk margin is the difference between the technical provisions and the best estimate liabilities. The technical provisions are intended to be market-consistent, and so are defined as the amount required to be paid to transfer the business to another undertaking. In practice, the technical provisions cannot be directly calculated, and so the risk margin must be determined using a proxy method; the method chosen for Solvency II is known as the cost-of-capital method. Following the implementation of Solvency II, the risk margin came under considerable criticism for being too large and too sensitive to interest rate movements. These criticisms are particularly valid for annuity business in the UK – such business is of great significance to the system for retirement provision. A further criticism is that mitigation of the impact of the risk margin has led to an increase in reinsurance of longevity risks, particularly to overseas reinsurers. This criticism has led to political interest, and the risk margin was a major element of the Treasury Committee inquiry into EU Insurance Regulation. The working party was set up in response to this criticism. Our brief is to consider both the overall purpose of the risk margin for life insurers and solutions to the current problems, having regard to the possibility of post-Brexit flexibility. We have concluded that a risk margin in some form is necessary, although its size depends on the level of security desired, and so is primarily a political question. We have reviewed possible alternatives to the current risk margin, both within the existing cost-of-capital methodology and considering a wide range of alternatives. We believe that requirements for the risk margin will depend on future circumstances, in particular relating to Brexit, and we have identified a number of possible changes to methodology which should be considered, depending on circumstances.


2013 ◽  
Vol 44 (1) ◽  
pp. 39-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maathumai Nirmalendran ◽  
Michael Sherris ◽  
Katja Hanewald

AbstractThis paper provides a detailed quantitative assessment of the impact of capital and default probability on product pricing and shareholder value for a life insurer providing life annuities. A multi-period cash flow model, allowing for stochastic mortality and asset returns, imperfectly elastic product demand, as well as frictional costs, is used to derive value-maximizing capital and pricing strategies for a range of one-year default probability levels reflecting differences in regulatory regimes including Solvency II. The model is calibrated using realistic assumptions. The sensitivity of results is assessed. The results show that value-maximizing life insurers should target higher solvency levels than the Solvency II regulatory one-year 99.5% probability under assumptions of reasonable levels of policyholder's aversion to insolvency risk. Even in the case of less restrictive solvency probabilities, policyholder price elasticity and solvency preferences are shown to be important factors for a life insurer's value-maximizing strategy.


2012 ◽  
Vol 17 (3) ◽  
pp. 562-615 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Foroughi ◽  
C. R. Barnard ◽  
R.W. Bennett ◽  
D. K. Clay ◽  
E. L. Conway ◽  
...  

AbstractInsurance accounting has for many years proved a challenging topic for standard setters, preparers and users, often described as a “black box”. Will recent developments, in particular the July 2010 Insurance Contracts Exposure Draft, herald a new era?This paper reviews these developments, setting out key issues and implications. It concentrates on issues relevant to life insurers, although much of the content is also relevant to non-life insurers.The paper compares certain IFRS and Solvency II developments, recognising that UK insurers face challenges in implementing new financial and regulatory reporting requirements in similar timeframes. The paper considers resulting external disclosure requirements and a possible future role for supplementary information.


2009 ◽  
Vol 15 (3) ◽  
pp. 747-777
Author(s):  
C. D. O'Brien

ABSTRACTThis paper reviews the market structure of the U.K. with-profits life insurance market and the potential effect on how life insurers operate. We consider the competitiveness of the market, quantifying the increase in the degree of concentration since 2000, and establishing that inherited estates may offer some protection from competition for incumbent firms. However, there is a significant degree of mobility in market positions of leading firms. Analysis of costs indicates some large differences between firms, with larger firms experiencing lower cost ratios, indicative of economies of scale. There are some marked differences in insurers' prices, the data showing that charges tend to be lower on unit-linked than on with-profits policies. The paper suggests that while there are potential concerns about how the market operates for consumers, the impact is limited by the dramatic reduction in new with-profits business.


2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 420-444
Author(s):  
Fabrice Balland ◽  
Alexandre Boumezoued ◽  
Laurent Devineau ◽  
Marine Habart ◽  
Tom Popa

AbstractIn this paper, we discuss the impact of some mortality data anomalies on an internal model capturing longevity risk in the Solvency 2 framework. In particular, we are concerned with abnormal cohort effects such as those for generations 1919 and 1920, for which the period tables provided by the Human Mortality Database show particularly low and high mortality rates, respectively. To provide corrected tables for the three countries of interest here (France, Italy and West Germany), we use the approach developed by Boumezoued for countries for which the method applies (France and Italy) and provide an extension of the method for West Germany as monthly fertility histories are not sufficient to cover the generations of interest. These mortality tables are crucial inputs to stochastic mortality models forecasting future scenarios, from which the extreme 0.5% longevity improvement can be extracted, allowing for the calculation of the solvency capital requirement. More precisely, to assess the impact of such anomalies in the Solvency II framework, we use a simplified internal model based on three usual stochastic models to project mortality rates in the future combined with a closure table methodology for older ages. Correcting this bias obviously improves the data quality of the mortality inputs, which is of paramount importance today, and slightly decreases the capital requirement. Overall, the longevity risk assessment remains stable, as well as the selection of the stochastic mortality model. As a collateral gain of this data quality improvement, the more regular estimated parameters allow for new insights and a refined assessment regarding longevity risk.


2009 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 887-908 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Gatzert ◽  
Gudrun Hoermann ◽  
Hato Schmeiser

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document