• 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 / Reinsurance Transactions / Accounting for Reinsurance / NAIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REJECTS WORKING GROUP’S PROPOSALS

NAIC EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE REJECTS WORKING GROUP’S PROPOSALS

February 1, 2009 by Carlton Fields

On Tuesday, January 27, 2009, this author attended the NAIC Capital and Surplus Relief Working Group public hearing in Washington, D.C. The Working Group met to discuss its draft recommendations on nine insurance industry proposals offered by the ACLI designed to provide capital and surplus relief on life insurers’ December 31, 2008 statutory financial statements. One proposal offered by ACLI requested that regulators allow insurers to utilize the 2001 CSO Preferred Mortality Tables for contracts based on the 2001 CSO Mortality Table and issued prior to the January 1, 2007 effective date on which the Mortality Tables were set to become applicable. The Technical Group assigned to consider this proposal expressed concern that some companies may already be addressing the overly conservative reserves through a questionable reinsurance accounting practice. The Technical Group recommended that Insurance Commissioners consider requiring companies to demonstrate that they have not used such reinsurance accounting practices before allowing the company to utilize the new Mortality Tables. Another proposal related to collateral for reinsurance transactions. After spirited discussion among regulators, industry representatives, and consumer advocates, the Working Group formally approved each of its prior draft recommendations and forwarded its recommendations to the NAIC Plenary Body.

On Thursday, January 29, the NAIC Executive Committee held a teleconference vote on the proposals forwarded by the Capital and Surplus Relief Working Group. The Executive Committee, in a near unanimous vote, rejected the Working Group’s recommendations noting that neither the ACLI nor any insurance company provided sufficient information to justify enacting these proposals on an emergency basis.

The Executive Committee concluded that NAIC Working and Technical groups should continue to provide feedback and guidance during the current financial crisis. The Committee commented that companies should continue to work with their state regulators to maintain sufficient capital, and that the NAIC was open to considering these issues again in the future. Read the NAIC's release on the action..

This post written by John Black.

Filed Under: Accounting for Reinsurance, Reinsurance Regulation, Reserves, Week's Best Posts

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.