Seeking Alpha

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners has voted in favor of new regulations for...

The National Association of Insurance Commissioners has voted in favor of new regulations for how life insurers fix reserves for future claims in a decision that could free up billions of dollars for acquisitions, dividend increases and buybacks. However, critics, who include New York's Benjamin Lawsky, fear that insurers will become under-reserved and vulnerable to economic downturns.
Comments (8)
  • "The National Association of Insurance Commissioners, an organization that sets solvency standards for adoption by states, approved the change, with 43 of its 56 members "


    Don't these commissioners have a personal agenda?? Did we not learn from
    when the SEC fiddled with the net capital rule in 2004 which helped in the Bear Stearns collapse???
    3 Dec 2012, 05:44 AM Reply Like
  • State regulation of insurance companies was working. First we get the Fed involved, to tell MET they can't reward shareholders, and soon enough to declare MET and PRU SIFI's and start regulating them as banks.


    Now the insurance commissioners strike back by setting forces in motion to compromise capital requirements, using the same type of thinking that has made banks implode and created the financial crisis.


    If we would get the Fed off the case and leave capital requirements where they were, things would be fine.


    Insurance regulation is (or used to be) about protecting policyholders, not shareholders.
    3 Dec 2012, 05:57 AM Reply Like
  • Yes they will fail....they are no different than a bank...they will make huge mistakes....they have just do not know as they are not as transparent...
    3 Dec 2012, 06:23 AM Reply Like
  • A life insurance company's primary obligation is to its policyholders.
    Any action it takes that threatens the promise it made to the person who put their faith in the company's ability to pay it's claims is a betrayal of that trust.
    3 Dec 2012, 07:40 AM Reply Like
  • A stock owned life carrier should be looking out for its shareholders first, not policy owners, evidenced by the exiting of LTC and VA GMWB markets by the likes of Pru, MET, Hartford et. al....
    A mutual company has its duty of loyalty to its policyholders, who are the owners.
    3 Dec 2012, 01:17 PM Reply Like
  • That's true, but regulators should be looking out for policyholders, first, last and foremost.
    3 Dec 2012, 01:29 PM Reply Like
  • How much do you think this has to do with improving pay packages for top execs?
    3 Dec 2012, 01:30 PM Reply Like
  • I bet it has more to do with chasing they can invest in more risky returns...and we know how that ends up...
    4 Dec 2012, 08:56 AM Reply Like
DJIA (DIA) S&P 500 (SPY)