test achats case
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
1/19
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
2/19
European insurance and reinsurance federation, foundedin 1953
Represents around 95% of European insurance market bypremium income
Committed to creation of favourable regulatory andsupervisory framework for insurers at European andinternational level
About the CEA
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
3/19
CEA members
34 national
associations:
26 EU memberstates
6 non-EU marketsCroatia, Switzerland,Iceland, Norway,Turkey, Liechtenstein
2 associatemembers
Serbia, San Marino
3 partners
Russia, Ukraine,Kosovo
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
4/19
Contribution to the economy
More than 5 000 European (re)insurersrepresented by the CEA
Employingnearly 1 million
people
Generatingpremium
income ofover € 1 100bn
Investingalmost
€ 7 500bn
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
5/19
Stakeholdersin the international environment
European institutionsInternational institutions
AMICE
EuropeanCommission
EuropeanParliament
Council of Ministers
EIOPA
ESRB
CFOForum
Insuranceindustrystakeholders
CROForum
PEIF
ICIS
RAB
Other stakeholders
Business Europe BEUCEFAMA
IAIS
OECD FSB
G-20
National insuranceassociations
Insurancecompanies
IMF
IASB
UNI-
Europa
EWL
Age Platform Europe
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
6/19
The ECJ “Test -Achats” ruling - agenda
Insurance pricing
Gender in insurance pricingIs gender a legitimate factor in insurancepricing?
Are there other legitimate alternativefactors?Gender Directive 2004/113/ECThe ECJ Test-Achats rulingIts implications for insurers andconsumers, in theory and in practice
Age and disability in insurance pricing
Conclusions
6
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
7/19
Private insurance differs from social securityVoluntary vs compulsoryMutualisation vs solidarityFunded method vs PAYG
Market freedom, entrepreneurship & competitiveness
Private insurance is based on the principle of fair riskpricing , considering relevant factors
Differentiation according to risk exposure is a preconditionto the functioning of private insurance
7
Insurance pricing
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
8/19
Is gender a legitimate factor in insurance pricing?No, where not relevant (home)Yes, where relevant, ie correlated with risks (eg motor, life, accident,health)
Gap in life expectancy in the EU: 6,5 yearsSome diseases are sex-specific (gender medicine)
Are there reasonable alternative factors ?Motor: years with driving license, mileage, claims background,
engine size, etc.Life / health: lifestyle (alcohol, smoking, nutrition, sport habits),income, place of residence, occupation, etc.Challenges:
Not obvious, not easily verifiable, not stable, intrusive
All things being equal, gender remains a relevant risk factor 8
Gender in insurance pricing (1)
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
9/19
Gender Directive 2004/113/ECProhibition of gender-based differentiation in insurance pricing
(Art.5 §1)
MS option allowing such differentiation (Art.5 §2)
Article 5 - Actuarial factors1. Member States shall ensure that in all new contracts concluded after 21 December 2007
at the latest, the use of sex as a factor in the calculation of premiums and benefits for the purposes of insurance and related financial services shall not result in differences inindividuals' premiums and benefits.
2. Notwithstanding paragraph 1, Member States may decide before 21 December 2007 to permit proportionate differences in individuals' premiums and benefits where the use of
sex is a determining factor in the assessment of risk based on relevant and accurateactuarial and statistical data. The Member States concerned shall inform theCommission and ensure that accurate data relevant to the use of sex as a determiningactuarial factor are compiled, published and regularly updated. These Member Statesshall review their decision five years after 21 December 2007, taking into account theCommission report referred to in Article 16, and shall forward the results of this review tothe Commission.
Implementation by 21 December 2007 (27 MS opted out for life)
Gender in insurance pricing (2)
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
10/19
Gender in insurance pricing (3)
ECJ Test-Achats ruling , 1 March 2011 Art.5 §2 invalid with effect from 21 Dec 2012
The ruling addresses the structure of the Gender Directive , but
leads to challenge the way private insurance works
Judgement in Case C-236/09 - Association belge desConsommateurs Test-Achats ASBL and Others v Conseil desministres:
“On those grounds, the Court (Grand Chamber) hereby rules:
Artic le 5(2) of Cou nc il Direct iv e 2004/113/EC of 13 Decem ber2004 im plement in g the pr in ciple of equal t reatment b etweenmen and wo men in the access to and su pp ly o f goo ds andservices is in valid w ith effect from 21 Decemb er 2012. “
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
11/19
Gender in insurance pricing (4)
Implications for insurers Technical challenge for insurers to adapt (deadline)
Legal certainty needed asap
EC guidelines expected in Dec 2011
Ruling only applies to new contracts concluded for the 1 st time after 21 Dec
2012:
- ECJ’s intention and Gender Directive’s aim to prevent sudden readjustment ofthe market
- Parties’ rights and obligations fixed and exhausted at the time the contract isconcluded
- Insurers have relied/rely in good faith on Article 5(2)
- Consumers and businesses need a secure legal environment when committingthemselves
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
12/19
General implications for consumersReduced competition, innovation and consumer choiceRisk inadequate pricing: risk of premium increase, withdrawal ofproducts (adverse selection and moral hazard)
Gender in insurance pricing (5)
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
13/19
General examples of consequences for consumers Term life insurance
– Women live longer than men & pay less – Expected premium increase eg for a single young mother looking for a
term life insurance to secure her mortgage
Motor insurance – (Young) women have less driving offences and claims, and therefore
pay lower premiums – Unisex premiums may result in higher premiums for them
Annuities – Men may stop buying annuities and prefer banking/investment products
with no biometric risk coverage – Expected social impact on levels of retirement savings in the context of
financial pressure on state pension schemes
Gender in insurance pricing (6)
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
14/19
National examplesBelgium
Motor third party liability (MTPL) insurance : the introduction of unisexrates resulted in 2008 in premium reductions of 3 – 4% for young men andpremium increases of 7 – 15% for young women
The UKMotor insurance : women aged 25 and under could see the cost of coverrise by up to 25%; men of same age costs could fall by up to 10% (based onan average motor premium of £1,682 for female aged 17-22 (AA PremiumIndex), it would mean an extra £420 a year) Annuities : men (and dependants) could see a 8% reduction in benefits,while those for women could only rise by 6%Term life insurance : expected rise of up to 35-50% in the cost of cover forwomen, while men could see a fall of 0-10%
Gender in insurance pricing (7)
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
15/19
Age and disability in insurance pricing(1)
Draft Directive on age & disabilityRisk of spill-over effect
Similar structure as Gender Directive Article 2(7) :
Notwithstanding paragraph 2, in the provision of financial services, [Member States may provide that] proportionate differences in treatment on the grounds of age or disability shallnot be considered discrimination for the purposes of this Directive, if age or the healthcondition underlying the disability is a determining factor in the assessment of risk for theservice in question and this assessment is based on actuarial principles and relevant andreliable statistical data, or, [where no such data is available] for a certain health condition,on relevant and reliable medical knowledge.
Providers of financial services who decide to apply proportionate differences of treatmenton the grounds of age or disability shall provide information on the reasons justifying thosedifferences of treatment.“
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
16/19
Age and disability in insurance pricing (2)
Draft Directive on age & disabilityLegitimate, relevant factors
Motor: claims frequency/ costs vary according to age groups
Health: medical expenses grow with age
Travel incl health cover: medical treatment costs grow with age
Life: mortality grows with age
A ban on the use of these factors would lead to the end of thecurrent insurance business model, to the detriment of
consumersNeed for absolute legal certainty on use of age and disability in riskassessment and insurance pricing
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
17/19
Conclusions
Differentiation according to risk exposure is not unfair discrimination,but is a precondition for the functioning of private insurance
ECJ Test-Achats judgment raises key challenges :
Will the industry manage to adapt in time?
Which benefits for consumers, including for women? Economic and social
implications?
Current private insurance business model at stake?
Age and disability are relevant factors in insurance pricing
Need for absolute legal certainty
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
18/19
CEA publications
CEA Annual Report
The use of gender in
insurance pricing
Financial education andawareness: European
insurance industryinitiatives
European Insurance inFigures
Briefing note: Insurancedistribution
Insurance DistributionChannels in Europe
-
8/16/2019 Test Achats Case
19/19
For more information
www.cea.eu
CEA aisbl Square de Mee ûs 29 B-1000 Brussels