Navigating the regulatory landscape: Solvency II vs. Bermuda Solvency – An actuarial perspective on life insurer

Kennisbank •

For an actuary working for a globally active insurer, understanding the nuances of different regulatory frameworks is paramount. This article delves into a comparison of the Solvency II and Bermuda regulatory regimes.

Navigating the regulatory landscape: Solvency II vs. Bermuda Solvency – An actuarial perspective on life insurer

Bermuda has established itself as a pivotal centre for global insurance and reinsurance, starting in 1947 when AIG located its international operations on the island, and following the development of captive insurance in the 1960s. The Bermuda Monetary Authority (BMA), formed in 1969, oversees the supervision of financial institutions. Currently, Bermuda is home to more than 1,100 registered insurers and reinsurers, which collectively underwrote gross premiums exceeding $268 billion in 2021 with total assets in excess of $1.1 trillion. Notably, the long-term (re)insurance sector has experienced robust growth in recent years, particularly driven by US life insurers seeking to transfer blocks of business, and supporting the Pension Risk Transfer. Bermuda is also recognised as a leading provider of catastrophe reinsurance to US insurers.

Both Solvency II and the Bermuda Solvency (BSCR framework) are market value and risk-based capital frameworks. The Bermuda framework has received Solvency II equivalence from the EU and UK, and is also recognized as a qualified jurisdiction by the U.S. NAIC, which is an advantage for insurers operating across multiple jurisdictions.

Over de auteur

Dima Babykin MSc AAG FRM

Risk Manager bij Aegon Ltd. / Transamerica.