Captives and Other Risk-Financing Options
Captives and Other Risk-Financing Options
Traditionally, businesses and other organizations have handled risk by transfer-ring it to an insurance company through the purchase of an insurance policy or, alternatively, by retaining the risk and allocating funds to meet expected losses through an arrangement known as “self insurance,” in which firms retain rather than transfer risk.
During the liability crisis of the 1980s, when businesses had trouble obtaining some types of commercial insurance coverage, new mechanisms for transferring risk developed, facilitated by passage of the Product Liability Risk Retention
Act of 1981. These so-called alternative risk transfer (ART) arrangements blend risk transfer and risk retention mechanisms and, together with self insurance, form the alternative market.
Captives—a special type of insurance company set up by a parent company, trade association or group of companies to insure the risks of its owner or owners—and risk-retention groups—in which entities in a common industry join together to provide members with liability insurance—were the first mechanisms to appear. Other options, including risk retention pools and large deductible plans, a form of self insurance, followed.
During the liability crisis of the 1980s, when businesses had trouble obtaining some types of commercial insurance coverage, new mechanisms for transferring risk developed, facilitated by passage of the Product Liability Risk Retention
Act of 1981. These so-called alternative risk transfer (ART) arrangements blend risk transfer and risk retention mechanisms and, together with self insurance, form the alternative market.
Captives—a special type of insurance company set up by a parent company, trade association or group of companies to insure the risks of its owner or owners—and risk-retention groups—in which entities in a common industry join together to provide members with liability insurance—were the first mechanisms to appear. Other options, including risk retention pools and large deductible plans, a form of self insurance, followed.
ART products, such as catastrophe bonds, weather derivatives and microinsurance programs are also emerging as an alternative to traditional insurance and reinsurance products.
Alternative Market Mechanisms
I. Captives
Wholly owned captives are companies set up by large corporations to finance or administer their risk financing needs. If such a captive insures only the risks of its parent or subsidiaries it is called a “pure” captive.
Captives may be established to provide insurance to more than one entity.
An association or group of companies may band together to form a captive to provide insurance coverage. Professionals—doctors, lawyers, accountants—have formed many captives over the years. Captives may, in turn, use a variety of reinsurance mechanisms to provide the coverage. In particular, many offshore captives use a “fronting” insurer to provide the basic insurance policy. Fronting typically means that underwriting, claims and administrative functions are handled in the United States by an experienced commercial insurance company, since a captive generally will not want to get involved directly in running the insurance operation. Also, fronting allows a company to show it has an insurance policy with a U.S.-licensed insurance company, which it may need to do for legal and business reasons.
The rent-a-captive concept was introduced in Bermuda 20 years ago and remains a popular alternative market mechanism. Rent-a-captives serve businesses that are unable to capitalize a captive but are willing to assume a portion of their own risk and share in the underwriting profits and investment income.
Generally sponsored by insurers or reinsurers, which essentially “rent out” their capital for a fee, the mechanism allows users to obtain some of the advantages of a captive without having the expense of setting up a single parent captive and meeting minimum capital and surplus requirements.
Wholly owned captives are companies set up by large corporations to finance or administer their risk financing needs. If such a captive insures only the risks of its parent or subsidiaries it is called a “pure” captive.
Captives may be established to provide insurance to more than one entity.
An association or group of companies may band together to form a captive to provide insurance coverage. Professionals—doctors, lawyers, accountants—have formed many captives over the years. Captives may, in turn, use a variety of reinsurance mechanisms to provide the coverage. In particular, many offshore captives use a “fronting” insurer to provide the basic insurance policy. Fronting typically means that underwriting, claims and administrative functions are handled in the United States by an experienced commercial insurance company, since a captive generally will not want to get involved directly in running the insurance operation. Also, fronting allows a company to show it has an insurance policy with a U.S.-licensed insurance company, which it may need to do for legal and business reasons.
The rent-a-captive concept was introduced in Bermuda 20 years ago and remains a popular alternative market mechanism. Rent-a-captives serve businesses that are unable to capitalize a captive but are willing to assume a portion of their own risk and share in the underwriting profits and investment income.
Generally sponsored by insurers or reinsurers, which essentially “rent out” their capital for a fee, the mechanism allows users to obtain some of the advantages of a captive without having the expense of setting up a single parent captive and meeting minimum capital and surplus requirements.
Captives have been expanding into the employee benefits arena since2003, the year in which the Department of Labor gave final approval to Archer .Daniels Midland Co.’s plan to use its Vermont captive to reinsure group life insurance benefits.
While the leading domicile for captives in the U.S. is Vermont, offshore captives covering U.S. risks are predominantly located in Bermuda, where they enjoy tax advantages and relative freedom from regulation. The Cayman Islands, Guernsey, the British Virgin Islands, Luxembourg and Barbados are also significant centers for captives. Vermont is the leading domicile for captives in the United States.
II. Self Insurance
Self insurance can be undertaken by single companies wishing to retain risk or by entities in similar industries or geographic locations that pool resources to insure each other’s risks.
The use of higher retentions/deductibles is increasing in most lines of insur-ance. In workers compensation many companies are opting to retain a larger portion of their exposure through policies with large deductible amounts of $100,000 or higher. Large deductible programs, which were first introduced in 1989, now account for a sizable portion of the market.
III. Risk Retention Groups
A risk retention group (RRG) is a corporation owned and operated by its members. It must be chartered and licensed as a liability insurance company under the laws of at least one state. The group can then write insurance in all other states. It need not obtain a license in a state other than its chartering states.
IV. Risk Purchasing Groups
Like risk retention groups (RRGs), purchasing groups must be made up of persons or entities with like exposures and in a common business. However, where-as RRGs are liability insurance companies owned by their members, purchasing groups purchase liability coverage for their members from admitted insurers, surplus lines carriers or RRGs. Laws in some states prohibit insurers from giving groups formed to purchase insurance advantages over individuals. However, purchasing groups are not subject to so-called “fictitious group” laws, which require a group to have been in existence for a certain period of time or require a group to have a certain minimum number of members. The Risk Retention
Act of 1986 specifically provided for purchasing groups to be created to pur-chase liability insurance for members of the sponsoring groups.
V. Catastrophe Bonds and other Alternative Risk Transfer (ART) Products
II. Self Insurance
Self insurance can be undertaken by single companies wishing to retain risk or by entities in similar industries or geographic locations that pool resources to insure each other’s risks.
The use of higher retentions/deductibles is increasing in most lines of insur-ance. In workers compensation many companies are opting to retain a larger portion of their exposure through policies with large deductible amounts of $100,000 or higher. Large deductible programs, which were first introduced in 1989, now account for a sizable portion of the market.
III. Risk Retention Groups
A risk retention group (RRG) is a corporation owned and operated by its members. It must be chartered and licensed as a liability insurance company under the laws of at least one state. The group can then write insurance in all other states. It need not obtain a license in a state other than its chartering states.
IV. Risk Purchasing Groups
Like risk retention groups (RRGs), purchasing groups must be made up of persons or entities with like exposures and in a common business. However, where-as RRGs are liability insurance companies owned by their members, purchasing groups purchase liability coverage for their members from admitted insurers, surplus lines carriers or RRGs. Laws in some states prohibit insurers from giving groups formed to purchase insurance advantages over individuals. However, purchasing groups are not subject to so-called “fictitious group” laws, which require a group to have been in existence for a certain period of time or require a group to have a certain minimum number of members. The Risk Retention
Act of 1986 specifically provided for purchasing groups to be created to pur-chase liability insurance for members of the sponsoring groups.
V. Catastrophe Bonds and other Alternative Risk Transfer (ART) Products
A number of alternative risk transfer (ART) products, such as insurance-linked securities and weather derivatives have developed to meet the financial risk transfer needs of businesses. One such product, catastrophe (cat) bonds, risk-based securities sold via the capital markets, developed in the wake of hurri-canes Andrew and Iniki in 1992 and the Northridge earthquake in 1994—mega-catastrophes that resulted in a global shortage of reinsurance (insurance for insurers) for such disasters. Tapping into the capital markets allowed insurers to diversify their risk and expand the amount of insurance available in catas-trophe-prone areas. Zurich Financial’s Kamp Re was the first major catastrophe bond to be triggered. The $190 million bond was triggered by 2005’s Hurricane Katrina, and resulted in a total loss of principal. Catastrophe bonds are now a multibillion dollar industry.
Catastrophes: Insurance Issues
The term “catastrophe” in the property insurance industry denotes a natural or man-made disaster that is unusually severe. An event is designated a catastrophe by the industry when claims are expected to reach a certain dollar threshold, currently set at $25 million, and more than a certain number of policyholders and insurance companies are affected.The magnitude of the damage caused by Katrina and the potential dam-age Hurricane Rita might have caused had it not weakened from an intense Category 5 hurricane has triggered a reexamination, not just among insurers and reinsurers but also among public policy and political leaders, of how the United States deals with the financial consequences of such massive property damage and personal loss.
Disaster losses along the coast are likely to escalate in the coming years, in part because of huge increases in development. One catastrophe modeling company predicts that catastrophe losses will double every decade or so due to growing residential and commercial density and more expensive buildings.
Data from the Census Bureau, collected by USA Today, show that in 2006, 34.9 million people were seriously threatened by Atlantic hurricanes, compared with 10.2 million in 1950. Before the 2005 hurricane season, Hurricane Andrew ranked as the single most costly U.S. natural disaster.Man-made catastrophes such as the attacks on the World Trade Center can also cause huge losses. The attacks led Congress to pass the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) in November 2002. Since then, TRIA has been reauthorized twice. The latest reauthorization, passed at the end of 2007, extends the law to 2014. TRIA provides a federal backstop for commercial insurance losses from terrorist acts, making it easier for insurers to calculate their maximum losses for such a catastrophe and thus to underwrite the coverage, see the topic on Terrorism Risk and Insurance.
The typical homeowners insurance policy covers damage from a fire, windstorms, hail, riots and explosions—as well as other types of loss such as theft and the cost of living elsewhere while the structure is being repaired or rebuilt after being damaged. Commercial property insurance policies generally cover the same causes of loss with some variation, depending on the coverages selected. Flood and earthquake damage are excluded under homeowners poli-cies—separate policies are available—but are covered under the comprehensive portion of the standard auto policy, which more than 75 percent of drivers who buy auto liability insurance purchase.
The insurance industry tracks catastrophes to monitor claim costs, assign ing a number to each catastrophe. Each claim arising from the event is tagged so that total industrywide losses can be tabulated. The term catastrophe is often used in the property insurance industry in a narrow way to mean a catastrophic event that exceeds a dollar threshold in claims payouts. This figure has changed over the years with inflation and the increase in development of areas subject to natural disasters. Starting in 1997 the catastrophe definition was raised from $5 million to $25 million in insured damage.
Disaster losses along the coast are likely to escalate in the coming years, in part because of huge increases in development. One catastrophe modeling company predicts that catastrophe losses will double every decade or so due to growing residential and commercial density and more expensive buildings.
Data from the Census Bureau, collected by USA Today, show that in 2006, 34.9 million people were seriously threatened by Atlantic hurricanes, compared with 10.2 million in 1950. Before the 2005 hurricane season, Hurricane Andrew ranked as the single most costly U.S. natural disaster.Man-made catastrophes such as the attacks on the World Trade Center can also cause huge losses. The attacks led Congress to pass the Terrorism Risk Insurance Act (TRIA) in November 2002. Since then, TRIA has been reauthorized twice. The latest reauthorization, passed at the end of 2007, extends the law to 2014. TRIA provides a federal backstop for commercial insurance losses from terrorist acts, making it easier for insurers to calculate their maximum losses for such a catastrophe and thus to underwrite the coverage, see the topic on Terrorism Risk and Insurance.
The typical homeowners insurance policy covers damage from a fire, windstorms, hail, riots and explosions—as well as other types of loss such as theft and the cost of living elsewhere while the structure is being repaired or rebuilt after being damaged. Commercial property insurance policies generally cover the same causes of loss with some variation, depending on the coverages selected. Flood and earthquake damage are excluded under homeowners poli-cies—separate policies are available—but are covered under the comprehensive portion of the standard auto policy, which more than 75 percent of drivers who buy auto liability insurance purchase.
The insurance industry tracks catastrophes to monitor claim costs, assign ing a number to each catastrophe. Each claim arising from the event is tagged so that total industrywide losses can be tabulated. The term catastrophe is often used in the property insurance industry in a narrow way to mean a catastrophic event that exceeds a dollar threshold in claims payouts. This figure has changed over the years with inflation and the increase in development of areas subject to natural disasters. Starting in 1997 the catastrophe definition was raised from $5 million to $25 million in insured damage.
There have been four catastrophes that fall into the megacatastrophe catego-ry, greatly exceeding the $25 million threshold. The first two, Hurricane Andrew (1992) and the Northridge earthquake (1994), were both watershed events in that they were far more destructive than most experts had predicted a disaster of this type would be. The third, the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in 2001, altered insurers’ attitudes about man-made risks worldwide. Hurricane Katrina (2005), the fourth catastrophe, is not only the most expensive natural disaster on record but also an event that intensified discussion nationwide about the way disasters, natural and man-made, are managed. It also focused attention on the federal flood insurance program, see the topic on Flood Insurance.
المشاركات
ليست هناك تعليقات: