Report criticises Basel II
A new CSFI report sets out why the insurance industry is failing to gain an advantage from the new capital rules
LONDON - A new report from the Centre for the Study of Financial Innovation (CSFI), A tough nut… Basel II, insurance and the law of unexpected consequences, explains why insurers have so far had little joy from Basel II, which is supposed to provide a new role for insurance as a mitigator of operational risk.
Author Shirley Beglinger explains that, because Basel II was “written by bankers, primarily for bankers”, demands on insurers are expressed in a way that the insurance industry would be hard-pressed, or unable, to meet. Beglinger, who has worked both for the banking and the insurance industries, says that linguistic differences between the two make the problem of complying with Basel II exasperating for both sectors. She has worked with Swiss Re to gain Basel II recognition for insurance as a mitigator of operational risk.
As the deadline for Basel II approaches, Beglinger claims that insurers are handicapped in their role of mitigating operational risk, even for banks operating the internal ratings based and advanced measurement approaches. To facilitate the insurers’ task, she recommends that the confidence interval for calculating operational risk regulatory capital be reduced; insurance products be given the same generosity as credit derivatives in risk mitigation; and that the market of eligible banks for insurance risk mitigation be broadened.
Beglinger also proposes a complete rewrite of Basel II insurance rules to better cater for the buying and selling of insurance products. As the world is going ahead with Basel II – US exceptions aside – she recognises that scope for a full eleventh hour rewrite is at best optimistic. Initial industry responses suggest that the industry will struggle to amend existing policies, and that changes in the insurance industry will inevitably complement Basel’s evolution. The value of Beglinger’s paper is perhaps more as a warning – highlighting increasingly unavoidable conflicts between the banking and insurance industries.
Only users who have a paid subscription or are part of a corporate subscription are able to print or copy content.
To access these options, along with all other subscription benefits, please contact info@risk.net or view our subscription options here: http://subscriptions.risk.net/subscribe
You are currently unable to print this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
You are currently unable to copy this content. Please contact info@risk.net to find out more.
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (point 2.4), printing is limited to a single copy.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
Copyright Infopro Digital Limited. All rights reserved.
You may share this content using our article tools. As outlined in our terms and conditions, https://www.infopro-digital.com/terms-and-conditions/subscriptions/ (clause 2.4), an Authorised User may only make one copy of the materials for their own personal use. You must also comply with the restrictions in clause 2.5.
If you would like to purchase additional rights please email info@risk.net
More on Regulation
CFTC wants to regulate prediction markets. Is it up to the task?
Former officials echo state gambling authorities’ concerns over agency’s ability to police betting risks
EBA seeks to allay Simm divergence concerns
EU validator pledges to co-ordinate with global regulators, but retains ability to act alone “if needed”
FRTB models find salvation in US Basel III proposal
Changes to P&L attribution test and NMRFs make IMA viable for US banks, risk managers say
US blows the floors off Basel III
Barr criticises “downward deviations” in US rule; Bowman rejects “blind adherence” to global standards
Basel III endgame – a timeline
A review of Risk.net’s coverage of the US implementation saga
Leaked EU plans offer extra temporary relief for FRTB models
Risk factors would need only two observations to be modellable. Do changes foreshadow US Basel III?
Iosco chief talks cyber, AI and clearing
Buenaventura discusses Iosco’s role in aiding market resilience and cross-border co-operation
US regulators bid to save FRTB IMA, but it’s no small task
Even if industry wish-list is granted, a 2028 start date might be too soon for model adoption