text: GUIDELINES ON QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS IN PRE-EMPTIVE RECOVERY PLANNING

text: Regulation (EU) 1094/2010

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No

text: and repealing

text: Commission Decision 2009/79/EC

text: OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48–83

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of insurance and reinsurance undertakings and amending Directives

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1132

text: and Regulations

text: (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EU) No 648/2012

text: (EU) No 806/2014

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1129

text: (OJ L, 2025/1, 8.1.2025). 3 Bolder, Simpler, Faster: EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision (EIOPA-BoS-25/118), 8 April 2025.

text: Page 2/7

text: Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II), (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1).

text: Page 3/7

text: COMMISSION DELEGATED REGULATION (EU) No …/… supplementing Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to regulatory technical standards for liquidity risk management plans

text: Page 4/7

text: Page 5/7

text: Page 6/7

text: Page 7/7

title: Guidelines on indicators - IRRD.pdf

text: Central Bank of Ireland - RESTRICTED [Business Area] This is only test GUIDELINES

text: GUIDELINES

text: Guidelines on qualitative and quantitative indicators in pre-emptive recovery planning

text: EIOPA-BoS-26-259 8 July 2026

text: GUIDELINES ON THE QUALITATIVE AND QUANTITATIVE INDICATORS IN PRE-EMPTIVE RECOVERY PLANNING

text: INTRODUCTION

text: 1. In accordance with

text: Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EIOPA Regulation)1 and with

text: Article 5(11)

text: , point (b), of

text: Directive (EU) 2025/12

text: , EIOPA issues these Guidelines to specify further the qualitative and quantitative indicators, identifying the points at which remedial actions should be considered or taken, contained in the pre-emptive recovery plans of insurance and reinsurance undertakings (hereafter: “undertakings”) and groups.

text: 3. These Guidelines have been developed in line with EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision3, thereby enhancing supervisory convergence through simpler, more efficient frameworks.

text: 4. When selecting indicators, undertakings and groups should ensure consistency with their overall risk management framework and select indicators that are proportionate to thei nature, scale and complexity of the activities of the undertaking and group concerned taking into account Article 4 of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No xyz/xyz [on content of the preemptive recovery plans].

text: 5. Undertakings and groups may, to the extent possible, use existing tools and analysis used for risk management purposes including ORSA indicators, stress testing results or risk appetite frameworks.

text: 6. Undertakings and groups may decide not to include one or more indicator categories set out in these Guidelines within their pre-emptive recovery plan, taking into account their nature, scale, complexity of their activities and risk management framework, provided that the set of indicators includes, at a minimum, any breach of SCR in accordance with

text: Article 5(8) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: 7. Qualitative indicators are non-numerical indicators that capture elements of risk which cannot be readily expressed in quantitative terms but are relevant to an undertaking’s business model, risk profile and consistent with its internal risk management framework. The calibration of these indicators typically relies on expert judgment or undertaking-specific characteristics. Undertakings and groups may include such indicators, where relevant, to support the timely identification of a deterioration.

text: 8. These Guidelines are addressed to competent authorities as defined in

text: Article 4(2)

text: , point (i), of the EIOPA Regulation and to financial institutions as defined in Article 4(1) of that Regulation.

text: 9. The Guidelines apply from 30 January 2027.

text: 10. If not defined in these Guidelines, the terms have the meaning defined in the legal acts referred to in the introduction.

text: GUIDELINE 1 – CALIBRATION OF RECOVERY PLAN INDICATORS

text: 11. The calibration of the pre-emptive recovery plan indicators should ensure that appropriate levels are set to alert the undertaking or group early enough and can allow the undertaking or group to react promptly and effectively in a crisis situation, ahead of the adoption of the supervisory measures foreseen in

text: Article 136

text: a of Directive

text: (Solvency II) . In accordance with

text: Article 5(8) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , indicators should identify the points at which remedial actions should be considered or taken. In this context, specifically indicators relating to the breach of the solvency capital requirement should be treated with additional urgency.

text: 12. When selecting and calibrating indicators, undertakings and groups should consider the nature of the different indicators and how they relate to each other. Indicators should be designed to trigger remedial actions, in line with the specific risk profile of the undertaking and groups. In particular, certain indicators may indicate a higher degree of urgency or escalation and may require more severe or immediate remedial actions to be taken.

text: 13. When selecting and calibrating indicators, particular attention should be given to the fact that indicators may vary in their sensitivity to capture deterioration and in the speed at which such deterioration materialises. In particular, liquidity deterioration may not be captured immediately by indicators relating to capital. An undertaking or a group may suffer from liquidity deterioration not accompanied by a breach or a likely breach of capital requirements and vice versa. Therefore, it is important that the pre-emptive recovery plan provides for a range of indicators of different nature, allowing for a comprehensive and timely view of the undertaking’s or group’s risk profile, rather than limiting to indicators related to capital requirements.

text: 14. When calibrating indicators, the undertaking or group should consider ways to address the issues stemming from the fact that certain remedial actions to restore the capital position can be subject to longer execution periods, contractual obligations or greater sensitivity to market and other conditions. In particular, such actions could relate to material contractual maturities relating to capital instruments, such as subordinated debt and subordinated loans, and potential dividend payments, as relevant.

text: GUIDELINE 2 – CAPITAL INDICATORS

text: 15. Capital indicators should identify any material actual and likely future deterioration in the coverage of capital requirements and in the quantity and quality of eligible own funds.

text: 16. Where relevant, capital indicators should take into account the impact of transitional measures laid down in

text: Article 308

text: c and

text: Article 308

text: d of Directive

text: 17. In accordance with the first sub-paragraph of

text: Article 5(8) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , capital indicators should include at a minimum the breach of the Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR). Group pre-emptive recovery plans should include indicators relating to the group SCR and to the SCR of any subsidiary undertakings that are in scope of the group pre-emptive recovery plan.

text: 18. In addition to the SCR breach , undertakings and groups should consider capital indicators that are consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile. Those additional capital indicators could include the Minimum Capital Requirement (MCR).

text: GUIDELINE 3 – LIQUIDITY INDICATORS

text: 19. Liquidity indicators should identify the potential for or an actual material deterioration of the capacity of the undertaking or group to meet its current and foreseen liquidity and funding needs.

text: 20. Liquidity indicators should be integrated within the strategies, policies, processes and systems developed by each undertaking or group pursuant to

text: Articles 144

text: a and 246a of Directive

text: regarding the need to draw up and keep up to date a liquidity risk management plan. In case the undertaking or group is required to extend the liquidity risk management plan to cover liquidity analysis over medium and long-term in accordance with

text: Article 144

text: a(2) of Directive

text: , the liquidity indicators should be consistent with that plan, namely including both the short-term and long-term liquidity and funding needs, even under stressed conditions.

text: 21. Liquidity indicators should cover the criteria specified in Article 2(2) of Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No xyz/xyz on liquidity risk management plans .

text: GUIDELINE 4 – ASSET QUALITY INDICATORS

text: 22. Asset quality indicators should identify any actual and likely future material asset quality deterioration of the whole portfolio of assets of the undertaking or group.

text: 23. Asset quality indicators should, where relevant, cover aspects such as reinsurance recoverables and receivables.

text: 24. Undertakings and groups should consider asset quality indicators that are most consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile and could include the average rating of investments (credit quality step) and share of below investment grade investments (credit quality step >3).

text: GUIDELINE 5 – PROFITABILITY INDICATORS

text: 25. Profitability indicators should identify any actual and likely future material deterioration in the undertaking’s or group’s financial position due to insurance or investment related losses.

text: 26. Undertakings and groups should consider profitability indicators that are most consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile. Profitability indicators could include: a. Indicators, which measure the performance of underwriting, including but not limited to the loss ratio; b. Indicators, which measure and monitor the impact of changes in valuation assumptions in the development of technical provisions, including but not limited to changes in key reserving assumptions such as adverse development in mortality or morbidity assumptions that have an adverse effect on the change of value of liabilities, changes in relevant yield curve, investments, lapse rates or changes to the value of options and guarantees or expected profits included in future premiums; c. Investment-related indicators, including but not limited to price movements of sovereign or corporate bonds or derivatives the undertaking or group has invested in, as well as, coupons and the undertaking’s or group’s investments concentration to a single counterparty; d. Indicators, which measure business and costs efficiency, including but not limited to the expense ratio which measure costs and expenses of carrying on insurance business and cost efficiency, which compare costs and expenses against income generated; e. Line of business-specific indicators, including but not limited to combined ratio (nonlife business), return on investments (life business) and premium growth (split by the type of business).

text: GUIDELINE 6 – MARKET CONDITIONS INDICATORS

text: 27. Market conditions indicators should identify the market’s reaction or perception of the material decline in investment performance of equity or debt instruments issued by the undertaking or group, as well as the fall in market confidence in their financial position.

text: 28. Undertakings and groups should consider market conditions indicators that are most consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile and could include adverse share price movements, rating downgrades and credit default swap (CDS) spreads of the undertaking or group.

text: GUIDELINE 7 – MACRO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS INDICATORS

text: 29. Macroeconomic indicators should identify material deterioration in the economic conditions in which the undertaking or group operates, or of geographical (i.e. a region or a country) and sectoral concentrations (e.g. a given sector of the economy to which the undertaking is exposed) of exposures or worsening funding conditions.

text: 30. As such, they should capture adverse changes in economic variables such as interest rates, credit default spreads, unemployment rates, exchange rates, inflation, volatility indicators, or real estate prices.

text: 31. The range of macroeconomic conditions indicators should take into account the impact on the undertaking’s or group’s financial position from material correlations between macroeconomic conditions and the insurance portfolio in particular resulting from different types of insurance liabilities and the assets backing those liabilities.

text: 32. Undertakings and groups should consider macroeconomic conditions indicators that are most consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile and could include the inflation forecast (percentage change in average consumer prices), unemployment forecast (percentage of total labour force), sovereign CDS spreads, real estate prices (annual average rate of change).

text: GUIDELINE 8 – OPERATIONAL EVENTS INDICATORS

text: 33. Operational indicators should capture material operational events, arising from inadequate or failed internal processes, personnel or systems, including in respect of outsourced processes or from external events, that could severely affect the undertaking’s or group’s operational conditions threatening therefore its financial position.

text: 34. Undertakings and groups should consider operational events indicators that are most consistent with their overall risk management framework and relevant to their business model, strategy and risk profile. Operational events indicators could relate to events such as fraud, regulatory or legal fines, and cyber-attacks.

text: COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING RULES

text: 35. This document contains Guidelines issued under Article 16 of the EIOPA Regulation. In accordance with Article 16(3) of the EIOPA Regulation, competent authorities and financial institutions are required to make every effort to comply with guidelines and recommendations.

text: 36. Competent authorities that comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines should incorporate them into their regulatory or supervisory framework in an appropriate manner.

text: 37. Competent authorities are to confirm to EIOPA whether they comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines, with reasons for non-compliance, within two months after the issuance of the translated versions.

text: 38. In the absence of a response by this deadline, competent authorities will be considered as noncompliant to the reporting and reported as such.

text: FINAL PROVISION ON REVIEW

text: 39. These Guidelines will be subject to a review by EIOPA.


text: [CHOOSE THE BUSINESS AREA]

text: February 2020

text: GUIDELINES ON THE CRITERIA TO DETERMINE WHETHER SIMPLIFIED OBLIGATIONS CAN APPLY FOR CERTAIN INSURANCE AND REINSURANCE UNDERTAKINGS AND GROUPS

text: Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No

text: and repealing

text: Commission Decision 2009/79/EC

text: (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48–83)

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of insurance and reinsurance undertakings and amending Directives

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1132

text: and Regulations

text: (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EU) No 648/2012

text: (EU) No 806/2014

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1129

text: (OJ L, 2025/1, 8.1.2025). 3 Bolder, Simpler, Faster: EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision, (EIOPA-BoS-25/118), 8 April 2025.

text: Page 2/7

text: Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1-155).

text: Page 3/7

text: Page 4/7

text: Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II), (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1).

text: Page 5/7

text: Page 6/7

text: Page 7/7

publisher: Europeiska försäkrings- och tjänstepensionsmyndigheten

sprak: en

title: Guidelines on simplified obligations - IRRD.pdf

serie: riktlinjer

text: This is only test GUIDELINES

type: rubrik

text: GUIDELINES

text: Guidelines on the criteria to determine whether simplified obligations can apply for certain insurance and reinsurance undertakings and groups

text: EIOPA-BoS-26-261 8 July 2026

type: stycke

text: INTRODUCTION

text: 1. In accordance with

text: Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EIOPA Regulation) and with

text: Article 4(2) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , EIOPA issues these Guidelines to specify further details on the criteria listed in the introductory part of

text: Article 4(1) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: for the purposes of determining whether simplified obligations can apply for certain insurance and reinsurance undertakings (hereafter: “undertakings”) and groups.

text: 2. These Guidelines have been developed in line with EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision , thereby enhancing supervisory convergence through simpler, more efficient frameworks.

text: 3. The approach set-out in these Guidelines is intended to promote the convergence of practices among supervisory authorities and resolution authorities when assessing undertakings and groups against the assessment criteria while ensuring that this assessment is conducted in a proportionate manner.

text: 4. These Guidelines are addressed to supervisory authorities and resolution authorities, in accordance with

text: Article 4(2)

text: , point (i) of the EIOPA Regulation.

text: 5. The Guidelines apply from 30 January 2027.

text: 6. If not defined in these Guidelines, the terms have the meaning defined in the legal acts referred to in this introduction.

text: GUIDELINE 1 – GENERAL PRINCIPLES REGARDING THE ASSESSMENT OF THE APPLICATION OF SIMPLIFIED OBLIGATIONS

text: 7. These guidelines further specify the assessment criteria by setting a list of elements against which undertakings and groups should be assessed by supervisory authorities and resolution authorities when determining whether it is appropriate to apply simplified obligations to any of these undertakings and groups. For the purpose of this assessment, certain elements of the criteria may be of differing significance depending on the specific conditions of the undertaking or group.

text: 8. Based on the assessment criteria specified in these guidelines, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should assess whether a failure of an undertaking and its subsequent winding-up under normal insolvency proceedings would have a significant negative effect on financial markets, on other undertakings, on policyholders, on funding conditions, or on the wider economy.

text: 9. The assessment should take place only for those undertakings and groups that are subject to pre-emptive recovery planning or resolution planning, in accordance with Article

text: and

text: of Directive (EU) 2025/1.

text: 10. In order to apply simplified obligations to certain undertakings and groups, supervisory and resolution authorities should assess all the assessment criteria. However, if for one of the citeria it is evident that a failure and subsequent winding up would have a significant negative effect on financial markets, on other undertakings, on policyholders, on funding conditions, or on the wider economy, full obligations should be applied and no further assessment should necessarily be perfomed against the other criteria.

text: 11. Simplified obligations are less likely to be applicable to undertakings and groups in the following categories: - with significant cross-border activities as defined in

text: Article 152

text: aa(1) of Directive

text: (Solvency II) ; or - whose failure would have a significant impact on its policyholders and beneficiaries and on the market in accordance with Guideline 15 and 16 of the EIOPA Guidelines on supervisory review process (EIOPA-BoS-14/179).

text: 12. Supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should ensure that they are kept informed of changes to an undertaking’s or group’s business or structure relevant to the assessment criteria in order to ensure that the application of full or simplified obligations remains appropriate. The granted simplified obligations should not continue to apply when the basis for their application is no longer met.

text: 13. Supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should also have particular regard to undertakings and groups that are in scope of the pre-emptive recovery or resolution planning requirements but are foreseen to be wound-up under normal insolvency proceedings, as their eligibility for the application of simplified obligations is expected to be more likely. However, the determination that an undertaking or group is eligible for simplified obligations does not preclude an assessment that the conditions for resolution are satisfied pursuant to

text: Article 19 of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: and that a resolution tool may be applied having regard to the resolution objectives in

text: Article 18 of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: 14. The criteria and elements developed in these Guidelines are to be used in the assessment of the eligibility of simplified obligations for the pre-emptive recovery planning and resolution planning requirements of both individual undertakings and groups. Supervisory authorities and resolution authorities may choose to categorise undertakings and groups for the purposes of assessing their eligibility for simplified obligations using the elements under the assessment criteria. Additionally, the outcomes of the assessment of the potential impact of failure, in accordance with the EIOPA Guidelines on supervisory review process (EIOPA-BoS-14/179), and the assessment for determining the market share in accordance with

text: Article 5(2) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: could serve as input for the categorisation of assessment criteria.

text: 15. Given that some criteria and in particular certain elements listed in these Guidelines, coincide with those that are to be assessed under the Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) No [to be updated], on criteria for pre-emptive recovery planning requirements and methods to be used when determining the market shares, these criteria/elements may be approached from the same perspective, thereby allowing the same set of information to be used to satisfy both requirements. In a similar manner, supervisory and resolution authorities can perform both assessments in the same process.

text: GUIDELINE 2 – NATURE OF BUSINESS

text: 16. When assessing the nature of business criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. the extent to which the undertaking provides critical functions in one or more Member States; b. factors by which it generates profit and losses, including its profitability ratios; c. lines of business in which it operates, taking into account both the relative contribution of each line of business to the undertaking’s or group’s total gross written premiums or to the total technical provisions and their riskiness; d. types of products it offers; e. investment strategy followed by the undertaking or group; f. distribution model and distribution channels and their diversification; g. stability of business model, considering also the degree of diversification across lines of business.

text: 17. Based on the assessment of these elements, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider less likely to be subject to simplified obligations undertakings or groups that show: a. a concentration in fewer lines of business or products, especially the ones that are deemed to be riskier; b. a high impact from the discontinuation of their insurance coverage; c. undiversified investment strategies and distribution model or channels; d. an overall instability of the business model, including a low degree of business diversification.

text: GUIDELINE 3 – SHAREHOLDING STRUCTURE

text: 18. When assessing the shareholding structure criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. whether there is adequate transparency of the identities of the shareholders, direct or indirect, natural or legal persons; b. whether shareholders are concentrated or dispersed, in particular taking account of the profile of shareholders with qualified holdings as defined in Art. 13(21) of Directive

text: (Solvency II); c. the extent to which the shareholding structure may impact, for example, the availability of certain remedial actions for the undertaking or group.

text: 19. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider less likely to be subject to simplified obligations undertakings or groups that have a nontransparent, complex, shareholders profile or shareholding structure.

text: GUIDELINE 4 – LEGAL FORM

text: 20. When assessing the legal form criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. the structure of an undertaking in terms of whether the undertaking is part of a group and, if so, whether the group has a complicated or simple structure and the degree to which entities are interconnected, having regard to financial and operational interdependencies; b. the legal form of the undertaking including mutual undertakings and cooperative society, in accordance with the legal forms of undertakings set out in the Annex III of Directive

text: (Solvency II) .

text: 21. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider less likely to be subject to simplified obligations undertakings that are part of a complicated group structure and the entities within the group are highly interconnected.

text: GUIDELINE 5 – RISK PROFILE

text: 22. When assessing the risk profile criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider the gross and, as appropriate, net risk exposures of an undertaking or a group and at least the following elements: a. the solvency ratio of the undertaking, b. the quality of the own funds and the percentage that they represent over the total Solvency Capital Requirement; c. whether risk exposures, measured by Solvency Capital Requirement modules or submodules, pose higher risk for the undertaking in comparison to other undertakings on the market; d. the undertaking's risk appetite considering it, where relevant, in the context of the solvency and financial condition; e. the liquidity risk.

text: 23. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider as being less likely to be subject to simplified obligations those undertakings or groups with a low solvency ratio, low quality of own funds, high risk exposure compared to other undertakings or groups, have a high risk appetite, or high liquidity risk.

text: GUIDELINE 6 – SIZE

text: 24. When assessing the size criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should use the amount of: a. gross technical provisions for life undertakings; b. gross written premiums for non-life undertakings. Where relevant, the assessment of size may be supplemented by the amount of total assets.

text: 25. Based on the size assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider larger undertakings or groups as being less likely to be subject to simplified obligations and smaller undertakings or groups as being more likely to be subject to simplified obligations.

text: GUIDELINE 7 – LEGAL STATUS

text: 26. When assessing the legal status criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. the insurance classes, listed in Annexes I and II to the Solvency II, which the undertaking has been granted an authorisation for in accordance with Title I, Chapter II of Solvency II; b. whether the undertaking pursues both life and non-life activities.

text: 27. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider as being less likely to be subject to simplified obligations those undertakings or groups which: a. have been granted an authorisation for a broad scope of insurance classes, in particular in terms of the types and their related complexity; b. pursue both life and non-life activities.

text: GUIDELINE 8 – INTERCONNECTEDNESS TO OTHER REGULATED UNDERTAKINGS OR TO THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM IN GENERAL

text: 28. When assessing the interconnectedness criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. the extent to which the undertaking provides critical functions to other financial institutions in one or more Member States; b. exposures to counterparties in the broader financial system and real economy; c. concentration of the financial instruments held and their corresponding volumes, considering, where relevant, derivative positions, repos and securities lending positions and collateral agreements; d. contagion risks among entities within the group, considering also the volume of intra-group transactions, reinsurance and shareholder structure; e. relevance of the undertaking’s operational services for the group.

text: 29. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider less likely to be subject to simplified obligations those undertakings or groups that have a high exposure to many counterparties, a high concentration in terms of numbers in fewer financial instruments held or their high volume with respect to the total assets, a high contagion risk or high relevance of the operational services for the group.

text: GUIDELINE 9 – SCOPE AND COMPLEXITY OF ACTIVITIES

text: 30. When assessing the scope and complexity of activities criterion, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities should consider at least the following elements: a. cross-border business; b. role of third party providers; c. risk transfer arrangements, including reinsurance strategy; d. investments in complex financial instruments, such as structured assets; e. group structure, including allocation of own funds and interdependencies; f. total covered liabilities by insurance guarantee scheme or schemes (if existent in the given jurisdiction).

text: 31. Based on the assessment, supervisory authorities and resolution authorities may consider less likely to be subject to simplified obligations those i undertakings or groups when there is a high degree of cross-border business, there is a strong dependence on third party providers, risk transfer arrangements are used to a great extent, investments in complex financial products play an essential role, the group structure is complex or the total portion of liabilities covered by insurance guarantee schemes is low.

text: COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING RULES

text: 32. This document contains Guidelines issued under Article 16 of the EIOPA Regulation. In accordance with Article 16(3) of the EIOPA Regulation, competent authorities are required to make every effort to comply with guidelines and recommendations.

text: 33. Competent authorities that comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines should incorporate them into their regulatory or supervisory framework in an appropriate manner.

text: 34. Competent authorities are to confirm to EIOPA whether they comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines, with reasons for non-compliance, within two months after the issuance of the translated versions.

text: 35. In the absence of a response by this deadline, competent authorities will be considered as noncompliant to the reporting and reported as such.

text: FINAL PROVISION ON REVIEW

text: 36. These Guidelines will be subject to a review by EIOPA.

type: vagledning

utgivare: eiopa


text: Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No

text: and repealing

text: Commission Decision 2009/79/EC

text: , OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48-83.

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of insurance and reinsurance undertakings and amending Directives

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1132

text: and Regulations

text: (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EU) No 648/2012

text: (EU) No 806/2014

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1129

text: (OJ L, 2025/1, 8.1.2025). 3 Bolder, Simpler, Faster: EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision (EIOPA-BoS-25/118), 8 April 2025.

text: Page 2/3

text: Page 3/3

title: Guidelines on provision of information - IRRD.pdf

text: This is only test GUIDELINES

text: GUIDELINES

text: Guidelines to specify how information should be provided in summary or collective form for the purposes of Article 66(2), point (b), of

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: EIOPA-BoS-26-269 8 July 2026

text: GUIDELINES TO SPECIFY HOW INFORMATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN SUMMARY OR COLLECTIVE FORM FOR THE PURPOSES OF ARTICLE 66(2), POINT (B), OF DIRECTIVE

text: (EU) 2025/1

text: INTRODUCTION

text: 1. In accordance with

text: Article 16 of Regulation (EU) 1094/2010

text: and with

text: Article 66(7) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , EIOPA issues these Guidelines to specify how information should be provided in summary or collective form.

text: 2. These Guidelines apply in relation to the disclosure of confidential information in summary or collective form for the purposes of

text: Article 66(2)

text: , point (b), of

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: by the persons, authorities and bodies defined in Article 66(1) of that Directive.

text: 3. These Guidelines have been developed in line with EIOPA’s views for better regulation and supervision , thereby enhancing supervisory convergence through simpler, more efficient frameworks.

text: 4. These Guidelines are addressed to supervisory authorities and resolution authorities defined in point (i) of Article 4(2) of the EIOPA Regulation as competent authorities and to financial institutions as defined in Article 4(1) of the EIOPA Regulation, insofar these are mentioned under

text: Article 66(1) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: 5. The Guidelines apply from 30 January 2027.

text: 6. If not defined in these Guidelines, the terms have the meaning defined in the legal acts referred to in the introduction.

text: Provision of information in summary or collective form

text: 7. For the purposes of disclosing information in summary or collective form according to

text: Article 66(2)

text: point (b), of

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , in such a way that individual entities as referred to in point (a) to (e) of Article 1(1) of that Directive cannot be identified, the information should be provided either by means of a brief statement or on an aggregate basis, in anonymised form.

text: 8. All the following factors should be considered in order to ensure that the information in summary or collective form is disclosed in anonymised form.

text: 9. Number of entities: if the confidential information relates to fewer than three individual entities, disclosure should be avoided, unless the specific patterns and the context of disclosure, as specified below, create a risk of those individual entities being identified.

text: 10. Specific patterns: any reference to specific characteristics, distinctive features, names or to numerical, qualitative or other distinctive data as well as information regarding scope and geographical position, which could allow for the identification of the individual entities, should be avoided.

text: 11. Context of disclosure: disclosure of confidential information should be avoided when a set of circumstances, such as the means of the disclosure, the number and the characteristics of the addressees, the timing of the disclosure, and any other distinctive circumstance creates a risk of the individual entities being identified.

text: COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING RULES

text: 12. This document contains Guidelines issued under Article 16 of the EIOPA Regulation. In accordance with Article 16(3) of the EIOPA Regulation, competent authorities and financial institutions are required to make every effort to comply with guidelines and recommendations.

text: 13. Competent authorities that comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines should incorporate them into their regulatory or supervisory framework in an appropriate manner.

text: 14. Competent authorities are to confirm to EIOPA whether they comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines, with reasons for non-compliance, within two months after the issuance of the translated versions.

text: 15. In the absence of a response by this deadline, competent authorities will be considered as noncompliant to the reporting and reported as such.

text: FINAL PROVISION ON REVIEW

text: 16. These Guidelines will be subject to a review by EIOPA.


text: Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No

text: and repealing

text: Commission Decision 2009/79/EC

text: (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48–83). Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1-155).

text: Page 2/8

text: Page 3/8

text: Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 establishing a framework for the recovery and resolution of insurance and reinsurance undertakings and amending Directives

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1132

text: and Regulations

text: (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EU) No 648/2012

text: (EU) No 806/2014

text: and

text: (EU) 2017/1129

text: (OJ L, 8.1.2025, p. 1.)

text: Page 4/8

text: Page 5/8

text: Page 6/8

text: Page 7/8

text: Page 8/8

title: Guidelines on supervisory powers to remedy liquidity vulnerabilities.pdf

text: This is only test GUIDELINES

text: GUIDELINES

text: EIOPA-BoS-26/282 Adopted on 23 June 2026

text: GUIDELINES ON SUPERVISORY POWERS TO REMEDY LIQUIDITY VULNERABILITIES

text: INTRODUCTION

text: 1. In accordance with

text: Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EIOPA Regulation) and

text: Article 144

text: b(8) of Directive

text: (Solvency II Directive) , after having consulted the ESRB, EIOPA issues Guidelines on supervisory powers to remedy liquidity vulnerabilities. These Guidelines further specify: (a) the measures to address deficiencies in liquidity risk management and the form, activation and calibration of powers that supervisory authorities may exercise to reinforce the liquidity position of undertakings where liquidity risks are identified and not adequately remedied by those undertakings, (b) the existence of exceptional circumstances that justify the temporary suspension of redemption rights, and (c) the conditions for ensuring the consistent application of the temporary suspension of redemption rights as a last resort measure across the Union and the aspects to consider for equally and adequately protecting policy holders in all home and host jurisdictions.

text: 2. In line with

text: Article 144

text: b of the Solvency II Directive, the Guidelines are based on an escalation process to address deficiencies in liquidity risk management. In case of such deficiencies, insurance and reinsurance undertakings are expected to implement timely remedial actions and communicate those to supervisory authorities. Supervisory authorities then follow up to monitor the progress of the implementation. Should the remedial actions of the undertakings prove insufficient, supervisory authorities may impose measures to safeguard the undertaking’s liquidity position.

text: 3. The escalation process of the Guidelines should be read in conjunction with undertakings’ preemptive recovery plans, where applicable, established in accordance with

text: Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , which constitute firm-prepared recovery planning instruments setting out indicators and measures to restore the financial position where that position has significantly deteriorated. The existence of such plans may support an undertaking in demonstrating its capacity to address emerging liquidity vulnerabilities through timely remedial actions. Where relevant indicators defined in those plans are triggered and the liquidity position continues to deteriorate, supervisory authorities may take them into account under Guideline 3 when assessing whether to activate supervisory powers pursuant to

text: Article 144

text: b.

text: 4. When undertakings face material liquidity risks that may cause an imminent threat to the protection of policy holders and beneficiaries or to the stability of the financial system, supervisory authorities have the power to take more invasive measures, even though on a temporary basis. In exceptional circumstances, insurance undertakings can be subject to significant liquidity risks. Therefore,

text: Article 144

text: b(3)(e) of the Solvency II Directive provides supervisory authorities with the power to temporarily suspend redemption rights on life insurance policies of such undertakings concerned by significant liquidity risks for no more than three months and only as a last resort measure where it is in the collective interest of policy holders and beneficiaries of the undertakings. The measure can be renewed if the reasons that justify it are still present and should be interrupted when those reasons are no longer present. The Guidelines provide for a non-exhaustive list of market developments, events and/or undertaking specific conditions that could potentially trigger material liquidity risks for undertakings and should therefore induce supervisory authorities to pay specific attention. The exceptionality of the circumstances is confirmed when the suspension of redemption rights is the last resort mitigating measure and where that is in the collective interest of policy holders and beneficiaries of the undertaking.

text: 5. Given that exceptional circumstances may also be triggered by events in a host Member State, the Guidelines recognise the need for host and home supervisory authorities of undertakings with cross-border activities to exchange information on the details of any relevant events in the host Member State that may justify the temporary suspension of redemption rights of undertakings operating in that host Member State.

text: 6. These Guidelines are addressed to supervisory authorities under the Solvency II Directive.

text: 7. The Guidelines apply from 30 January 2027.

text: 8. If not defined in these Guidelines, the terms have the meaning defined in the legal acts referred to in this Introduction.

text: GUIDELINE 1: SUPERVISORY MEASURES TO ADDRESS DEFICIENCIES IN LIQUIDITY RISK MANAGEMENT

text: 9. When supervisory authorities identify material liquidity risks in an insurance or reinsurance undertaking in accordance with

text: Article 144

text: b(1) of the Solvency II Directive, the undertaking should be requested to submit formal written communication to the supervisory authorities outlining the remedial actions planned to be taken, their implementation timeline (including the expected short-, medium-, or long-term nature of the actions), and the expected impact on the adequacy and effectiveness of the framework. The undertaking is expected to ensure consistency between this communication and their liquidity risk management plan. Supervisory authorities should monitor the implementation of the remedial actions, in particular where actions are expected to be implemented over the medium- or long-term.

text: 10. Where, following such supervisory monitoring, there is sufficient evidence that an undertaking has failed to take timely and effective actions to address the material deficiencies, the supervisory measures referred to in

text: Article 144

text: b(2) of the Solvency II Directive may include, but are not limited to, requiring undertakings to: a. improve internal control systems, roles and responsibilities of key functions, and governance arrangements relevant to liquidity risk management, within the undertaking’s system of governance, and ensure that such improvements are appropriately reflected in the own risk and solvency assessment (ORSA); b. conduct training and/or reassessment of key staff involved in liquidity risk management to ensure adequate expertise; c. improve the liquidity risk management plans, including through clearer articulation of liquidity risk tolerance limits, liquidity risk indicators, and escalation procedures, as well as ensure that the plan is subject to more frequent updates where appropriate, and that it reflects adequate operational capacity to respond to deteriorating liquidity conditions; d. improve the design, frequency, granularity, and credibility of liquidity stress testing and scenario analysis, to ensure that results appropriately reflect the undertaking’s exposure to liquidity risk under adverse conditions; e. activate relevant actions following clear escalation procedures, set out, where applicable, in the last submitted liquidity risk management plan and, where applicable, in the most recently submitted pre-emptive recovery plan established in accordance with

text: Article 5 of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: ; f. restore the liquidity position to adequate levels, including through the establishment or strengthening of liquidity buffers.

text: GUIDELINE 2: FORM AND CALIBRATION OF SUPERVISORY POWERS TO REINFORCE THE LIQUIDITY POSITION

text: 11. Supervisory measures should be: a. time-bound, subject to periodic review at least every six months, in accordance with

text: Article 144

text: b(2) of the Solvency II Directive; b. applied in a timely manner, including before liquidity constraints escalate into financial distress; c. proportionate to the nature, scale, and complexity of the liquidity risks identified.

text: 12. The assessment of the existence of material liquidity risk should be based on a forward-looking evaluation and should take into account the liquidity assessments included in the ORSA and the liquidity risk management plan. This assessment should also consider the liquidity risk indicators referred to in

text: Article 144

text: a(2) of the Solvency II Directive. The calibration of supervisory interventions should reflect the severity and persistence of the potential liquidity shortfall, and the effectiveness of prior remedial actions taken by the undertaking.

text: 13. When applying supervisory measures, supervisory authorities should ensure that: a. undertakings are granted a timeframe that reflects the urgency of the situation, and the time already elapsed since the deficiencies were first identified; b. the interests of policy holders remain adequately protected, avoiding unnecessary disruption or adverse effects on the undertaking; c. broader implications for financial stability are duly considered.

text: 14. In conducting regular reviews of supervisory measures, supervisory authorities should assess whether the interventions remain proportionate and effective in addressing the underlying vulnerabilities. Based on updated liquidity risk assessments, interventions should be modified or lifted as appropriate.

text: GUIDELINE 3: ACTIVATION OF SUPERVISORY POWERS TO REINFORCE THE LIQUIDITY POSITION

text: 15. In deciding whether to activate supervisory measures in accordance with

text: Article 144

text: b(2) of the Solvency II Directive, supervisory authorities should assess whether there is sufficient evidence that material liquidity risks persist despite earlier remedial actions. This assessment should be based on a range of indicators or deficiencies – some of which may have already emerged during the regular supervisory review process under

text: Article 144

text: b(1) of the Solvency II Directive -– and may include, but are not limited to: a. the undertaking is unable to demonstrate the adequacy of its liquidity position under stressed conditions, as required under

text: Article 144

text: a(1) of the Solvency II Directive; b. liquidity risk indicators, as required under

text: Article 144

text: a(2) of the Solvency II Directive and further specified in Article 7 of the Regulatory Technical Standards on liquidity risk management plans, signal liquidity stress or show that exposures exceed established risk tolerance limits. In such cases, supervisory authorities may rely on notifications made under Article 136 of the Solvency II Directive, where undertakings are required to inform supervisory authorities of deteriorating financial conditions; c. the undertaking fails to comply with the measures, including escalation procedures, set out in its most recent liquidity risk management plan, or the remedial actions taken have proven insufficient to address the identified material liquidity risks; d. the undertaking fails to maintain adequate liquidity buffers in line with

text: Article 144

text: a(1) of the Solvency II Directive and ensure the appropriateness of their composition under

text: Article 260(1)

text: (d)(ii) of Commission Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/35

text: ; e. cash flow projections, as required under

text: Article 144

text: a(2) of the Solvency II Directive, indicate significant mismatches between incoming and outgoing cash flows, with specific items to be reported as per Article 5 of the Regulatory Technical Standards on liquidity risk management plans; f. stress tests and scenario analysis, as required under Article 259(3) of Commission Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/35

text: , are found to be inadequate, unrealistic, or produce results that raise concerns; g. one or more qualitative or quantitative indicators identified in the undertaking’s preemptive recovery plan, as required under

text: Article 5(8) of Directive (EU) 2025/1

text: , are triggered and the undertaking’s liquidity position continues to deteriorate, taking into account the timeframe envisaged in the pre-emptive recovery plan for the implementation of remedial actions; h. intra-group liquidity support is unavailable or significantly constrained, where the undertaking belongs to a group and depends on liquidity support from the group; i. liquidity risk tolerance limits are inadequate to ensure the undertaking can meet its financial obligations as they fall due under stressed conditions, as required under

text: Article 144

text: a(1) of the Solvency II Directive and

text: Article 260(1)

text: (d)(ii) of Commission Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/35

text: 16. The indicators in points (a) to (i) should be considered only insofar as they are relevant for material liquidity risk in accordance with

text: Article 144

text: b of the Solvency II Directive.

text: GUIDELINE 4: EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT JUSTIFY THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF REDEMPTION RIGHTS

text: 17. Before deciding on the temporary suspension of redemption rights pursuant to

text: Article 144

text: b(3) of the Solvency II Directive, supervisory authorities should assess whether the circumstances justify the exercise of that measure. The assessment should consider the nature, severity and potential impact of those circumstances on the protection of policy holders and beneficiaries or on the stability of the financial system.

text: 18. Supervisors may gather evidence from different sources to assess the circumstances. Evidence leading to the identification of exceptional circumstances may derive from an assessment of internal liquidity frameworks, including contingency funding plans, developed by insurance or reinsurance undertakings and the supervisory review process, including a forward-looking assessment (example given stress testing, sensitivity analyses) of the liquidity position of the undertaking concerned. The assessment should enable supervisory authorities to identify material weaknesses and actual or potential deficiencies or non-compliances that could lead them to imposing the temporary suspension of redemption rights.

text: 19. Supervisory authorities should also assess the market and economic developments that could lead to exceptional circumstances for insurance or reinsurance undertaking facing material liquidity risks. Supervisory authorities should consider at least the events listed below, or a combination of these events, as potential triggers of exceptional circumstances: a. unforeseen, sharp and steep changes of interest rates; b. market-wide liquidity freeze or inability to sell assets without material impairment; c. rapid changes in policy holders’ behaviour towards insurance products, including sudden increase in lapses or drops in underwritten premia; d. significant repricing in risk premia, including widespread credit rating downgrades; e. increased risk associated with derivative positions, and margin calls; f. unforeseen, sharp and steep deterioration of financial markets conditions; g. high-impact catastrophic, including exceptional health emergency, natural catastrophe or other extreme events resulting in unexpected large-scale claims and/or significant underwriting losses; h. reputational events and / or loss of confidence in the ability of the insurance sector to meet its obligations.

text: 20. Supervisory authorities should assess whether one or more of the events set out in paragraph 19 has the potential to generate material liquidity risks for undertakings, in particular through the reduction in the cash inflows (e.g. drop in written premia, contraction in investment’s income, cut in reinsurance receivables) and/or the increase in cash outflows (e.g. claims inflations, mass lapse) forcing fire sales with potential implications to the financial position of the undertakings and/or to financial stability.

text: 21. Supervisory authorities should consider the undertaking’s specific conditions that could lead to the identification of exceptional circumstances. Supervisory authorities should consider at least the conditions listed below, or a combination of these conditions, as potential triggers of exceptional circumstances for insurance or reinsurance undertaking facing material liquidity risks: a. the undertaking does not comply with the SCR or there is a risk of non-compliance in the following three months, and it has informed the supervisory authorities in accordance with Article 138(1) of the Solvency II Directive. In addition, the undertaking fails to submit a realistic recovery plan, or the undertaking presents a recovery plan which is not approved by the supervisory authority, or the undertaking fails to comply with it or despite compliance with it, the solvency and liquidity position of the undertaking continues to deteriorate; b. the undertaking presents material exposure to liquidity risk, while it fails to demonstrate that it is able to realise investments or other assets to settle its financial obligations when they fall due.

text: 22. Supervisory authorities should assess whether it might be possible to remedy the impact of market and economic developments referred to in paragraph 19 and/or the undertaking-specific conditions referred to in paragraph 21 by the application of any supervisory measure, including the ones pursuant to

text: Article 144

text: b(2) and (3) of the Solvency II Directive, or a combination of these measures, other than the temporary suspension of redemption rights.

text: 23. Supervisory authorities should consider exceptional circumstances to exist when the suspension of redemption rights is the last resort measure, having regard to the potential unintended consequences of such suspension, and where that is in the collective interest of policy holders and beneficiaries of the undertaking.

text: GUIDELINE 5: PROTECTION OF POLICY HOLDERS IN ALL HOME AND HOST JURISDICTIONS AND CONSISTENT APPLICATION OF THE TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF REDEMPTION RIGHTS

text: 24. Supervisory authorities should assess the cross-border implications of the temporary suspension of redemption rights when undertakings operate in more than one Member State under the freedom to provide services or the right of establishment, to ensure that policy holders are treated equally and adequately in all home and host jurisdictions.

text: 25. Before temporarily suspending redemption rights, the home supervisory authority should inform the host supervisory authorities. That information should include at least the following aspects: a. the intention to suspend temporarily the redemption rights; b. the underlying reasons, including an assessment of the solvency and liquidity position of the undertaking concerned and how the application of this measure is in the collective interest of policy holders and beneficiaries of the undertaking, including in a cross-border context; c. the intended application date of the measure and its intended duration. The host supervisor should provide to the home supervisory authority the information about the market developments in the host jurisdiction which is essential for the assessment of exceptional circumstances by the home supervisory authority.

text: 26. The information should be provided through collaboration platforms in case such platforms have been established in accordance with

text: Article 152

text: b of the Solvency II Directive.

text: 27. The home supervisory authority should provide the information referred to in paragraph 25 to the host supervisory authorities on the date on which it informs the undertaking on its intention to apply the measure but not later than five working days before the intended application date of the measure.

text: 28. The home and host supervisory authorities should continue to exchange information and cooperate closely throughout the duration of the suspension of redemption rights, including on aspects concerning public communication.

text: 29. As soon as the home supervisory authority decides that the reasons justifying the suspension of redemption rights do not longer exist, it should inform the host supervisory authorities providing them the details of its assessment.

text: 30. After having suspended the redemption rights, supervisory authorities should perform an ex-post assessment of the application of the temporary suspension of redemption rights, in terms of its impact and efficiency and share possible lessons learned with EIOPA. Such ex-post assessment should enhance the consistent application of the temporary suspension of redemption rights.

text: COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING RULES

text: 31. This document contains Guidelines issued under Article 16 of the EIOPA Regulation. In accordance with Article 16(3) of the EIOPA Regulation, competent authorities and financial institutions are required to make every effort to comply with guidelines and recommendations.

text: 32. Competent authorities that comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines should incorporate them into their regulatory or supervisory framework in an appropriate manner.

text: 33. Competent authorities are to confirm to EIOPA whether they comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines, with reasons for non-compliance, within two months after the issuance of the translated versions.

text: 34. In the absence of a response by this deadline, competent authorities will be considered as noncompliant to the reporting and reported as such.

text: FINAL PROVISION ON REVIEWS

text: 35. These Guidelines will be subject to a review by EIOPA.


text: EIOPA REGULAR USE This is only test

text: Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 November 2010 establishing a European Supervisory Authority (European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority), amending Decision No

text: and repealing

text: Commission Decision 2009/79/EC

text: (EIOPA Regulation) (OJ L 331, 15.12.2010, p. 48–83). Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 November 2009 on the taking up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (Solvency II) (OJ L 335, 17.12.2009, p. 1-155). 3 Commission Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/35 of 10 October 2014

text: supplementing Directive

text: (OJ L 12, 17.01.2015, p. 1-797).

text: Page 2/10

text: Page 3/10

text: Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 June 2013 on the annual financial statements, consolidated financial statements and related reports of certain types of undertakings, amending Directive

text: of the European Parliament and of the Council and repealing Council Directives

text: and

text: (OJ L 182, 29.6.2013, pp. 19–76).

text: Page 4/10

text: Page 5/10

text: Page 6/10

text: Page 7/10

text: Page 8/10

text: Page 9/10

text: solo diversified solo

text: diversified solo

text: diversified solo

text: Page 10/10

title: Revised Guidelines on group solvency.pdf

text: GUIDELINES

text: GUIDELINES

text: on group solvency

text: EIOPA-BoS-26/283 Adopted on 23 June 2026

text: GUIDELINES ON GROUP SOLVENCY

text: INTRODUCTION

text: 1. In accordance with

text: Article 16 of Regulation (EU) No 1094/2010

text: (EIOPA Regulation) , EIOPA issues these Guidelines on group solvency.

text: 2. These Guidelines relate to

text: Articles 212

text: to 235 and

text: Articles 261

text: to 263 of Directive

text: (Solvency II Directive) , and to

text: Articles 328

text: to 342 of Commission Delegated

text: Regulation (EU) 2015/35

text: (Delegated Regulation 2015/35) .

text: 3. These Guidelines are addressed to supervisory authorities under Solvency II.

text: 4. The Guidelines apply to all the methods of group solvency calculation unless otherwise specified. When relevant, the standard formula or the internal model will be specified in the Guidelines.

text: 5. The Guidelines provide guidance on the treatment of EEA groups in the context of

text: Articles 215

text: to 217 of the Solvency II Directive.

text: 6. The Guidelines apply from 30 January 2027 and repeal and replace the Guidelines on group solvency (EIOPA-BoS-14/181).

text: 7. If not defined in these Guidelines the terms have the meaning defined in the legal acts referred to in the introduction.

text: GUIDELINE 1 – SCOPE OF THE GROUP FOR THE GROUP SOLVENCY CALCULATION

text: 8. The participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company responsible for calculating the group solvency should ensure that it covers all risks and all related undertakings belonging to the group, unless the undertakings are excluded in accordance with Articles 214(2) and 229 of the Solvency II Directive. Irrespective of the calculation method used for the group solvency calculation, the scope of the group should be the same.

text: GUIDELINE 2 – CASE OF APPLICATION OF GROUP SUPERVISION

text: 9. Since the four cases of application of group supervision referred to in

text: Article 213(2)

text: (a) to (d) of the Solvency II Directive are not mutually exclusive and can exist within the same group, supervisory authorities should consider the different cases under this article in setting up group supervision.

text: GUIDELINE 3 - PARENT INSURANCE OR REINSURANCE UNDERTAKING, INSURANCE HOLDING COMPANY OR MIXED FINANCIAL HOLDING COMPANY HEADQUARTERED IN A THIRD COUNTRY

text: 10. According to Article 215 of the Solvency II Directive, where a subgroup referred to in

text: Article 213(2)

text: (a) and (b) of the Solvency II Directive exists, the acting group supervisor as defined in Article 260 of the Solvency II Directive, after consulting the other supervisory authorities concerned, should ensure that group supervision applies by default at the level of the ultimate parent undertaking in the European Union.

text: 11. However, where the parent insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company is headquartered outside the EEA and is subject to an equivalent third country group supervision, the acting group supervisor as defined in Article 260 of the Solvency II Directive should rely on the group supervision exercised by the third-country supervisory authorities, according to Article 261 of the Solvency II Directive, and exempt the group from group supervision at the ultimate level of the European Union on a case-by-case basis, where this would result in a more efficient supervision of the group and would not impair the supervisory activities of the supervisory authorities concerned in respect of their individual responsibilities.

text: 12. After consulting with other supervisory authorities concerned, the acting group supervisor as defined in Article 260 of the Solvency II Directive should consider a more efficient group supervision as achieved when the following criteria are met: (a) the worldwide group supervision allows for a robust assessment of the risks to which the EEA subgroup and its entities are exposed, considering the structure of the group, the nature, scale and complexity of the risks and the capital allocation within the group; (b) the cooperation currently in place between the third-country group supervisor and EEA supervisory authorities for the group concerned is structured and well-managed through regular meetings and appropriate exchange of information within a college of supervisors to which the EEA supervisory authorities and EIOPA are invited; (c) an annual work plan, including joint on-site examinations, is agreed upon in these regular meetings by the supervisory authorities involved in the supervision of the group.

text: 13. Where the parent insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company is headquartered outside the EEA and is not subject to an equivalent third country supervision, group supervision should be applied at the level of the ultimate parent undertaking in the European Union where a group, as defined by

text: Article 213(2)

text: (a) or (b) of the Solvency II Directive, exists. Where such group does not exist, the supervisory authorities should decide whether to require, by virtue of

text: Article 262(3)

text: (b) of the Solvency II Directive, the establishment of an insurance holding company or a mixed financial holding company which has its head office in the European Union and subject this EEA group to group supervision and group solvency calculation.

text: GUIDELINE 4 - CHOICE OF THE METHOD OF CALCULATION AND ASSESSMENT OF THE INTRA- GROUP TRANSACTIONS

text: 14. When deciding whether the exclusive application of method 1 is not appropriate according to

text: Article 328(1)

text: (e) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, the group supervisor should consider the presence of intra-group transactions between the related undertaking being assessed for deduction and aggregation method and all other entities in the scope of the group solvency calculation.

text: GUIDELINE 5 - PROPORTIONAL SHARE

text: 15. Where a related undertaking is linked with another undertaking by a relationship as set out in

text: Article 22(7) of Directive 2013/34/EU

text: , irrespective of the choice of the calculation method, a proportional share of 100% should be used by default. Where the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company seeks to use another percentage, it should explain to the group supervisor why it is appropriate. After consulting the other supervisory authorities concerned and the group itself, the group supervisor should decide on the appropriateness of the proportional share chosen by the group.

text: 16. When calculating the group solvency according to method 1, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should determine the proportional share it holds in its related undertakings by taking: (a) 100% when including a subsidiary according to

text: Article 335(1)

text: (a) and (b) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, unless otherwise decided in accordance with Guideline 6; (b) the percentage used for the establishment of the consolidated accounts, when including undertakings according to

text: Article 335(1)

text: (c), (d) and (f) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35.

text: GUIDELINE 6 - CRITERIA FOR THE RECOGNITION OF THE SOLVENCY DEFICIT OF A SUBSIDIARY ON A PROPORTIONAL BASIS

text: 17. In order to prove that the responsibility of the parent undertaking is strictly limited to the share of capital of the insurance or reinsurance subsidiary as envisaged in Article 221(1) of the Solvency II Directive, the parent undertaking should provide evidence to the group supervisor that the following criteria are met: (a) no profit and loss transfer agreement and no guarantees, net worth maintenance agreements or other agreements of the parent undertaking or any other related undertaking providing financial support are in place; (b) the investment in the subsidiary is not considered as a strategic investment for the parent undertaking; (c) the parent undertaking does not benefit of any advantage from its participation in the subsidiary, where such advantage could take the form of intra-group transactions such as loans, reinsurance agreements or service agreements; (d) the subsidiary is not a core component of the group's business model, in particular regarding product offering, client base, underwriting, distribution, investment strategy and management; furthermore it is not operating under the same name or brand, and there are no interlocking responsibilities at the level of the group senior management; (e) a written agreement between the parent undertaking and the subsidiary explicitly limits the support of the parent undertaking in case of a solvency deficit to the parent undertaking’s share in the capital of that subsidiary. In addition, the subsidiary should have a strategy in place to resolve the solvency deficit, such as guarantees from minority shareholders.

text: 18. Where a subsidiary is included in the scope of the internal model to calculate the group solvency capital requirement, the group supervisor should not allow the parent undertaking to take into account the solvency deficit of the subsidiary on a proportional basis.

text: 19. The group supervisor should assess such criteria, after consulting the other supervisory authorities concerned and the group itself, on a case-by-case basis, taking into account the specific features of the group.

text: 20. The status of strictly limited responsibility of the parent undertaking should be subject to an annual review by the group supervisor.

text: 21. The parent undertaking and the subsidiary should disclose the positive decision of the group supervisor that allows the recognition of the solvency deficit on a proportional basis in order to inform policyholders and investors, as material information in the capital management section of the group and individual Solvency and Financial Condition Report.

text: 22. When preparing the consolidated data using method 1, the own funds and the solvency capital requirement of the subsidiary should be calculated on a proportional basis instead of applying a full consolidation.

text: 23. When preparing the aggregated data using method 2, the own funds and the solvency capital requirement of the subsidiary should be calculated using the proportional share of that subsidiary, also in the case of a solvency deficit.

text: GUIDELINE 7 – CONTRIBUTION OF A RELATED UNDERTAKING TO THE GROUP SOLVENCY CAPITAL REQUIREMENT

text: 24. For the purpose of

text: Article 330(6)

text: (a) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should calculate the contribution of a related undertaking to the group solvency capital requirement according to the Technical Annex, with the goal to reflect diversification effects.

text: GUIDELINE 8 – TREATMENT OF RING-FENCED FUNDS FOR COVERING THE GROUP SOLVENCY CAPITAL REQUIREMENT

text: 25. For all undertakings included in the group solvency calculation using method 1 and for undertakings in non-equivalent third countries included in the group solvency calculation using method 2, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should apply the principles for ring-fenced funds as set out in

text: Article 81

text: and Article 217 of Delegated Regulation 2015/35.

text: 26. For undertakings in equivalent third countries included in the group solvency calculation using method 2, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should identify any restriction to the undertakings’ own funds due to ring-fencing of assets or liabilities or similar arrangements, in accordance with the equivalent solvency regime. These restrictions should be considered in the group solvency calculation as part of the own funds availability assessment at the group level.

text: 27. When calculating the group solvency capital requirement using method 1, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should not eliminate intra-group transactions between the assets and liabilities associated with each material ring-fenced fund and the remaining consolidated data. The group solvency capital requirement calculated on the basis of the consolidated data should be the sum of: (a) the notional solvency capital requirement for each material ring-fenced fund calculated with the assets and liabilities of the ring-fenced fund gross of intra-group transactions; and; (b) the (diversified) group solvency capital requirement for the remaining consolidated data (excluding assets and liabilities of all material ring-fenced funds but including the assets and liabilities of all non-material ring-fenced funds). When calculating the group solvency capital requirements for the remaining consolidated data, intra-group transactions should be eliminated, while intra-group transactions between the remaining consolidated data and the material ring-fenced funds should not be eliminated.

text: 28. Where a group uses an internal model to calculate the group Solvency Capital Requirement (SCR), it should follow the guidance set out in Guideline 10 of the Guidelines on ring-fenced funds.

text: 29. The consolidated data used to calculate the group own funds should be net of intra-group transactions as set out in Article 335(3) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35. Therefore, all intra-group transactions between material ring-fenced funds and the remaining consolidated data should be eliminated for the calculation of the group own funds.

text: 30. For each material ring-fenced fund identified within the consolidated data under method 1, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should calculate the restricted own-fund items using the same assets and liabilities of the ring-fenced fund used to calculate its notional solvency capital requirement as described above, i.e. gross of intra-group transactions.

text: 31. Therefore, the total restricted own funds within the ring-fenced fund to be deducted from the group reconciliation reserve should be the sum of all material restricted own funds identified in EEA insurance or reinsurance undertakings and the restricted own funds identified in any non-EEA insurance and reinsurance undertaking in the scope of the consolidated data.

text: GUIDELINE 9 – ADJUSTMENTS RELATED TO NON-AVAILABLE OWN FUNDS FOR THE CALCULATION OF GROUP ELIGIBLE OWN FUNDS

text: 32. The participating insurance and reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should deduct the part of the own funds of related undertakings, referred to in Article 330(1) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, that have been assessed as nonavailable at group level in accordance with Article 330 of Delegated Regulation 2015/35. Such deductions should be done from the relevant own funds items and the relevant tiers of the group own funds.

text: 33. When using method 1 or a combination of methods, the following process should be followed for calculating the consolidated group own funds eligible to cover the consolidated group solvency capital requirement and the minimum consolidated group solvency capital requirement: (a) the consolidated group own funds are calculated on the basis of the consolidated data, as referred to in

text: Article 335(1)

text: (a), (b), (c), (d) and (f) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, net of any intra-group transactions. Holdings in related undertakings as referred to in Article 228(1) of the Solvency II Directive are not mentioned in this paragraph since they are not included in the consolidated data; (b) the consolidated group own funds referred to in (a) are classified into the relevant tiers according to Articles 331-334 of Delegated Regulation 2015/35; (c) the following deductions have to be made for each related undertaking referred to in Article 330(1) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35 to determine the available consolidated group own funds: i. the sum of all non-available own-fund items, other than minority interests, of a related undertaking in excess of the contribution of that related undertaking to the group solvency capital requirement should be deducted from the own funds referred to in (b). ii. minority interests of subsidiaries that are not fully owned should be deducted with the amounts as calculated according to

text: Article 330

text: (4a) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35 (d) the available consolidated group own funds from (c) are subject to the same tiering limits applying at individual level in order to determine the eligible consolidated group own funds that cover the consolidated group solvency capital requirement and the minimum consolidated group solvency capital requirement.

text: 34. When using method 2, the participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should use the sum of the eligible own funds of related undertakings after deducting non-available own funds at group level.

text: 35. For all calculation methods, where the non-available own funds have been classified into more than one tier, the order in which they are deducted from the different tiers should be explained to the group supervisor.

text: 36. For related undertakings from other financial sectors as referred to in Article 228(1) of the Solvency II Directive, own funds identified by the group supervisor as having reduced loss-absorbency capacity will follow the treatment as stated in Article 228 (2) of the Solvency II Directive.

text: GUIDELINE 10 – TREATMENT OF GROUP SPECIFIC RISKS

text: 37. The participating insurance or reinsurance undertaking, the insurance holding company or the mixed financial holding company should calculate the group solvency capital requirement taking into account all quantifiable, and material specific risks existing at group level, which may impact the solvency and financial position of the group. If the group specific risks are material, the group should use group-specific parameters or a partial internal model for the calculation of the solvency capital requirement corresponding to the group-specific risks.

text: 38. These risks are: (a) the risks which are also present at individual level, but whose impact is significantly different (which behave in a different way) at group level; or (b) the risks only present at group level.

text: 39. The group solvency capital requirement for the quantifiable part of these risks should be calculated as follows: (a) in the case described in (a) by applying different calibrations to the relevant risk modules or sub-modules than those used at the individual level, or by applying appropriate scenarios; (b) in the case of (b) by applying appropriate scenarios.

text: 40. If the group is unable to reflect the risk profile in the group solvency capital requirement due to the specific risks existing at group level as described above, the group supervisor after consulting the other supervisory authorities concerned, should be able to impose a group capital add-on, as provided for in

text: Articles 232

text: (a), 233(6) and 233a(7) of the Solvency II Directive, if appropriate.

text: COMPLIANCE AND REPORTING RULES

text: 41. This document contains Guidelines issued under Article 16 of the EIOPA Regulation. In accordance with Article 16(3) of the EIOPA Regulation, competent authorities and financial institutions are required to make every effort to comply with guidelines and recommendations.

text: 42. Competent authorities that comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines should incorporate them into their regulatory or supervisory framework in an appropriate manner.

text: 43. Competent authorities are to confirm to EIOPA whether they comply or intend to comply with these Guidelines, with reasons for non-compliance, within two months after the issuance of the translated versions.

text: 44. In the absence of a response by this deadline, competent authorities will be considered as noncompliant to the reporting and reported as such.

text: FINAL PROVISION ON REVIEWS

text: 45. The present Guidelines will be subject to a review by EIOPA.

text: TECHNICAL ANNEX

text: For the purpose of

text: Article 330(6)

text: (a) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35, the contribution Contrj of a related undertaking j to the consolidated group solvency capital requirement should be calculated according to the formula:

text: Contrj = SCRj × MIN(1;SCR /∑i SCRi ) Where:

text: - SCRj is the proportional share of the solo SCR at individual entity level of the undertaking j;

text: - SCR is the diversified component of the consolidated group SCR calculated in accordance with

text: Article 336

text: (a) of Delegated Regulation 2015/35; - For the participating undertaking and each related insurance or reinsurance undertaking and third-country insurance and reinsurance undertaking included in the calculation of the

text: SCR , SCRi is the proportional share of the solo SCR at individual entity level. For insurance holding companies and mixed financial holding companies and holding companies of third country insurance and reinsurance undertakings included in the calculation of the

text: SCR , SCRi is the proportional share of the notional SCR as calculated according to Articles

text: and

text: of Directive 2009/138/EC. Articles

text: and

text: of Directive 2009/138/EC via reference to Subsections 1, 2 and 3 of Section 4 of Chapter VI of Title I of Directive

text: imply that the notional SCR covers all risks included in the standard formula, e.g. equity risk for participations held and underwriting risk in the context of service outsourcing.