shutterstock-176934983
15 December 2015 Alternative Risk Transfer

Is there the will - or the way?

Interest in insurance-linked securities (ILS) has been ramping up for some time and a quick look at the size of the market explains why. In the first half of 2015 the issuance of new catastrophe bonds and other ILS recorded in the Artemis Deal Directory exceeded $5 billion, putting the market on course for a record year.

It was therefore unsurprising that in the Budget back in March, UK Chancellor George Osborne noted that the ILS market represents an important growth opportunity for the country and that the government would work with the industry and regulators to develop a new competitive corporate and tax structure for allowing ILS to be domiciled in the UK, thereby making greater use of so-called alternative capital.

Encouraging developments

Subsequent developments have been encouraging. In April, Osborne indicated that the government was altering its tone on regulation in the City, focusing its efforts on making it more attractive for business. After the election in May, Osborne retained his post, making the prospect of government support for ILS as strong as it ever was likely to be—no other political party had much interest in creating the type of structure that would make London competitive in this respect, particularly from a taxation perspective.

Then, in June, the London Market Group’s ILS taskforce was set up, tasked with producing a series of recommendations that could be included in the Chancellor’s autumn statement later this year. The taskforce will consider potential changes to the tax, regulatory and company law regimes that could make the UK a more attractive domicile for ILS business and managers.

However, the delivery of the summer Budget in July could be seen as raising some questions about the government’s commitment, since there was no mention of the changes needed for ILS to be issued. This could simply be a question of timing—the logic of creating a rule that allows people to be paying less tax, which is one of the fundamental points that the UK has to deal with if it is to attract ILS investors—doesn’t necessarily fit with the government’s programme of continuing austerity and spending cuts. The structural changes required are also neither simple nor quick.

Looking forward, it will be interesting to see whether the political will remains and progress on this issue is sustained or whether it is quietly dropped. It may be that the challenges that need to be overcome in order to make London a centre for ILS are simply deemed to be too big.

Significant challenges

As well as the need to make the tax regime more attractive to ILS investors, the UK regulators—in particular the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA)—are likely to have a number of concerns which they will want to see addressed. These will include ensuring that the collateral which typically backs ILS arrangements is sufficient; that ILS investors understand the underlying risks they are taking on; and that they have adequate know-how, including access to modelling capability, to assess these risks properly.

The PRA will also want to know that the ceding company appreciates the extent to which risk is actually being transferred by it pursuant to the ILS arrangement, and that it understands the wider impact on traditional re/insurers as a result of participating in an ILS arrangement (such as with regard to concentration of risk, impact on returns on capital, and possible changes in business model, etc).

Already registered?

Login to your account

To request a FREE 2-week trial subscription, please signup.
NOTE - this can take up to 48hrs to be approved.

Two Weeks Free Trial

For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription that we can add you to for FREE, please email Elliot Field at efield@newtonmedia.co.uk or Adrian Tapping at atapping@newtonmedia.co.uk