Europe split in approach to Solvency II
21 October 2015 London
Image: Shutterstock
Asset managers’ approaches to the Solvency II regulation, and their readiness for the 1 January 2016 implementation, differs depending on geographies, according to a Silverfinch white paper.
According to the white paper, large countries with a more advanced financial infrastructure are generally better prepared for the regulation, but the focus of attention differs between these jurisdictions.
German fund managers, for example, appear to be more confident in their ability to meet the pillar one requirements, which focus on the measurement of solvency for insurance companies, due to the similarities with the county’s own regulations.
French firms, however, are more focused on the pillar three requirements, relating to the reporting and dissemination of information on an insurer’s financial health.
The paper suggested that firms across the continent have raised concerns about the delays in finalising some of the details of the requirements, a point that has caused particular complications in each country.
In the Italian market, the report said, there is concern regarding the difference in resources available between the few large insurers and the many smaller companies.
John Dowdall, managing director of Silverfinch said: “In spite of the deadline for new regulation looming, the fact remains there is much work to do. Across Europe, the majority of asset managers are aware of the benefits of helping their insurance clients with Solvency II, but how to respond to the new regulations has clearly split the continent.”
“With different countries focusing on distinct pillars of the regulation and selecting various models for their data reporting, only time will tell who is best prepared. The one thing which is certain is that the financial regulation of the European Union is in for a shake-up.”
According to the white paper, large countries with a more advanced financial infrastructure are generally better prepared for the regulation, but the focus of attention differs between these jurisdictions.
German fund managers, for example, appear to be more confident in their ability to meet the pillar one requirements, which focus on the measurement of solvency for insurance companies, due to the similarities with the county’s own regulations.
French firms, however, are more focused on the pillar three requirements, relating to the reporting and dissemination of information on an insurer’s financial health.
The paper suggested that firms across the continent have raised concerns about the delays in finalising some of the details of the requirements, a point that has caused particular complications in each country.
In the Italian market, the report said, there is concern regarding the difference in resources available between the few large insurers and the many smaller companies.
John Dowdall, managing director of Silverfinch said: “In spite of the deadline for new regulation looming, the fact remains there is much work to do. Across Europe, the majority of asset managers are aware of the benefits of helping their insurance clients with Solvency II, but how to respond to the new regulations has clearly split the continent.”
“With different countries focusing on distinct pillars of the regulation and selecting various models for their data reporting, only time will tell who is best prepared. The one thing which is certain is that the financial regulation of the European Union is in for a shake-up.”
NO FEE, NO RISK
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
100% ON RETURNS If you invest in only one asset servicing news source this year, make sure it is your free subscription to Asset Servicing Times
