In addition to an interest rate guarantee and annual surplus participation, life insurance contracts typically embed the right to stop premium payments during the term of the contract (paid-up option), to resume payments later (resumption option), or to terminate the contract early (surrender option). Terminal guarantees are on benefits payable upon death, survival and surrender. The latter are adapted after exercising the options. A model framework including these features and an algorithm to jointly value the premium payment and surrender options is presented. In a first step, the standard principles of risk-neutral evaluation are applied and the policyholder is assumed to use an economically rational exercise strategy. In a second step, option value sensitivity on different contract parameters, benefit adaptation mechanisms, and exercise behavior is analyzed numerically. The two latter are the main drivers for the option value.
The introduction of an insurance guaranty scheme can have significant in- fluence on the pricing and capital structures in a competitive market. This contribution summarizes the major findings of a working paper written by Schmeiser andWagner (Working Papers on Risk Management and Insurance (IVW-HSG), No. 80, 2010). The effect on competitive equity-premium combinations is studied while considering a framework with policyholders and equity holders where guaranty fund charges are volume-based, as levied in existing schemes. Several settings with regard to the ori- gin of the fund contributions are assessed and the immediate effects on the incentives of the policyholders and equity holders are analyzed through a one-period contingent claim approach. One result is that introducing a guaranty scheme in a market with competitive conditions entails a shift of equity capital towards minimum solvency requirements. Hence adverse incentives may arise with regard to the overall security level of the industry.
The main reason for different insurance premiums and benefits is the use of different statistically proven risk factors in actuarial calculations for individuals. Basing its ruling on European Union Directive 2004/113/EC (the Gender Directive), the European Court of Justice on 1 March 2011 concluded that any gender-based discrimination is prohibited, so gender equality in the European Union (EU) must be ensured from 21 December 2012. The ruling definitively banning the use of the gender criterion in actuarial calculations for individual prices may have important consequences for the insurance industry and customers in the EU. In this short text, a number of implications are discussed. Possible consumer behaviour and potential responses from market players are outlined as well as possible further regulatory interventions. The implications of the definitive ban on gender-based discrimination are extensive for the insurance industry and may have a strong economic and legal impact on the individual product offering and pricing.
Die Verwendung des Geschlechts zur Preisdifferenzierung wird bei Versicherungsnehmern nur beschränkt als diskriminierend empfunden. Dies zeigt eine aktuelle Studie. Trotzdem werden Versicherungsgesellschaften nicht darum herum kommen, ihre Modelle zur Prämienkalkulation anzupassen.
Based on a basic solvency model, the authors examine the sensitivity of different risk measures with respect to model misspecification. An analysis considers the effects of introducing stochastic jumps and linear, as well as non-linear dependencies into the basic setting on the solvency capital requirements, shortfall probability and expected policyholder deficit. Additionally, the authors take a regulatory view and consider the degree to which the deviations in risk measures, due to the different model specifications, can be diminished by means of requiring interim financial reports.
The simulation results suggest that the sensitivity of solvency capital as a risk measure - as it is in regulatory practice - underestimates the actual misspecification risk that policyholders are exposed to. It is also found that semi-annual mandatory interim reports can already reduce the model uncertainty faced by a regulator, significantly. This has important implications for the design of risk-based capital standards and the implementation of internal solvency models.
The results from the Monte Carlo simulation show that changes in the specification of a solvency model have a much greater impact on shortfall probabilities and expected policyholder deficits than they have on capital requirements. The shortfall risk measures react much more sensitively to small changes in the model assumptions, than the capital requirements. This leads us to the conclusion that regulators should not solely rely on capital requirements to monitor the solvency situation of an insurer, but should additionally consider shortfall risk measures. More precisely, an analysis of model risk focusing on the sensitivity of capital requirements will typically underestimate the relevant risk of model misspecification from a policyholder's perspective. Finally, the simulation results suggest that mandatory interim reports on the solvency and financial situation of an insurance company are a powerful tool in order to reduce the model uncertainty faced by regulators.
