We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • NCOIL Capital Standards Resolution Draws Mixed Reaction From Insurance Trade Groups

    July 14, 2014 by Thomas Harman

    BOSTON – Insurance industry trade groups had mixed opinions concerning a National Conference of Insurance Legislators’ resolution opposing the imposition of insurance capital standards under discussion internationally.

    NCOIL’s executive committee approved the resolutions on the final day of its Summer National Meeting on July 13.

    The standards resolution was crafted in response to international proposals for insurer solvency regulation, including a global capital standard. Among the international proposals concerning state lawmakers, the resolution cited the G-20 Financial Stability Board’s direction to the International Association of Insurance Supervisors to create a quantitative insurance capital standard for internationally active insurance groups, a standard that impacts some large U.S. companies.

    The resolution said NCOIL wants the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, the Federal Insurance Office and the U.S. representatives to the Financial Stability Board “to oppose the creation of any additional set of international solvency standards, including a global insurance capital standard, that fails to adequately and appropriately accommodate the proven U.S. approach to insurer solvency regulation.” NCOIL also seeks coordination with federal agencies and state regulators toward a position consistent with states policies and laws regarding global insurance capital standards. The global capital standard, the resolution said, is unnecessary and duplicative and would not recognize jurisdictional differences such as accounting standards and state-required use of statutory accounting principles, or significant differences in risk and capital needs between insurance groups (Best’s News Service, July 11, 2014).

    The American Insurance Association was concerned about the resolution, because it failed to mention ongoing implementation efforts by the Federal Reserve to create a differentiated capital standard for insurers organized as depository institutions or designated as systemically important financial institutions by the Financial Stability Oversight Council. “Nor does it acknowledge the longstanding and deep commitment of the NAIC and commissioners at the international level in the work of the IAIS,” Joe DiGiovanni, AIA’s senior vice president of state affairs , said in a statement. “It assumes the IAIS capital standards will yield a product that cannot accommodate the U.S. approach to capital, yet the [insurance capital standards] discussions are just beginning.”

    The Property Casualty Insurers Association of America supported the resolution. Frank O’Brien, PCI vice president state government affairs, said NCOIL President Neil Breslin, a New York state senator, recognizes the importance of protecting the U.S. state-based system of insurance regulation. “It is essential for state and federal officials embrace a coordinated policy position to keep in check international mission creep as some international bodies attempt to expand their influence beyond their scope of responsibility.”

    David Snyder, PCI’s international vice president, said NCOIL’s actions send a clear message to all U.S. and international decision makers.

    The AIA said it is working with the IAIS, the NAIC, the FIO and the Federal Reserve to shape the development of the new international standards. The AIA recommended any global capital standard take a risk-focused approach to capital assessment that accommodates different jurisdictional frameworks, including that in the United States.

    The AIA also was concerned about the resolution concerning principles of state sovereignty in international trade, which calls on more transparency in talks regarding the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the Trade in Services Agreement.

    “The resolution fails to recognize measures that protect the role of states in regulation, as well as regulatory safeguards that are in all U.S. trade agreements, and ignores the enormous benefits of trade agreements to the U.S. insurance sector,” DiGiovanni said.

    The National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies favored both the capital standards resolution and a resolution seeking more transparency in international talks that would give lawmakers a voice internationally.

    An NCOIL Task Force Advisory Council also made progress toward a series of proposed amendments to NCOIL’s Model Unclaimed Life Insurance Benefits Act, currently in place in 15 states and under consideration in six others. The panel changed some of its planned amendments that would have allowed prospective application of the model or retroactive applications only in cases where companies practiced asymmetrical matching. Instead, the panel moved to retain existing retrospective provisions, but consider allowing regulators more discretion to ease model implementation.

    The task force will continue to work on the model amendments in the hope of gaining a final vote of approval when NCOIL meets Nov. 20-23 in San Francisco.

    (By Thomas Harman, associate editor, BestWeek: Tom.Harman@ambest.com)

    Originally Posted at A.M. Best on July 14, 2014 by Thomas Harman.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency