Distinguished guests and esteemed colleagues,
Thank you to the FSI and the IAIS for convening this discussion at an important moment for insurance supervision.
Regulatory and supervisory modernisation has become increasingly prominent in discussions about the future of financial regulation.
Just three weeks ago, I participated in a roundtable on modernising global financial regulation at the Institute of International Finance’s Annual Membership Meeting in Bangkok. For the first time, regulatory modernisation will also feature as a dedicated roundtable at the IAIS Annual Conference.
This growing attention reflects an important reality: we are operating in a period of rapid change. New technologies, evolving business models and an increasingly complex, interconnected risk environment are changing how insurers operate and the risks they face.
At the same time, supervisors must address a growing range of risks and challenges, often with limited resources.
Against this backdrop, supervisory modernisation means ensuring that our approaches remain effective, proportionate and responsive to change, while delivering their intended outcomes.
I would like to offer two perspectives: first, as Vice Chair of the IAIS Executive Committee, and then as Chairperson of EIOPA.
The IAIS perspective: Building on a framework that continues to evolve
Modernisation is not new for the IAIS. The international framework for insurance supervision has evolved considerably, responding to developments in the insurance sector, emerging risks and lessons from periods of financial stress.
ComFrame, the Holistic Framework for the assessment and mitigation of systemic risk, and, most recently, the Insurance Capital Standard are examples of this evolution.
Each has strengthened the global supervisory framework: enhancing group wide supervision of internationally active insurers, modernising systemic risk monitoring and establishing a global risk based capital standard for internationally active insurance groups.
Together, they demonstrate that international supervision is not static. It evolves as markets change, risks develop and our understanding of effective supervision advances.
From the IAIS perspective, I would highlight three considerations.
First, supervision needs to remain responsive to change.
Supervisors must be forward looking and adaptive, with the tools and capabilities to identify and respond to new and evolving risks.
The IAIS has deliberately developed principles based standards, providing flexibility to respond to changing circumstances without constant revision.
But flexibility in the standards is only part of the equation. As markets and business models evolve, we must also consider whether our supervisory approaches, tools and practices remain fit for purpose.
Second, supervision needs to be proportionate and focused on material risks and outcomes.
Proportionality is already embedded in the IAIS Insurance Core Principles. It allows supervisors to tailor their approaches to achieve intended outcomes and avoid unnecessary requirements or processes that add little value.
This is particularly relevant to insurance, given the long term nature of many insurance activities and liabilities. Unlike some banking risks, which can materialise very rapidly, certain insurance risks develop over longer periods, giving supervisors more time to respond. Supervisory approaches should reflect these differences while remaining responsive to risks that emerge more quickly.
Third, we need to make the best use of supervisory capacity.
Supervisors in many jurisdictions face constrained budgets and limited specialist resources, while the risks they oversee continue to grow in complexity. Prioritisation is therefore increasingly important.
Technology, data and supervisory technology, or SupTech, can expand supervisory reach, improve efficiency and strengthen risk identification and assessment. They can also help direct resources where they will have the greatest impact.
Ultimately, modernisation is about making better use of the resources we have, rather than assuming that effective supervision always requires more.
Together, these priorities point towards a common objective: making supervision more adaptive, proportionate and efficient while maintaining the standards and outcomes that effective supervision must deliver.
The international dimension
Jurisdictions approach regulatory and supervisory modernisation differently, reflecting their markets, institutional arrangements and supervisory frameworks. This diversity creates opportunities to learn from one another, share good practices and consider where successful approaches could be applied more widely.
The IAIS is also engaging in the Financial Stability Board’s work on regulatory and supervisory modernisation. Together with the experience of our members, this work can inform our activities and support supervisors across our diverse membership.
Modernisation is not an end in itself. Ultimately, it must strengthen supervisory effectiveness and deliver better outcomes: protecting policyholders, supporting insurers’ resilience and contributing to financial stability.
That is the perspective I bring from the IAIS. Let me now turn to the European perspective and explain how EIOPA approaches supervisory modernisation and effectiveness.
The EIOPA perspective
As Chairperson of EIOPA, I would like to share the choices that guide our approach.
Europe faces a particular challenge. A common insurance market depends on cooperation between authorities with different national responsibilities. That cooperation affects consumer protection, financial stability and the conditions under which companies compete.
EIOPA’s Strategy Towards 2030 provides a compass, setting a direction for stronger consumer protection and greater resilience across insurance and pensions. Simplification and digitalisation will help us pursue these objectives more efficiently.
I will focus on supervisory impact, simplification and competitiveness, and our collective capacity to deliver.
Supervisory impact
EIOPA’s strategy connects Single Market integration, market and societal resilience, and better regulation supporting supervision. These priorities reinforce one another: consistent protection supports integration, stronger risk assessment supports resilience, and clearer regulation helps authorities act.
EIOPA combines technical advice with supervisory convergence and oversight. What supervisors see on the ground must inform how we regulate. Their experience helps us understand where requirements work and where they need to change.
Through country visits, colleges and collaboration platforms, we work with national authorities on concrete supervisory issues. This helps authorities compare assessments, identify weaknesses and coordinate responses, while showing EIOPA where differing practices can produce different outcomes across the Single Market.
Enhancing cross border supervision remains a central priority. An issue in one jurisdiction can affect policyholders in several others. Effective cooperation requires timely information and effective enforcement of recommended actions. EIOPA strengthens this cooperation and supports consistent supervisory action.
The same focus guides our conduct work.
EIOPA’s first coordinated mystery shopping exercise examined consumers’ experiences when purchasing insurance based investment products. It showed that longer or more formal sales processes do not necessarily improve consumer outcomes.
These findings inform our work on simpler sales processes and more effective consumer protection. EIOPA and national supervisors followed up through further analysis, stakeholder dialogue and national supervisory action. We have also launched a second exercise focusing on online sales of non life insurance.
Earlier this month, EIOPA launched a consultation on a draft Supervisory Statement concerning insurance based investment products. It makes our expectations for outcomes focused supervision of sales processes and disclosures more explicit.
The draft asks supervisors to assess whether processes and disclosures support informed consumer decisions, focusing on weaknesses that materially affect consumer understanding or the effectiveness of safeguards.
Compliance remains the foundation of consumer protection. Our objective is to make safeguards work effectively in practice while reducing complexity that adds little value for consumers.
We have also simplified our value for money benchmarking methodology, supporting focused comparisons and helping supervisors identify products that warrant closer attention.
We judge effectiveness by how early supervisors identify vulnerabilities, how promptly they act and how consistently they protect policyholders. Peer reviews and oversight follow up help reveal progress and where further work is needed.
Our resilience objective also connects sectoral soundness with wider societal needs. EIOPA’s work on risk assessment and protection gaps supports the capacity of insurance and pensions to serve households and businesses over time.
Preparedness is part of this approach. EIOPA has advanced implementation of the Insurance Recovery and Resolution Directive, including instruments on recovery and resolution planning. In developing these instruments, we sought the least burdensome approach within the legislative framework, focusing on streamlined processes, proportionality and avoiding unnecessary duplication.
The next phase requires authorities to translate this common framework into operational readiness, reinforcing the importance of appropriate skills and effective coordination.
Simplification, regulation and competitiveness
EIOPA has delivered all legal instruments within its mandate under the Solvency II review. The revised framework will apply from January 2027.
Solvency II remains a robust risk based framework. The review will strengthen proportionality and facilitate investment in equities and securitisation. EIOPA will monitor how companies use the resulting capital relief, its contribution to financing Europe’s real economy and changes in companies’ risk profiles.
Simplification is integral to this work.
In March, EIOPA proposed changes that would reduce quarterly reporting templates by 26 per cent and annual templates by 30 per cent, with larger reductions for small and non complex undertakings.
Our objective is a clearer framework that authorities and companies can apply consistently. Each requirement must justify the effort its implementation demands.
We also examine how sectoral and horizontal requirements interact. Through engagement with the AI Office, EIOPA seeks greater coherence between the AI Act and insurance legislation. Where obligations overlap, authorities should explore opportunities for a comply once approach.
Dialogue with industry provides valuable evidence on duplication, unnecessary complexity and uncertainty. Concrete examples and data on costs and impacts help identify where simplification can deliver the greatest benefit. EIOPA must assess this evidence against the supervisory purpose of the requirements.
Our work on national general good rules under the Insurance Distribution Directive also contributes to this effort, seeking greater transparency and examining whether administrative burdens remain proportionate to consumer protection objectives.
These measures explain EIOPA’s contribution to competitiveness.
EIOPA fully supports Europe’s competitiveness agenda, contributing through the responsibilities and tools within its current mandate.
A more integrated Single Market offers companies greater opportunities to develop and compete internationally. Consistent supervision can reduce unnecessary barriers and uncertainty, while proportionate requirements can help different business models operate effectively.
Sustainable growth also depends on trust. Insurance and pensions involve long term commitments. Confidence in those commitments supports market participation, investment and financial security.
Credible supervision sustains that confidence, creating conditions in which resilient companies can innovate and expand. Stability and predictability therefore contribute to the attractiveness of European markets.
Supervisors must also recognise the costs their requirements create, examining whether they remain necessary and whether simpler methods can achieve the same objectives.
EIOPA combines this responsibility with its commitment to consumer protection and financial stability. The practical focus should remain on deeper integration, fewer unnecessary burdens and consistent supervisory outcomes, supporting both effective supervision and competitive markets.
Supervisory capacity and supervisory unity
Delivering these objectives brings us to supervisory capacity.
New responsibilities require choices about resources. Authorities must consider the severity of risks, the urgency of intervention and the consequences of inaction, while retaining flexibility to revise priorities as evidence changes.
The timing of major exercises also matters. EIOPA moved the next insurance stress test from 2027 to 2028, taking account of pressure from implementing new frameworks. We continue our ongoing risk monitoring. This adjustment helps authorities and industry manage competing demands on their capacity.
Digital tools offer further opportunities. EIOPA develops supervisory technology internally and with national authorities, and supports skills development through the Supervisory Digital Finance Academy.
These efforts require investment in people and systems. Experienced supervisors must retain responsibility for interpretation and decisions.
Efficiency gains cannot absorb every new demand. Authorities need sufficient resources to fulfil their mandates, and an honest assessment of capacity must accompany decisions about new responsibilities.
Supervisory unity offers a complementary response.
It means EIOPA and national authorities working as one supervisory community, with a European perspective. We aim to prevent divergences before they emerge and support faster, more decisive supervisory action. This approach builds on national responsibilities and local knowledge. It focuses cooperation where there is a clear European interest and joint work can deliver practical benefits.
The purpose is to reduce parallel effort and strengthen supervision across the Single Market. Authorities with different resources can also benefit from a wider pool of expertise.
Progress depends on trust. Authorities need to share concerns early, engage with different assessments and contribute actively to joint work. Practical cooperation can deepen that trust and strengthen European supervisory culture.
The same approach informs EIOPA’s international engagement. Risks and business structures connect European markets with other jurisdictions. Cooperation helps authorities understand these connections and respond more effectively.
EIOPA brings a common European voice to international discussions, drawing on our collective supervisory experience to advance shared priorities and strengthen cooperation with international partners.
The FSI and the IAIS provide important opportunities to compare experience and develop shared understanding. EIOPA values these exchanges as part of its commitment to effective supervision.
Conclusion
EIOPA’s strategy provides a clear compass. The task now is to translate its direction into supervisory impact. That requires sustained attention to outcomes, a simpler framework and stronger collective use of resources.
EIOPA has delivered the instruments for the Solvency II review, advanced concrete burden reductions and strengthened the evidence available for supervision.
The next phase must carry these efforts into consistent implementation. Supervisory unity can help authorities combine expertise and act with a clearer European perspective.
The ultimate measure is the reliability of the protection that insurance and pensions provide. Effective supervision supports that reliability and the trust on which these markets depend. That trust strengthens competitiveness and the sector’s contribution to the resilience of the wider economy.
These priorities guide EIOPA’s contribution to our common work in the years ahead.
Thank you.
- Publication date
- 29 October 2026