Search QAs

The question relates to subordinated debt issued by a Turkish insurance company and being purchased by a Greek insurance company. The two entities belong in the same Group of companies (i.e. they have the same insurance parent company). How would the purchase of such a debt be recognized by the Greek insurance company?

Can you please clarify the instructions for item S.36.01/ NC0190? It is saying: "6 months up to the reporting date". In case the template is submitted on an annual basis (1.1.-31.12.), do we only have to report payments from 1.7. until 31.12.?

My question is relating the relationship between S.37.01 and S.37.02 . I understand that S.37.01 requires only significant risks to be reported whereas S.37.02 requires all risks to be reported. My confusion is where we have an insurance policy with a counterparty which does not meet the threshold of S.37.01 to be reported, but is still an exposure- does this need to be reported in S.37.02? We do have thousands of policies that we are struggling to report this way in S.37.02.

As a Belgian insurance intermediary, FinFactor NV would like to obtain clarity regarding the definition of 'capitalization transactions', as referred to in Article 2, § 3, b), ii), of Solvency II Directive and included in Article 5, 13° of the Insurance Act (hereinafter the WVLA ), which, according to the FSMA, only refers to obligations that are specified in terms of their duration and amount and therefore only relates to products that entail an obligation to repay a certain amount expressed in money.

We would like to ask information on how to fill the fields C0320 and C0330 in template S.06.02 in case the credit rating is provided by a non-EU CRA and endorsed by an ECAI registered by ESMA. We would like to ask confirmation that, in this particular situation, the abovementioned fields should be filled with reference to the ECAI registered in EU that has endorsed the ratings.

Within the LOG File for QRT S.19.01, we noticed the following change/addition in the descriptions for those triangles that include Best Estimate Claims Provisions values: ..."net of salvage and subrogation and excluding any expenses, as well as any future premiums." In our opinion, there is a mismatch between this new description and the validations between S.19.01 and S.17.01, for example BV1438 (and following) or BV1474 (and following).

Is it legal that an EU insurance company request the insured his or her criminal conviction records to offer or renew a home insurance policy?

My question is related to Q&A 2962. EIOPA answer is that for the column C0131 in S.08.01.01, it is modelled using MD metrics with no dimensions, the multicurrency facts have the information about the “Currency Conversion Approach” (s2c_dim:AF) dimension with “Expressed in currency of denomination (not converted to reporting currency)” (s2c_CA:x1) embedded in the MD metric declaration and carried in their label and MD metric details.

One of the new ITS requirements for S.19.01 states that Best Estimate amounts should exclude any expenses. However S.19.01 contains amounts of Best Estimate calculated for previous years. Is it necessary to apply this new requirement (excluding of expenses) for historical BE Amounts (previous diagonals that contain data for previous reporting years) or only for amounts starting from 2023 reporting year (last diagonal)?