• 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 Regulation / NAIC Publishes Exposure Drafts of Proposed Revisions to Credit for Reinsurance Models to Implement the Covered Agreement

NAIC Publishes Exposure Drafts of Proposed Revisions to Credit for Reinsurance Models to Implement the Covered Agreement

July 16, 2018 by Rob DiUbaldo

The NAIC has published proposed revisions to the Credit for Reinsurance Model Law and the Credit for Reinsurance Model Regulation that are intended to facilitate compliance by the states with the provisions of the Covered Agreement with the European Union, and avoid the federal preemption of state credit for reinsurance laws. These exposure drafts further the implementation of the Covered Agreement discussed at the NAIC’s February 20, 2018 public hearing. The draft revisions add new sections to both the Model Act and the Model Regulation allowing a ceding insurer to take financial statement credit for reinsurance if the assuming insurer has its headquarters or domicile in what the state insurance commissioner determines is a “Reciprocal Jurisdiction,” as that term is defined in the revised Models. The proposed revisions do not change or delete any of the existing provisions of the Models, which would remain in force and effect along with the new provisions.

The proposed revised Model Regulation adds detailed requirements to the more general provisions of the Model Act, including provisions clearly intended to implement the provisions of Articles 3 – 5 of the Covered Agreement and extend the benefits of the reinsurance collateral provisions of the Covered Agreement to non-E.U. jurisdictions that have group governance, capital, supervision, solvency, and other requirements that are in compliance with those found in the Covered Agreement. For example, Section 9 of the proposed revised Model Regulation states that to be recognized by a state as a Reciprocal Jurisdiction, a non-U.S. jurisdiction must either: (1) be recognized by the state insurance commissioner as a Reciprocal Jurisdiction and be party to a treaty or international agreement with the United States regarding credit for reinsurance, such as a Dodd-Frank Act Covered Agreement; or (2) be recognized by the state insurance commissioner as a qualified jurisdiction and a Reciprocal Jurisdiction, meeting stated requirements concerning the equal treatment of insurers domiciled in the U.S. and the foreign jurisdiction, a lack of a “local presence” requirement, certain worldwide group governance, solvency, capital, and supervision requirements, and required information exchange and sharing between insurance supervisors. The proposed revisions impose requirements for credit for reinsurance in such jurisdictions that are not only consistent with but quoted from the Covered Agreement, effectively offering the terms of the Covered Agreement to countries outside the E.U. on an equal footing with the Covered Agreement’s terms for E.U. member nations. Section 9.B.(2)(d) of the proposed revisions to the Model Regulation notes that “a memorandum of understanding or similar document between the commissioner and such qualified jurisdiction” will be needed to implement the provisions concerning the exchange of information between the regulators of different jurisdictions.

The proposed revisions to the Models resolve two issues which were undecided at the February 2018 public hearing: (1) whether the reinsurance collateral reform contemplated by the Covered Agreement would be limited to U.S.-E.U. relationships, or be applicable to reinsurance arrangements with foreign reinsurers domiciled elsewhere; and (2) whether non-E.U. domiciled reinsurers would have to be subject to the group supervision, solvency, capital, and information exchange provisions of the Covered Agreement to receive the benefits of reinsurance collateral reform. The proposed revisions to the Models make the reinsurance collateral reform provisions available with respect to any reinsurer domiciled in what the state insurance commissioner determines is a Reciprocal Jurisdiction, not limiting such treatment to E.U. nations, but conditions a determination that a jurisdiction is a Reciprocal Jurisdiction on that jurisdiction having laws or regulations in place that are consistent with the group supervision, solvency, capital, and information exchange provisions of the Covered Agreement. Thus, the Covered Agreement potentially becomes a model for the worldwide reinsurance market for U.S. ceding insurers.

There is a short public comment period for these drafts open until July 23, 2018. The consideration of these proposed revisions presumably will continue on the schedule published by the NAIC earlier this year, with consideration by the Financial Condition (E) Committee at the NAIC’s August meeting and by the NAIC plenary at the November meeting.

This post written by Rollie Goss.
See our disclaimer.

Filed Under: Reinsurance Regulation, 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.