Search QAs

The instruction in regulation 2023/894 for the cell C0085 in S.34.01 is the same as for the cell C0270 in S.33.01. Should not the cell C0085 in S.34.01 include the instruction for related entities described in article 335 1.e and 336.c of the DR that the contribution of these entities to the group SCR is the proportional share of the capital requirements for credit institutions, investment firms, financial institutions, alternative investment fund managers,

Could you please clarify with which data the field "C0250 -Insurance policies" has to be filled? What would that mean from a reinsurer perspective?

Regarding the metric to insert in the QRT S.26.13, we noted that the tabs S.26.13.01.06,S.26.13.01.07,S.26.13.01.08, in the fields C0100-C0110-C0120 / R0670-R0900 & R0970-R1200, the metric is "Pure" and not "Monetary" in coherence with the same fields in the other tabs and in the other internal model QRTs.

In the scope of valuation of assets and liabilities, we can read the following under article 75 of the Solvency II directive:

a) assets shall be valued at the amount for which they could be exchanged between knowledgeable willing parties in an arm’s length transaction;

There’s a new column in table S.37.01 dubbed “Insurance policies”. ITS for the column reads: “The total amount of the exposure in the insurance policies (liability limit or sum insured depending which one represents the maximum possible exposure)” Could “maximum possible exposure” referred in the ITS be interpreted as meaning EML (estimated maximum loss), which is less hypothetical exposure than sum insured or liability limit?

According to the FINAL REPORT: REVISED DRAFT ITS ON THE MAPPING OF ECAIS’ CREDIT ASSESSMENTS document the fitch short terming rating F1+ has can credit quality step of 1 and is therefore an equivalent of a AA long term rating. This means that an short term note of, for example, Germany/France/Netherlands a AA rating which is in our opinion quite low. Since the default of those country, especially on an short term is very unlikely? So the question is why does Eiopa consider F1+ as an AA equivalent instead of a AAA equivalent?

To the answer of Q&A No. 2802 arise two additional questions: • According to the LOG file item C0120 (“Amount of Claims Paid”) is defined as “Amount of claims paid, for the relevant product Identification, for claims that have been settled with payment during the reporting year.” This is not consistent to the answer of Q&A No. 2802.

Regarding these new fields what should we refer to: Log Eiopa or the validation rule provided in the xbrl?

New taxonomy 2.8.0 has introduced two new fields: C0010-C0100/R0120 and C0010-C0100/R0130 related to SCR and MCR ratios, but the formula requested by Log Eiopa states division operations while, for the other fields above in those columns,

Could you kindly provide clarification on the C0250 field labeled "Insurance Policies"? Specifically, I would like to understand whether this field pertains to insurance policies held by the company as a client, or if it refers to policies issued by the company. Any additional guidance or examples regarding the appropriate content for this field would be greatly appreciated.