Facebook logo
Facebook logo
Facebook logo
Facebook logo

Latest Headlines

Captive Insurance Times home | Features | Can a captive $ave us from ourselves?← You are here

[close]
Latest News
Atlas secures captive manager approval in Texas
28 March 2017 | Charlotte
Atlas Insurance Management has received approval from the Texas Department of Insurance to act as a manager for captive insurance businesses in the state Read more

TRA Stanford to acquire PHT Services
29 March 2017 | Columbia
The Risk Authority Stanford (TRA) is expected to acquire PHT Services (PHTS), following unanimous approval by both boards of directors, according to a statement from PHTS Read more

For more news visit our news section

Upcoming events
PARIMA MANILA 2017
Date: 28 March 2017
Location: SHANGRI LA at THE FORT Taguig, Metro Manila
Find out more

Captives & Corporate Insurance Strategies Summit
Date: 05 - 06 June 2017
Location: Canada
Find out more

For more events visit our event section
Industry recruitment
There are currently no jobs available
For more jobs visit our recruitment section
Captive Insurance Times
View the latest issues online now

Sister publications
Securities Lending Times
http://captiveinsurancetimes.com

Asset Servicing Times
www.assetservicingtimes.com

Real Estate Investment Times
www.realestateinvestmenttimes.com

Media pack [download]
Ad specs [download]
Latest features
Coming up captives
Feature: Disruption was the theme of the recent CICA International Conference in San Diego, where a new president was welcomed, the next generation of professionals was groomed and a regulatory shake up was previewed Read more

Cook Islands
Country profile: In an era of increasing uncertainty, Tamatoa Jonassen suggests that the Cook Islands can be a bridge to financial security in a captive Read more

Eduardo Fox :: Appleby
Interview: Appleby and Bermuda are optimistic about the future of Latin American captives. Eduardo Fox explains Read more

For more features visit our features section
Features
Latest news
Can a captive $ave us from ourselves?
With a solid enterprise risk management strategy, a captive can increase in value and reputation, says Michael Zuckerman of Temple University
Is a captive insurance company: a money pit; an inconvenient chequebook needed simply to support a fronted self-insurance programme; or a risk management vehicle that can drive an insured/member strategic enterprise risk management (ERM) programme?

There is no doubt that captives can be expensive. They require capital and incur significant administrative costs. However, if a captive is simply a chequebook to support a fronted self-insurance programme, then maybe the parent should rethink the need for a captive.

Regardless of the captive’s parent position, there is a significant research question that deserves the attention of both the academic and professional risk management community.

Can a properly managed captive insurance company be a driver of traditional and/or ERM maturity? Specifically, this research needs to address whether a captive managed according to generally accepted captive management best practices can be used as a vehicle to promote and improve the insured/member ERM programme over the long term.

This article will focus on just one of many issues for which a captive can provide invaluable ERM support. Studies indicate that CFOs will talk about earnings shortfalls and accounting irregularities as risk issues that keep them up at night. Consequently, a possible credit rating downgrade is also a significant financial and strategic exposure, for most profit and many non-profit organisations.

A credit downgrade is a key risk indicator that the organisation is not effectively managing the operational, financial, and strategic risks that will eventually negatively impact its earnings before interest, tax depreciation and amortisation (EBITDA).

Moreover, a credit rating downgrade affects the cost of capital, increasing interest rates that may cause liquidity and budgetary instability. Ultimately, this could damage the organisation’s reputation. These are the type of issues that a well-thought out risk financing strategy, which includes the use of a captive, is intended to alleviate.

An organisation that self-insures an exposure to loss, such as professional liability or workers’ compensation, must account for these losses as loss contingencies on its income statement (ASC 450). The organisation must, therefore, accrue for these expected losses for the fiscal period in question as a business expense, which is offset as a liability for retained loss reserves on its balance sheet.

Any manipulation of this accrual, such as understatement of expected losses caused by an overstatement of the discount rate, which cannot be supported by market conditions, or the use of a confidence level loss forecast that clearly does not recognise the variability in actuarial projections, puts the organisation at financial risk. Under-reserving claims is also a source of concern.

These aggregated issues may cause budgetary instability resulting in earnings volatility. In summary, corrupted loss data caused by systemic claims management issues, or manipulation of actuarial assumptions, could lead to an understatement of expected losses. This, in turn, may negatively affect EBITDA, creating a liquidity issue for the organisation when actual losses to be paid exceed expected losses. EBITDA volatility may result in a credit rating downgrade increasing the cost of capital, or at a minimum creating a major distraction for management caused by budgetary instability.

This is how financial exposure is better managed with a captive. A captive is a regulated legal subsidiary with its own board of directors. A director has a duty of care, loyalty, and candor. Specifically, this duty of care requires the director be informed about material captive operations including financial-and risk-related information to allow the director to be able to exercise the appropriate due diligence to make decisions and provide the required oversight of captive operations.

There are a series of regulators requiring transparency and knowledgeable oversight by the captive’s board, including the broker/consultant, actuary, auditor, lawyer, captive manager, and even the captive domicile regulator. They all provide a layer of analysis, oversight and regulatory input that may not otherwise be available to guide the parent’s risk financing strategy.

For example, a firm that is self-insured does not have to use an actuary to calculate expected losses. While the firm’s external auditor and internal audit function are absolutely an important source of risk management oversight, they are not solely focused on risk financing issues with the same acuity that a captive regulator, actuary, auditor, broker consultant and management company would have.

Again, if the captive director is exercising their legal duty of care then they must be informed on the key operational, financial, and strategic issues facing the captive to be able to make reasonable and knowledgeable decisions in the best interest of the captive. In the spirit of Sarbanes Oxley, an act passed by US Congress in 2002 to protect investors from the possibility of fraudulent accounting activities by corporations, the director must be present at board, and relevant committee, meetings and given the appropriate risk management information to be able to ask questions and raise causes for concern about the captive’s claims management programme (data source) and expected loss forecasts. These include key variables such as discount rates, confidence level variations, and actuarial methods.

This is an important aspect of captive due diligence required to assist the insured/member or parent in ensuring that its risk financing programme is meeting its goals of maintaining liquidity; to ensure ability to pay for losses; and to reduce the cost of risk and earnings volatility. The parent and captive risk management actions are interconnected and in this case, the captive’s management process is driving the parent’s due diligence, positively impacting the parent’s risk financing goals. These risk financing goals are established to enable the parent to grow stakeholder value, and at the end of the day protect its reputation. In other words, enabling the success of ERM.

The captive’s actuary, auditor, captive manager, broker/consultant, and attorney are the captive’s human capital. The captive is also the product of an active and knowledgeable board, supported by this human capital that ultimately ensures that the captive is seeking and receiving an appropriate level of funding to pay its expenses and losses.

The captive board meeting, therefore, is an appropriate and efficacious conduit by which the directors are provided information about the appropriate steps taken to address risk data issues (audit of the claims reserving practices), expected loss variability, and the application of the appropriate financial variables and actuarial methodology needed to protect the parent’s financial stability and reputation.

This is a first step in building a transformative captive insurance programme that positively impacts its parent’s operations. Captives are expensive to operate. They require capital and an operational infrastructure to manage them properly. Most importantly, the captive requires the time and attention of the parent’s senior officers, who sit on the captive’s board, creating a critical risk communication pipeline. Without captive management best practices, it is less likely that the captive can contribute to its parent’s long-term growth in value.

The captive’s return on investment, therefore, should not be simply benchmarked against the parent’s cost of capital. The parent must also consider the value of avoiding risk management and financing surprises that force the parent to seek funds to pay for unexpected losses that cause budgetary instability and adversely impact its EBITDA, drawing the interest of the rating agencies.

A credit rating review requires a complex process. Certainly, any threat to EBITDA warrants careful review. The captive can offer a progressive risk financing solution to address this issue, as well as other ERM issues, enabling the parent organisation to grow value over the long term and enhance its reputation.

To view the full issue in which this article appeared - Click Here



Atlas secures captive manager approval in Texas
Atlas Insurance Management has received approval from the Texas Department of Insurance to act as a Read more

TRA Stanford to acquire PHT Services
The Risk Authority Stanford (TRA) is expected to acquire PHT Services (PHTS), following unanimous ap Read more

UK finally triggers Brexit
The UK has officially pulled the trigger on Article 50 and commenced the two-year negotiation proces Read more

XL Catlin bolsters structured risk solutions team
XL Catlin has named Isa Ennadifi as senior underwriter of structured risk solutions, based in London Read more

Bespoke Software launches inTell Captive
Bermuda-based Bespoke Software has launched the new business intelligence software solution to help Read more

Captive Insurance Times site map
Home
Home

Sitemap

Issue archive
Back issues online
Recruitment
Recruitment
Events andtraining
Upcoming events

Upcoming training

Company info
About us

Contact us


Copyright (C) 2013 Black Knight Media Ltd. All rights reserved. No reproduction without prior authorization