• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Reinsurance Focus

New reinsurance-related and arbitration developments from Carlton Fields

  • About
    • Events
  • Articles
    • Treaty Tips
    • Special Focus
    • Market
  • Contact
  • Exclusive Content
    • Blog Staff Picks
    • Cat Risks
    • Regulatory Modernization
    • Webinars
  • Subscribe
You are here: Home / Archives for Reinsurance Regulation

Reinsurance Regulation

NAIC Committee takes action on reinsurance collateral proposal

March 12, 2007 by Carlton Fields

The NAIC has issued a news release with respect to action taken today by the NAIC's Financial Condition (E) Committee at the NAIC's Spring National Meeting, which is currently underway in New York City. The news release reports that the Committee has directed the Reinsurance Task Force to continue to work on technical details within the Reinsurance Evaluation Office Proposal, and to consider the design of a revised US reinsurance regulatory framework. For details, see the news release on the NAIC's Internet site.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation, Week's Best Posts

Surplus lines/reinsurance bill reintroduced in Congress

March 7, 2007 by Carlton Fields

Last fall, the Nonadmitted and Reinsurance Reform Act passed the house 417-0, but was not considered by the Senate due to its late passage in the House. A substantially similar bill has been introduced in the House, H.R. 1065. The bill subjects nonadmitted insurers to the premium tax laws of the policyholder's home state, and makes reinsurers subject to the solvency laws of their state of domicile under most circumstances. Due to an amendment to the definition of “qualified risk manager,” the new bill has the support of the Risk & Insurance Management Society, which did not support the bill last year.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation, Reorganization and Liquidation, Week's Best Posts

Zurich companies settle insurance bid-rigging claims

March 5, 2007 by Carlton Fields

A group of companies has settled civil and regulatory issues relating to alleged bid rigging in the sale of insurance. A District Court has approved a settlement whereby Zurich Financial Services, Zurich American Insurance Company, Steadfast Insurance Company, Fidelity and Deposit of Maryland, Empire Fire and Marine Insurance Company, American Guarantee and Liability Insurance Company, Empire Indemnity Insurance Company and Assurance Company of America have settled all claims in a pending MDL action, and also settled with numerous state attorneys general and insurance departments. In re: Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation, Case No. 04-5184/MDL No. 1663 (USDC D.N.J. Feb. 16, 2007). Details of the settlement, which will cost the companies over $200 million, may be found in a Memorandum In Support of a motion seeking approval of the settlement.

Filed Under: Arbitration / Court Decisions, Reinsurance Regulation

Cat risk legislative update

February 27, 2007 by Carlton Fields

There are three recent items of interest in pending legislation regarding cat risks:

  • a Bill has been introducted in the United States Senate (S. 292) to establish a bi-partisan Commission on Catastrophic Disaster Risk and Insurance, to assess the condition of the property and casualty insurance and reinsurance markets in the aftermath of the recent hurricanes, and the ongoing exposure of the United States to various cat risks, and recommend any necessary legislative and regulatory changes to improve the financial health and competitiveness of such markets and assure consumers of the availability of adequate insurance coverage at competitive prices;
  • a Bill has been introduced in the Missouri Senate (SB 518 – bill text and bill summary) to establish the Missouri Catastrophe Fund to help protect property and casualty insurers against insolvencies caused by certain natural disasters.
  • two Bills have been introduced in the New York Senate to establish a state cat fund (S. 1883 and S. 2520).

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation

SEC settles sham reinsurance allegations with Renaissance Re

February 16, 2007 by Carlton Fields

The SEC has settled allegations that Renaissance Re entered into a sham reinsurance transaction that had no economic substance and no purpose other than to smooth and defer $26.2 million of Renaissance Re's earnings from 2001 to 2002 and 2003. To effectuate the settlement, the SEC filed a Complaint against Renaissance Re in US District Court and simultaneously announced a settlement of the allegations. The settlement required Rennaisance Re to pay a $15 million civil penalty, which Renaissance Re had offered to pay last summer, as reported in an August 25, 2006 posting in this blog.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation

  • « Go to Previous Page
  • Page 1
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 97
  • Page 98
  • Page 99
  • Page 100
  • Page 101
  • Interim pages omitted …
  • Page 107
  • Go to Next Page »

Primary Sidebar

Carlton Fields Logo

A blog focused on reinsurance and arbitration law and practice by the attorneys of Carlton Fields.

Focused Topics

Hot Topics

Read the results of Artemis’ latest survey of reinsurance market professionals concerning the state of the market and their intentions for 2019.

Recent Updates

Market (1/27/2019)
Articles (1/2/2019)

See our advanced search tips.

Subscribe

If you would like to receive updates to Reinsurance Focus® by email, visit our Subscription page.
© 2008–2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. · Carlton Fields practices law in California as Carlton Fields, LLP · Disclaimers and Conditions of Use

Reinsurance Focus® is a registered service mark of Carlton Fields. All Rights Reserved.

Please send comments and questions to the Reinsurance Focus Administrators

Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please contact us. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites. This site may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions.