International GAAP® 2019: Generally Accepted Accounting Practice under International Financial Reporting Standards
Page 893
insurance contracts if that group is onerous.
An insurance contract is onerous at the date of initial recognition if the fulfilment cash
flows allocated to the contract, any previously recognised acquisition cash flows and
any cash flows arising from the contract at the date of initial recognition in total are a
net outflow. As discussed at 5 above, an entity should group such contracts separately
4514 Chapter 52
from contracts that are not onerous. To the extent that an entity has reasonable and
supportable information to conclude that all contracts in a set of contracts will be in the
same group, an entity may identify the group of onerous contracts by measuring a set of
contracts rather than individual contracts.
When a group of insurance contracts are onerous, an entity should recognise a loss
component and book the corresponding loss in profit or loss for the net outflow for the
group of onerous contracts, resulting in the carrying amount of the liability for remaining
coverage of the group being equal to the fulfilment cash flows and the contractual
service margin of the group being zero. [IFRS 17.47].
Subsequent to initial recognition, a group of insurance contracts becomes onerous (or
more onerous) if the following amounts exceed the carrying amount of the contractual
service margin:
• unfavourable changes in the fulfilment cash flows allocated to the group arising
from changes in estimates of future cash flows relating to future service; and
• for a group of insurance contracts with direct participation features, the entity’s
share of a decrease in the fair value of the underlying items.
An entity should recognise a loss in profit or loss to the extent of that excess. [IFRS 17.48].
For losses under onerous groups of insurance contracts recognised either on initial
recognition or subsequently, an entity should establish (or increase) a loss component
of the liability for remaining coverage for an onerous group depicting the losses
recognised. A ‘loss component’ means a notional record of the losses attributable to each
group of onerous insurance contracts. The liability for the expected loss is contained
within the liability for remaining coverage for the onerous group (as it is within the
fulfilment cash flows). Keeping a record of the loss component of the liability for
remaining coverage is necessary in order to account for subsequent reversals, if any, of
the onerous group and any loss component is required to be separately disclosed
(see 16.1.1 below). The loss component determines the amounts that are presented in
profit or loss as reversals of losses on onerous groups and are consequently excluded
from the determination of insurance revenue and, instead, credited to insurance service
expenses. [IFRS 17.49].
After an entity has recognised a loss on an onerous group of insurance contracts, it
should allocate: [IFRS 17.50]
• the subsequent changes in fulfilment cash flows of the liability for remaining
coverage on a systematic basis between:
• the loss component of the liability for remaining coverage; and
• the liability for remaining coverage, excluding the loss component.
• any subsequent decrease in fulfilment cash flows allocated to the group arising
from changes in estimates of future cash flows relating to future service and any
subsequent increases in the entity’s share in the fair value of the underlying items
solely to the loss component until that component is reduced to zero. An entity
should adjust the contractual service margin only for the excess of the decrease
over the amount allocated to the loss component.
Insurance contracts (IFRS 17) 4515
The subsequent changes in the fulfilment cash flows of the liability for remaining
coverage to be allocated are: [IFRS 17.51]
• estimates of the present value of future cash flows for claims and expenses released
from the liability for remaining coverage because of incurred insurance service
expenses;
• changes in the risk adjustment for non-financial risk recognised in profit or loss
because of the release from risk; and
• insurance finance income or expenses.
The systematic allocation required above should result in the total amounts allocated to
the loss component being equal to zero by the end of the coverage period of a group of
contracts (since the loss component will have been realised in the form of incurred
claims). [IFRS 17.52].
IFRS 17 does not prescribe specific methods to track the loss component. The IASB
considered whether to require specific methods but concluded that any such methods
would be inherently arbitrary. The IASB therefore decided to require an entity to make
a systematic allocation of changes in the fulfilment cash flows for the liability for
remaining coverage that could be regarded as affecting either the loss component or the
rest of the liability. [IFRS 17.BC287].
Tracking the loss component of the liability for remaining coverage for each group of
onerous contracts will be a new and complex task, particularly for many life insurers.
Most non-life insurers will be familiar with the concept of running off provisions for
unearned premiums and unexpired risks, and we expect that tracking a loss component
should be easier for short duration contracts. Maintaining the loss component is not
equivalent to maintaining a negative contractual service margin.
Changes in the liability for remaining coverage due to insurance finance income or
expenses, release from risk, and incurred claims and other insurance service expenses,
need to be allocated between the loss component and the remainder of the liability for
remaining coverage on a systematic basis. An entity could allocate the effect of these
changes to the loss component in proportion to the total liability, though other bases
could be appropriate. Whichever approach is adopted, it should be applied consistently.
Changes in the liability for incurred claims are not allocated to the liability for
remaining coverage.
The treatment of onerous contracts can be illustrated in the following example.
Example 52.32: Application of the loss component for a group of onerous
contracts
An entity determines that a group of insurance contracts without direct participation features is onerous at
initial recognition. On initial recognition, the fulfilment cash flows (ignoring discounting and other
adjustments) are a net cash outflow of €50 and therefore this is recognised as a loss in profit or loss. There is
no contractual service margin. The loss component of the liability for remaining coverage is €50.
At the entity’s next reporting date, the entity calculates that the fulfilment cash flows for the liability for
remaining coverage have decreased by €60. Of this change, €40 adjusts the loss component of the liability
for remaining coverage by a credit to profit or loss. The remaining €20 reduction does not adjust the loss
component of the liability for remaining coverage. Consequently, at the reporting date, the loss component
of the liability for remaining coverage is €10 (i.e. €50 less €40).
4516 Chapter 52
8.9
Reinsurance contracts issued
A reins
urance contract is a contract issued by one entity (the reinsurer) to compensate
another entity for claims arising from one or more insurance contracts issued by that
other entity (underlying contracts). [IFRS 17 Appendix A].
The requirements for recognition and measurement of reinsurance contracts issued are
the same as for insurance contracts. This means that the issuer should make an estimate
of the fulfilment cash flows including estimates of expected future cash flows. At initial
recognition (and at each reporting date) this will include estimates of future cash flows
arising from underlying insurance contracts expected to be issued by the reinsured
entity (and covered by the issued reinsurance contract) that are within the contract
boundary of the reinsurance contract. This is because the issuer of the reinsurance
contract has a substantive obligation to provide insurance cover (i.e. services) for those
unissued policies. However, the unit of account for measurement is the reinsurance
contract rather than the underlying individual direct contracts.
8.9.1
The boundary of a reinsurance contract issued
Some reinsurance contracts issued may contain break clauses which allow either party
to cancel the contract at any time following a specified notice period. In February 2018,
the TRG members observed that, in an example of a reinsurance contract where the
reinsurer can terminate coverage at any time with a three month notice period, the
initial contract boundary would exclude cash flows related to premiums outside of that
three month notice period.19 The TRG did not discuss how to determine the contract
boundary subsequently, for example whether on day 2, if the three month notice period
had not been invoked, there was a new contract with a boundary of one day or whether
the boundary of the original contract had increased by one day.
8.9.2
Issued adverse loss development covers
For reinsurance contracts which cover events that have already occurred, but for which
the financial effect is uncertain, IFRS 17 states that the insured event is the
determination of the ultimate costs of the claim. [IFRS 17.B5]. As the claim has occurred
already, the question arises as to how insurance revenue and insurance service expense
should be presented for these insurance contracts when they are acquired in a business
combination or similar acquisition in their settlement period. More specifically, whether
insurance revenue should reflect the entire expected claims or not. This issue is not
specific to reinsurance contracts issued; it is also relevant to direct adverse development
covers issued. In February 2018, this question was submitted to the TRG and the IASB
staff stated that for insurance contracts that cover events that have already occurred but
the financial effects of which is uncertain the claims are incurred when the financial
effect is certain. This is not when an entity has a reliable estimate if there is still
uncertainty involved. Conversely this is not necessarily when the claims are paid if
certainty has been achieve prior to settlement. Accordingly, insurance revenue would
reflect the entire expected claims as the liability for remaining coverage reduces
because of services provided. If some cash flows meet the definition of an investment
component, those cash flows will not be reflected in insurance revenue or insurance
service expenses.20
Insurance contracts (IFRS 17) 4517
This results in entities accounting differently for similar contracts, depending on
whether those contracts are issued originally by the entity or whether the entity
reinsured those contracts in their settlement period. The most notable outcomes of this
distinction include:
• an entity applies the general model for contracts acquired in their settlement
period because the period over which claims could develop is longer than one year
whilst entities expect to apply the premium allocation approach for similar
contracts that they issue; and
• an entity recognises revenue for the contracts acquired in their settlement period
over the period the claims can develop, while revenue is no longer recognised over
this period for similar contracts issued.
The TRG members observed that although the requirements in IFRS 17 are clear,
applying the requirements reflects a significant change from existing practice and this
change results in implementation complexities and costs. In May 2018, the IASB staff
prepared an outreach report which included implementation concerns regarding the
subsequent treatment of insurance contracts issued and acquired in their settlement
period. The outreach report has been provided to the IASB although it is unclear what
action, if any, will be taken to address the concerns voiced by some TRG members.21
8.9.3
Determining the quantity of benefits for identifying coverage units
As discussed at 8.7.1 above, the question of how to determine the quantity of benefits
for coverage units was discussed by the TRG in both February 2018 and May 2018. In
May 2018, the TRG analysed an IASB staff paper that contained the IASB staff’s views
on sixteen examples of different types of insurance contracts.
The following examples apply the principles discussed at 8.7.1 above to specific fact
patterns for reinsurance contracts issued.22
Example 52.33: Proportional reinsurance issued
A reinsurance contract issued provides proportional cover for underlying contracts issued during the contract
period. The reinsurance contract issued is for a period of one year. Underlying contracts are written uniformly
throughout the year and are annual policies that are reasonably homogenous and provide relatively even cover
over their one-year coverage periods.
Applying the principles at 8.7.1 above the expected coverage duration of the reinsurance contract issued is
two years. This is because the reinsurer has a substantive obligation to provide services under the contract for
a period of two years as the risks attaching over a single policy year will cover two years of exposure to risk.
A valid method for determining the quantity of benefits is the amount for which the policyholder has the
ability to make a valid claim. This is because the pattern of coverage should reflect the expected pattern of
underwriting of the underlying contracts because the level of service provided depends on the number of
underlying contracts in-force. Therefore, the more contracts in force, the higher the level of service.
Example 52.34: Reinsurance adverse development of claims with claim limit
A reinsurance adverse development cover contract will pay claims in excess of a stated aggregate amount on
a group of underlying property and casualty contracts where the claim event has already been incurred. There
is a total aggregate limit to the amount payable under the contract. Because there is uncertainty in the ultimate
amount and timing of the final settlements of the underlying claims, the insured event is the determination of
the ultimate cost of settling those claims.
4518 Chapter 52
Applying the principles at 8.7.1 above the expected coverage duration would be the period from inception of
the contract to the time at which the limit of cover is expected to be reached, adjusted for expected lap
ses, if
any. Valid methods for determining the quantity of benefits are:
• 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; or
• comparing the expected amount of underlying claims covered in the period with the expected amount of
underlying claims remaining to be covered in future periods.
A straight-line method over the expected coverage duration might not be valid because it would not reflect
the different levels of cover provided across periods.
Example 52.35: Reinsurance adverse development of claims without claim limit
A reinsurance adverse development cover contract will pay claims in excess of a stated aggregate amount on
a group of underlying property and casualty contracts where the claim event has already been incurred. There
is no total aggregate limit to the amount payable under the contract. Because there is uncertainty in the
ultimate amount and timing of the final settlements of the underlying claims, the insured event is the
determination of the ultimate cost of settling those claims.
Applying the principles at 8.7.1 above the expected coverage duration would be the period to when the
financial effect of the claims become certain. This may be before the claims are paid if certainty has been
achieved prior to the actual payment. An entity will need to estimate the expected duration of the period in
which claims will be made and payments will be made to estimate the fulfilment cash flows. Valid methods
for determining the quantity of benefits are:
• equal benefits in each coverage period, which would end at the date of the last expected settlement
payment; or
• compare the expected amount of underlying claims covered in the period with the expected amount of
underlying claims remaining to be covered in future periods; or
• if the underlying claims were of equal size, comparing the number of underlying claims covered in the
period with the number of underlying claims remaining to be covered in future periods.
8.10 Insurance contracts issued by mutual entities
A mutual entity accepts risks from each policyholder and pools that risk. However,
policyholders rather than shareholders hold the residual interest in a mutual entity. The