Book Read Free

International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards

Page 892

by International GAAP 2019 (pdf)


  • IFRS 17 established a principle (to reflect the services provided in a period under a

  group of insurance contracts), not detailed requirements, and that it would not be

  possible to develop detailed requirements that would apply appropriately to the

  wide variety of insurance products existing globally.

  • The determination of coverage units is not an accounting policy choice but

  involves judgement and estimates to best achieve the principle of reflecting the

  services provided in each period. Those judgements and estimates should be

  applied systematically and rationally.

  • The analysis of the examples in the IASB Staff paper depends on the fact patterns

  in that paper, and would not necessarily apply to other fact patterns. In addition,

  which method would best reflect the services provided in each period would be a

  matter of judgement based on facts and circumstances.

  • In considering how to achieve the principle, the TRG members observed:

  • the period in which an entity bears insurance risk is not necessarily the same

  as the insurance coverage period;

  • expectations of lapses of contracts are included in the determination of

  coverage units because they affect the expected duration of the coverage.

  Consistently, coverage units reflect the likelihood of insured events occurring

  to the extent that they affect the expected duration of coverage for contracts

  in the group;

  • because the objective is to reflect the insurance services provided in each

  period, different levels of service across periods should be reflected in the

  determination of coverage units;

  • determining the quantity of benefits provided under a contract requires an

  entity to consider the benefits expected to be received by the policyholder,

  not the costs of providing those benefits expected to be incurred by the entity;

  • a policyholder benefits from the entity standing ready to meet valid claims, not

  just from making a claim if an insured event occurs. The quantity of benefits

  provided therefore relates to the amounts that can be claimed by the policyholder;

  • different probabilities of an insured event occurring in different periods do

  not affect the benefit provided in those periods of the entity standing ready

  to meet valid claims for that insured event. Different probabilities of different

  4510 Chapter 52

  types of insured events occurring might affect the benefit provided by the

  entity standing ready to meet valid claims for the different types of insured

  events; and

  • IFRS 17 does not specify a particular method or methods to determine the

  quantity of benefits. Different methods may achieve the objective of reflecting

  the services provided in each period, depending on facts and circumstances.

  The TRG members considered that the following methods might achieve the objective

  if they are reasonable proxies for the services provided under the groups of insurance

  contracts in each period:

  • a straight-line allocation over the passage of time, but reflecting the number of

  contracts in a group;

  • a method based on the maximum contractual cover in each period;

  • a method based on the amount the entity expects the policyholder to be able to

  validly claim in each period if an insured event occurs;

  • methods based on premiums. However, premiums will not be reasonable proxies

  when comparing services across periods if they are receivable in different periods

  to those in which insurance services are provided, or reflect different probabilities

  of claims for the same type of insured event in different periods rather than

  different levels of service of standing ready to meet claims. Additionally, premiums

  will not be reasonable proxies when comparing contracts in a group if the

  premiums reflect different levels of profitability in contracts. The level of

  profitability in a contract does not affect the services provided by the contract; and

  • methods based on expected cash flows. However, methods that result in no

  allocation of the contractual service margin to periods in which the entity is

  standing ready to meet valid claims do not meet the objective.15

  The following examples apply the principles above to specific fact patterns for

  insurance contracts issued without direct participation features. Examples for

  reinsurance contracts issued and insurance contracts with direct participation features

  are discussed at 8.9.3 and 11.2.3 below respectively.16

  Example 52.22: Credit life loan insurance

  A life insurance policy pays a death benefit equal to the principal and interest outstanding on a loan at the

  time of death. The balance of the loan will decline because of contractually scheduled payments and cannot

  be increased.

  Applying the principles above the method suggested for determining the quantity of benefits is the cover for

  the contractual balance outstanding because it is both the maximum contractual cover and the amount the

  entity expects the policyholder to be able to make a valid claim for if the insured event occurs.

  Example 52.23: Credit life product with variable amount of cover

  A credit life insurance policy where the amount payable on an insured event varies (for example, claims might

  relate to an outstanding credit card balance). In these cases the sum assured will vary over time, rather than

  simply reducing. In addition, the sum assured may be limited based on the lender’s credit limits.

  Applying the principles above, the methods suggested for determining the quantity of benefits are either the

  constant cover of the contractual maximum amount of the credit limit or cover based on the expected credit

  card balances (i.e. the amount the entity expects the policyholder to be able to make a valid claim for if the

  insured event occurs).

  Insurance contracts (IFRS 17) 4511

  Example 52.24: Mortgage loss cover

  An insurance contract provides cover for five years for default losses on a mortgage, after recovering the

  value of the property on which the mortgage is secured. The balance of the mortgage will decline because of

  contractually scheduled payments and cannot be increased.

  Applying the principles above, the methods suggested for determining the quantity of benefits are either the

  maximum contractual cover (the contractual balance of mortgage) or the amount the entity expects the

  policyholder to be able to make a valid claim for if the insured event occurs (the contractual balance of the

  mortgage less the expected value of the property).

  Example 52.25: Product warranty

  A five-year warranty coverage insurance contract provides for replacement of a purchased item if it fails to

  work properly within five years of the date of purchase. Claims are typically skewed toward the end of the

  coverage period as the purchased item ages.

  Applying the principles above, the quantity of benefits are constant over the five year coverage period if the

  price of replacement product is expected to remain constant. However, if the cost of the replacement product

  rises of the coverage period (e.g. inflation costs) then the coverage units should include expectations about

  the cost of replacing the item.

  Example 52.26: Extended product warranty

  Extended warranty policies co
ver the policyholders after the manufacturer’s original warranty has expired.

  The policies provide new for old cover in the event of a major defect to the covered asset.

  Applying the principles above, the expected coverage duration does not start until the manufacturer’s original

  warranty has expired. The policyholder cannot make a valid claim to the entity until then.

  Example 52.27: Health cover

  An insurance contract provides health cover for 10 years for specified types of medical costs up to €1m over

  the life of the contract, with the expected amount and expected number of claims increasing with age.

  Applying the principles above, the expected coverage duration is the 10 years during which cover is provided,

  adjusted for any expectations of the limit being reached during the ten years and lapses. For determining the

  quantity of benefits the following two methods are suggested:

  • comparing the contractual maximum amount that could have been claimed in the period with the

  remaining contractual maximum amount that can be claimed as a constant amount for each future

  coverage period. So, if a claim of €100,000 were made in the first year, at the end of the year the entity

  would compare €1m coverage provided in the year with coverage of €900,000 for the following nine

  years, resulting in an allocation of 1/9.1 of the contractual service margin for the first year; or

  • comparing the maximum amount that could be claimed in the period with the expected maximum

  amounts that could be claimed in each of the future coverage periods, reflecting the expected reduction

  in cover because of claims made. This approach involves looking at the probabilities of claims in

  different periods to determine the expected maximum amounts in future periods. However, in this fact

  pattern, the probability of claims in one period affects the amount of cover for future periods, thereby

  affecting the level of service provided in those periods.

  Example 52.28: Transaction liability

  A transaction liability policy will pay claims for financial losses arising as a result of breaches of

  representations and warranties made in a specified and executed acquisition transaction. The policy period

  (contract term) is for 10 years from the policy start date. The insurer will pay claims for financial losses

  reported during the 10 year policy period up to the maximum sum insured.

  Applying the principles above the insured event is the discovery of breaches of representations and warranties

  (consistent with the definition of title insurance – see 3.7 above). Coverage starts at the moment the contract

  is signed and lasts for 10 years.

  4512 Chapter 52

  Example 52.29: Combination of different types of cover

  This example assumes there are five different contracts (A-E) in a single group of insurance contracts. Each

  contract has a different combination of four coverages (accidental death, cancer diagnosis, surgery and

  inpatient treatment). Each contract has a different coverage period. Coverages have a high level of

  interdependency in the same insurance contract; if a coverage of an insurance contract in the group of

  insurance contracts lapses, other coverages of the same insurance contract lapse simultaneously. Presented in

  the table below is the summary of the contracts.

  Contract Coverage

  Coverage

  period

  Accidental

  Cancer

  Surgery Inpatient

  death

  diagnosis

  treatment

  A

  Cover of 2000

  Cover of 1000

  Cover of 500

  Cover of 50

  2 years

  B

  N/A

  Cover of 1000

  Cover of 500

  N/A 5

  years

  C

  N/A

  N/A

  Cover of 500

  Cover of 50

  2 years

  D

  N/A

  N/A

  Cover of 500

  Cover of 50

  5 years

  E

  Cover of 2000

  N/A

  N/A

  N/A 10

  years

  The entity charges the same annual premium amount for each type of cover, and the total annual premium

  amount for a contract is the sum of the premiums for each type of cover included in the contract.

  Applying the principles above the expected coverage duration is the period in which cover is provided, adjusted

  for expectations of lapses. The quantity of benefits for each contract is the sum of all the levels of cover provided.

  So, based on the cover set out in the table, the total coverage units for contract A for each year would be $3,550

  (i.e. 2,000 + 1,000 + 500 + 50) and for contract B 1,500 (i.e. 1,000 + 500). Methods which do not reflect the

  different amounts of cover provided by each contract would not appear to be valid. A method based on annual

  premiums may be valid depending on the factors mentioned in the TRG analysis above.

  In this example, in all scenarios the coverage period is the same for all coverage components so the probability

  of the insured event does not affect the coverage period and can be ignored. If the coverage period for the

  various covers is different, then the probability of the insured event becomes relevant as some coverage

  component will expire before other coverage components.

  Example 52.30: Life contingent annuity

  A life contingent pay out annuity pays a fixed monthly amount of €10 each period until the annuitant dies.

  Applying the principles above the expected coverage duration is the probability weighted average expected

  duration of the contract. The expected coverage duration is reassessed each period. The quantity of benefits

  is the fixed monthly amount of €10. An approach that does not reassess the expected coverage period would

  appear to be inconsistent with the current measurement principle of IFRS 17.

  Example 52.31: Forward purchase of fixed rate annuity

  A forward contract to buy an annuity in the future at a fixed rate. The premium is payable when the annuity

  is bought. If the policyholder dies, or cancels the contract, before the date the annuity can be purchased, the

  policyholder receives no benefit.

  Applying the principles above the entity bears insurance risk from the date the forward contract is issued, but

  the coverage period does not start until the date the annuity starts (as a claim cannot be made before that date).

  The insured event is that the policyholder lives long enough (i.e. survives) to receive payments under the annuity.

  Insurance contracts (IFRS 17) 4513

  8.7.2

  Do services provided by an insurance contract include investment-

  related services?

  In May 2018, the TRG analysed an IASB staff paper that contained the IASB staff’s views

  on whether the coverage period for insurance contracts with and without direct

  participation features should include the period in which investment-related services

  are provided. The IASB staff view was that:

  • The coverage period for contracts subject to the variable fee approach should

  include the period in which investment-related services are provided (see 11.2.3

  below). Subsequently, the IASB has tentatively decided to propose a narrow-scope

  amendment to IFRS 17 to clarify the definition of the coverage period to make the

  Standard clear (see 18 below).

  �
�� The coverage period for contracts not subject to the variable fee approach (i.e.

  those subject to the general model) should include only the period in which

  insurance services are provided (i.e. not any additional period in which

  investment-related services are provided). In the IASB staff’s view, there is not a

  sufficient link between the amounts promised to policyholders and the returns on

  assets for the entity to receive a fee from the policyholder for investment-related

  services. Instead, the assets arising from the premiums received are the entity’s

  assets that it manages on its own behalf. The amounts promised to policyholders

  other than insurance benefits (i.e. the investment components) are not related to

  service, but are instead a form of financial instrument. The difference between the

  investment income from the entity’s assets and insurance finance expenses is

  presented as a finance result.17

  The TRG members agreed that IFRS 17 identifies contracts subject to the variable fee

  approach as contracts that provide both insurance services and investment-related

  services. The consequences of this was that references in IFRS 17 to services, quantity

  of benefits and expected coverage duration related to insurance and investment-related

  services, benefits and coverage duration (see 11.2.3 below). However, most TRG

  members disagreed that insurance contracts under the general model should be treated

  as providing only insurance services.18 Some TRG members had significant concerns

  about the ‘cliff effect’ caused by the difference in contractual service margin allocation

  for contracts eligible for the variable fee approach and other contracts that the TRG

  members feel provide a similar mix of investment-related and insurance services, if

  allocation of the contractual service margin under the general model can only reflect

  the provision of insurance coverage. In our view, this issue is unresolved and it is likely

  to be discussed by the IASB at a later date.

  8.8

  Measurement of onerous contracts

  As discussed at 8 above, a loss must be recognised on initial recognition of a group of

 

‹ Prev