Already have an account?  Log In
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Three cheers for fed regulation, insurers cry

by: Darla Mercado
published: Nov 13, 2008
Citing better global representation and effective consumer protection, insurance executives sang the praises of federal regulation of the industry today.
''Ultimately, the consumer ought to benefit from greater regulation, provided that we heed the lesson of the current crisis,'' said Christopher ''Kip'' Condron, president and chief executive of AXA Financial Inc. in New York.
He spoke at the 19th annual Executive Conference for the Life Insurance Industry in New York. Accounting firm Ernst & Young LLP and law firm Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP, both in New York, sponsored the event.

The nationalization of American International Group Inc. of New York points to a convergence of two issues: regulatory reform and a solution to the retirement crisis, Mr. Condron observed.

''With the federal takeover of AIG, we have our first nationalized multiline insurer,'' he said.

''Clearly, it's time for the industry and the government to work together or spiral into poverty. Regulatory reform needs to be top of mind for Congress in the coming months,'' Mr. Condron said.

Different standards across the United States don't help customers, while a ''level playing field'' of federal regulation would favor well-run companies, he noted.

It would also help with global perceptions of the U.S. insurance market. ''We've been criticized abroad for not having a single regulatory voice or entity that can speak for the market,'' Mr. Condron said.

The federal help extended to AIG, which has ballooned to about $150 billion, plus help that may be extended to other insurers, points the way to some form of federal regulation, he added.

That opinion was echoed by Gary C. Bhojwani, president and CEO of Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America in Minneapolis, who said that the carrier is a consistent public supporter of the optional federal charter.

''There was more progress made on the life side this year, and I think it has a real chance of passing and becoming a reality,'' he said.

The current proposal for a federal office of insurance information was a reasonable start as an interim step, Mr. Bhojwani added.


Get Updates Via Email

Get monthly updates about the debate over an Optional Federal Charter.
Sign up Today! ... Click Here
National Regulatory Modernization for Insurers FAQ's
Would the proposals create a big new bureaucracy?
Would these national regulatory proposals increase compliance costs?
Would the creation of a national regulator help incumbent companies make larger profits?
Is an Office of Insurance Information a good idea as a precursor to a national insurance market?
What would the proposed national regulators affect state regulation? What about federalism?
Will states lose tax revenue under an Optional Federal Charter?
Would insurance companies withdraw from certain parts of the country under an OFC?
Would there be a ''race to the bottom''?
Would an OFC subject insurance companies to both federal and state laws, thus increasing the overall burden of regulation?
What is really wrong with the current state system?
Will an OFC help the development of new insurance products?
Is the insurance industry unified in its support of OFC?
Would local insurance agents go out of business under an OFC?
Supporters and opponents of an OFC both cite Illinois as an example of what the market would look like under an OFC. What is the Illinois market like?
What would an OFC do for America’s international competitiveness?
Do other developed countries have something like an OFC?
Would an OFC protect consumers from insurance fraud?
Will it confuse consumers?
Do government-set rates protect consumers?
J. Robert Hunter of the Consumer Federation of America has presented a range of data showing that publicly held insurance companies are relatively safe investments and have become safer in recent years. Does this prove that the insurance industry is reaping more profits than it deserves and should not be rewarded with an Optional Federal Charter?
Does a ''revolving door'' between the industry and regulators prove that the insurance industry and the state regulatory systems are corrupt or that the insurance industry ''owns'' state regulators?
Is an OFC the only way America could liberalize its insurance markets?
What are some alternatives to an OFC?
Resources

You are Visitor #2295874 Since 2007