Article 199(1) states: “The probability of default (“PD”) on a single name exposure (“SNE”) shall be equal to the average of the PD on each of the exposures to counterparties that belong to the SNE, weighted by the loss-given-default in respect of those exposures.”
In other words PD is always assigned to the individual exposure and then aggregated on the level of SNE.

Article 199(3) states: ”SNE i to an insurance or reinsurance under-taking for which a credit assessment by a nominated ECAI is not available and where this undertaking meets its MCR, shall be assigned a PD I depending…”

Q1: Should I follow the article 199(3):

a)    when the individual exposure is exposure to counterparty and this counterparty is the insurance company defined in Article 199(3), regardless of the nature of the ultimate parent of the corporate group to which the counterparty belongs, or
b)    when the individual exposure is exposure to counterparty, this counterparty belongs to the corporate group and the ultimate parent of this corporate group is the insurance company defined in Article 199(3), regardless of the nature of counterparty?

Q2: Why the different wording is chosen in Article 199(3) and Article 199(4):

a)    Article 199(3): “Single name exposures i to…”
b)    Article 199(4): “Exposures to…”

In other words, why the word “Single name” is missing in Article 199(4) (and also 199(6), 199(7), 199(8),…)?