Search QAs

Considering the classification of (re)insurance contracts into Lines of Business (LoB) needs to be carried out based on the nature of the underlying risks and not the form of the contracts the (re)insurance products are based on: - Should the Technical Provisions (TPs) of a proportional reinsurance treaty where 100% of the original insurance contract premiums and claims are passed on to the reinsurer (with a commission being paid to the insurer), be classified under one of the "insurance" LoBs

Our question relates to the swap market data utilized to construct the risk-free rate curve. According to the documentation available at https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/document/download/71e6f092-d03d-482c-8242-8…, Refinitiv is currently the provider listed, with the following caveat: “EIOPA has no evidence of the superiority of a concrete market data provider.

In 2023 there was a change incorporated in the delegated act relating to the treatment of Insurance and Intermediaries as well as Reinsurance Receivables and Payables. For the balance sheet QRT SE 02.01 it is now explicitly stated that, for reinsurance segment, all (due and overdue) receivables and payables are to be shown in rows R370 and R830. For rows R360 and R820, this is not the case.

We have a question regarding NACE-Code "Other". With the taxonomy 2.8.2, the NACE code-list in XBRL data dictionary has been expanded to option “Other”. Based on the current “Know Issues” (provided with taxonomy 2.8.2) in our understanding, the NACE “Other” is only applicable for the QRT S.37.02. Accordingly, the NACE “Other” should not be used for the QRT S.06.02, S.11.01 and S.37.01. Do you agree with this view?

We believe there is a small error/omission in the 3rd paragraph of the General comments to S.06.03. It reads: "The template shall include information corresponding to 100 % of the value invested in collective investment undertakings. However, for the identification of countries the look–through shall be implemented in order to identify the exposures of 90 % of the total value of the funds minus the amounts relating to CIC 8 and 9

I am still struggling with the definition for determining the country to report in QRT S.04.04. Can EIOPA give more practical guidance's including some examples?

There is currently an initiative by the EU Commission to reduce reporting obligations by 25%. Many working groups have already been formed in some countries and at Insurance Europe to deal with this issue. At our workshop with the regulator, it was said that financial stability reporting is not being considered. We would be interested to know why this is the case?

In which EU regulation/directive/other is the term "property/immovable property" defined? If a property is situated in more than one member state how the risk should be allocated between them and respectively how the tax on the insurance premium should be apportioned? In addition, is a gas pipeline and any other pipeline deemed a immovable property?

We have a question regarding the S.37th QRTs (S.37.01, 37.02 & 37.03) -COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2023/89 2023/894-: We assume, most of the S.37th-information can be derived from S.06.02. In case characteristics are not applicable to QRT S.06.02,