Explain why different parts of the same organisation might be subject to different regulatory regimes and/or capital adequacy standards
Reasons different parts of an organisation might be subject to different regulatory regimes and/or capital adequacy standards
1. having operations that are regulated by different territories
2. having subsidiaries that operate in different industry sectors, eg financial and manufacturing
3. having subsidiaries that operate in different areas within the same sector, eg banking and insurance
4. having subsidiaries or portfolios within the same sector that are subject to different regulatory requirements, eg traditional insurer and captive insurer
5. having subsidiaries which are new ventures or acquisitions and are at different lifecycle stages
List the types of external entities that may exercise supervision and control over a company
Entities that may exercise supervision and control
List six processes that may form part of a prudential supervision system
Prudential supervision
1. oversight (eg financial)
2. licensing
3. a requirement to maintain minimum standards (eg operational)
4. procedures for monitoring compliance with standards and licences
5. a requirement for disclosure of key information
6. processes to take action against those who fail to comply
Outline the UK Senior Insurance Managers Regime (SIMR)
Senior Insurance Managers Regime (SIMR)
There are two main parts to the SIMR:
1. a governance map giving details of:
a. company and corporate governance structures
b. identified ‘Key Functions’, ‘Key Function Holders’ and ‘Key Function Performers’
c. all individuals within the SIMR regime, their responsibilities and reporting lines
d. the rationale applied in identifying those individuals and allocating responsibilities to them.
2. an assessment of fitness and propriety of senior insurance managers and directors, based on their responsibilities as allocated through the governance map.
Outline two broad types of regulation
Two types of regulation
Two broad types of regulation:
Outline the advantages and disadvantages of unified regulation
Unified regulation
Advantages:
1.easier to regulate financial conglomerates
2. ensures a consistent approach across financial services activities
3. limits any incentive for regulatory arbitrage
4. economies of scale
5. better sharing of ideas between regulatory staff
6. improved accountability (less buck-passing between regulators)
Disadvantages:
1. may become large and bureaucratic
2. departments within the regulator can end up functioning independently
State five factors that an insurer should consider when developing a set of relationship management principles with a regulator
Considerations when developing relationship management principles with a regulator
The insurer should consider what principles to adopt with respect to:
1. alignment to supervisory objectives
2. preservation of the insurer’s reputation
3. the importance of being proactive and engaging with a regulator as early as possible
4. transparency of communication
5. ensuring accountability for and governance of relationship management.
Outline insurer-regulator relationship management principles relating to alignment to supervisory objectives and to preservation of the insurer’s reputation
Principles relating to supervisory objectives / preservation of reputation
Outline insurer-regulator relationship management principles relating to proactive engagement
Principles for proactive engagement
Outline insurer-regulator relationship management principles relating to transparency of communication
Principles for transparency of communication
Outline insurer-regulator relationship management principles relating to accountability for / governance of the relationship
Principles for accountability / governance
There should be clarity as to which individuals are accountable for each of the following broad groups of interactions:
The Chief Risk Officer (or the Chief Financial Officer) should have overall responsibility for the relationship and co-ordinating interactions.
Continuity of the personnel involved in each type of interaction should be maintained as it helps to develop and maintain a trusting relationship.
Boards should encourage an appropriate relationship with regulators by setting the tone and be kept fully informed of insurer-regulator interactions, especially non-standard and strategic interactions.
List the aspects of an organisation that a risk-based regulator typically seeks to understand
Aspects of an organisation that a regulator typically seeks to understand
Regulators try to understand which companies represent greatest risk by examining:
Outline the three pillars of Basel Accords
Basel pillars
Pillar 1: minimum regulatory capital requirement determined by the amount of credit, market and operational risk exposures
Pillar 2: supervisory review which relates to the bank’s internal risk management processes. Supervisors will assess the bank’s internal systems, processes and risk limits to ensure that the bank has set aside sufficient capital for its risks (additional capital may be required, but this is expected to be rare). Particular attention is paid to liquidity and concentration risks.
Pillar 3: level of disclosure that the bank is required to undertake to the public and the market. Its purpose is to facilitate market discipline on firms through appropriate pricing for capital.
Summarise the main criticisms of the Basel II requirements
Summary of the main criticisms of the Basel II requirements
Summarise the main aims of Basel III
Basel III: Basel III works alongside Basel I & II.
It:
1. addresses liquidity risks (eg the risk of a run on the bank) as well as systemic and counterparty risks
2. strengthens the capital requirements for banks, including limiting cross holdings in other financial institutions and associated assets to limit systemic risk
3. introduces a conservation buffer to provide breathing space in times of financial stress
4. changes the minimum ratios of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital
5. allows some flexibility in capital requirements in times of financial crisis to limit pro-cyclicality.
Summarise the aims of Solvency II
Aims of Solvency II
Outline the three pillars of Solvency II
Solvency II
Pillar 1: quantitative requirements designed to capture underwriting, credit, market and operational risk. There are two parts to the requirements: the Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR – below which regulatory action is taken) and the lower Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR – below which authorisation is foregone).
Pillar 2: qualitative requirements on undertakings such as risk management well as supervisory activities. Specifically, insurers must carry out their Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA) to quantify their ability to continue to meet the SCR and MCR in the near future, given their identified risks and associated risk management processes and controls.
Pillar 3: supervisory reporting and disclosure
Outline the purpose and requirements of an Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)
Purpose and requirements of an ORSA
The purpose of the ORSA is to provide the board and senior management of an insurance company with an assessment of:
1. the adequacy of its risk management, and
2. its current, and likely future, solvency position.
The ORSA requires each insurer to:
1. identify the risks to which it is exposed,
2. identify the risk management processes and controls in place, and
3. quantify (using long-term projections) its ongoing ability to continue to meet its solvency capital requirements (both MCR and SCR)
4. analyse quantitative and qualitative elements of its business strategy
5. identify the relationship between risk management and the level and quality of financial resources needed and available.
Outline the similarities between Basel II and Solvency II
Similarities between Basel II and Solvency II
three-pillar structure
Pillar 1 – minimum capital requirements
- risk-based approach, using standard or internal model
- consideration of credit, market and operational risk
- available capital tiered to indicate quality
Pillar 2 – supervisory review
- assessment of own RM processes and capital adequacy
Pillar 3 – disclosure
- to facilitate market discipline
mandatory (if adopted into individual country regulation)
suitable for multi-nationals
Outline the differences between Basel II and Solvency II
Differences between Basel II and Solvency II
1. Solvency II not designed with systemic risk in mind
2. Solvency II is more principles based, Basel II has more prescriptive rules
3. Solvency II is EU, whereas Basel is global
4. Under Pillar 1, Solvency II involves the assessment of an SCR in addition to the MCR
5. Under Pillar 1, Solvency II considers underwriting risk
Outline the key features of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
Key features of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
1. formation of a Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB)
2. increased accountability of CEOs and CFOs requiring them to:
– certify that financial reports do not contain any untrue facts
– set up, maintain and evaluate internal controls, and report any issues to the external auditors
3. published reports must contain an internal control report (ICR)
4. independent audit committee with at least one financial expert
5. external auditor cannot provide non-audit services to same firm
6. limited length of appointment of external auditor (five years)
7. strengthened separation of analyst and investment bankers
8. illegal for directors to interfere with the audit process
9. illegal for employees to alter, conceal, falsify, destroy records
Outline the key questions that management should consider as part of their governance, risk and compliance (GRC) systems
Key questions for management to consider as part of GRC systems
Outline the COSO Integrated Framework
The COSO Integrated Framework
The Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) is a US private sector organisation, sponsored by professional accounting associations.
The framework it has set out definitions and standards which organisations can use to assess their internal RM control systems.
The framework considers different aspects of a business across three dimensions (often represented as a cube):
1. activities required to demonstrate internal controls
2. business areas covered
3. level of application.
The contents of each cell is considered in terms of whether there are adequate internal controls (eg reporting of risk assessments at divisional level) to demonstrate compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley.
State the principles embedded in the COSO framework:
Principles embedded in the COSO framework
The principles embedded in the COSO framework include:
1. ERM should be integrated into an organisation’s strategy
2. risk represents opportunity as well as potential downside
3. ERM is a multi-dimensional and iterative ongoing process
4. it should be integrated into everyday processes
5. everyone has a role in risk management (at all levels), but ultimate responsibility is with the CEO
6. any risk management process is imperfect
7. implementation of risk management must balance cost with potential benefit.