Email
Newsletters
R&I ONE®
(weekly)
The best articles from around the web and R&I, handpicked by R&I editors.
WORKERSCOMP FORUM
(weekly)
Workers' Comp news and insights as well as columns and features from R&I.
RISK SCENARIOS
(monthly)
Update on new scenarios as well as upcoming Risk Scenarios Live! events.

Sponsored Content by AIG

Global Program Premium Allocation: Why It Matters More Than You Think

Addressing the key challenges of global premium allocation is critical for all parties.
By: | October 1, 2014 • 5 min read

SponsoredContent_AIG
Ten years after starting her medium-sized Greek yogurt manufacturing and distribution business in Chicago, Nancy is looking to open new facilities in Frankfurt, Germany and Seoul, South Korea. She has determined the company needs to have separate insurance policies for each location. Enter “premium allocation,” the process through which insurance premiums, fees and other charges are properly allocated among participants and geographies.

Experts say that the ideal premium allocation strategy is about balance. On one hand, it needs to appropriately reflect the risk being insured. On the other, it must satisfy the client’s objectives, as well as those of regulators, local subsidiaries, insurers and brokers., Ensuring that premium allocation is done appropriately and on a timely basis can make a multinational program run much smoother for everyone.

At first blush, premium allocation for a global insurance program is hardly buzzworthy. But as with our expanding hypothetical company, accurate, equitable premium allocation is a critical starting point. All parties have a vested interest in seeing that the allocation is done correctly and efficiently.

SponsoredContent_AIG“This rather prosaic topic affects everyone … brokers, clients and carriers. Many risk managers with global experience understand how critical it is to get the premium allocation right. But for those new to foreign markets, they may not understand the intricacies of why it matters.”

– Marty Scherzer, President of Global Risk Solutions, AIG

Basic goals of key players include:

  • Buyer – corporate office: Wants to ensure that the organization is adequately covered while engineering an optimal financial structure. The optimized structure is dependent on balancing local regulatory, tax and market conditions while providing for the appropriate premium to cover the risk.
  • Buyer – local offices: Needs to have justification that the internal allocations of the premium expense fairly represent the local office’s risk exposure.
  • Broker: The resources that are assigned to manage the program in a local country need to be appropriately compensated. Their compensation is often determined by the premium allocated to their country. A premium allocation that does not effectively correlate to the needs of the local office has the potential to under- or over-compensate these resources.
  • Insurer: Needs to satisfy regulators that oversee the insurer’s local insurance operations that the premiums are fair, reasonable and commensurate with the risks being covered.

According to Marty Scherzer, President of Global Risk Solutions at AIG, as globalization continues to drive U.S. companies of varying sizes to expand their markets beyond domestic borders, premium allocation “needs to be done appropriately and timely; delay or get it wrong and it could prove costly.”

“This rather prosaic topic affects everyone … brokers, clients and carriers,” Scherzer says. “Many risk managers with global experience understand how critical it is to get the premium allocation right. But for those new to foreign markets, they may not understand the intricacies of why it matters.”

SponsoredContent_AIGThere are four critical challenges that need to be balanced if an allocation is to satisfy all parties, he says:

Tax considerations

Across the globe, tax rates for insurance premiums vary widely. While a company will want to structure allocations to attain its financial objectives, the methodology employed needs to be reasonable and appropriate in the eyes of the carrier, broker, insured and regulator. Similarly, and in conjunction with tax and transfer pricing considerations, companies need to make sure that their premiums properly reflect the risk in each country. Even companies with the best intentions to allocate premiums appropriately are facing greater scrutiny. To properly address this issue, Scherzer recommends that companies maintain a well documented and justifiable rationale for their premium allocation in the event of a regulatory inquiry.

Prudent premiums

Insurance regulators worldwide seek to ensure that the carriers in their countries have both the capital and the ability to pay losses. Accordingly, they don’t want a premium being allocated to their country to be too low relative to the corresponding level of risk.

Data accuracy

Without accurate data, premium allocation can be difficult, at best. Choosing to allocate premium based on sales in a given country or in a given time period, for example, can work. But if you don’t have that data for every subsidiary in a given country, the allocation will not be accurate. The key to appropriately allocating premium is to gather the required data well in advance of the program’s inception and scrub it for accuracy.

Critical timing

When creating an optimal multinational insurance program, premium allocation needs to be done quickly, but accurately. Without careful attention and planning, the process can easily become derailed.

Scherzer compares it to getting a little bit off course at the beginning of a long journey. A small deviation at the outset will have a magnified effect later on, landing you even farther away from your intended destination.

Figuring it all out

AIG has created the award-winning Multinational Program Design Tool to help companies decide whether (and where) to place local policies. The tool uses information that covers more than 200 countries, and provides results after answers to a few basic questions.

SponsoredContent_AIG

This interactive tool — iPad and PC-ready — requires just 10-15 minutes to complete in one of four languages (English, Spanish, Chinese and Japanese). The tool evaluates user feedback on exposures, geographies, risk sensitivities, preferences and needs against AIG’s knowledge of local regulatory, business and market factors and trends to produce a detailed report that can be used in the next level of discussion with brokers and AIG on a global insurance strategy, including premium allocation.

“The hope is that decision-makers partner with their broker and carrier to get premium allocation done early, accurately and right the first time,” Scherzer says.

For more information about AIG and its award-winning application, visit aig.com/multinational.

This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with AIG. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.
SponsoredContent_AIG

AIG is a leading international insurance organization serving customers in more than 130 countries.
Share this article:

Brokers

Broker/Client Disconnect

Employers say their brokers are not providing the value-added services they really want.
By: | October 1, 2014 • 3 min read
Broker disconnect

Brokers think they are offering clients the types of value-added services they want, but many employers apparently don’t agree.

Slightly more than half (53 percent) of 3,275 employers surveyed earlier this year by Zywave, a Milwaukee-based software vendor, said they are not satisfied with the information their broker provides them on regulatory and legislative updates.

Advertisement




Nearly all (92 percent) of employers said they wanted those updates, according to the Zywave 2014 Broker Services Survey.

Additionally, 88 percent said they wanted assistance with workplace wellness programs, but 56 percent said their broker was “not delivering to their expectations.” And, while 65 percent of employers want brokers to help them develop employee handbooks, 85 percent said their broker is not doing a satisfactory job.

There is a disconnect between how the brokers believe service distinguishes them and the way that employers feel they are being serviced, said Dave O’Brien, Zywave’s chief executive officer.

“That speaks to the discovery process many brokers have when they are courting prospective clients,” O’Brien said. “They tell them about the history of the firm and about their people, but in reality, they should be asking employers about their own histories, problems, and what they may need from the broker.”

The brokers that ask these kinds of questions up-front, and then periodically check with clients to see if they are meeting their needs, stand to beat out competitors as employers increasingly seek greater guidance, he said.

Smaller brokers may not be able to provide these additional services on their own, but they can leverage technology to offer services similar to those of larger brokers, he said.

Kelly Hagan, director of operations, employee benefits at Assured Neace Lukens in Louisville, Ky., said that brokers “should be making a concerted effort to get information” to employers.

“For smaller employers, the person handling benefits is often wearing multiple hats and has limited time to work on benefits on a day-to-day basis,” Hagan said. “So I do think it’s incumbent upon us to make sure that clients understand that we can provide resources to them, though sometimes with time constraints or business priorities, they may not always avail themselves to those services.”

Some clients don’t know how to ask for what they need, said Denise Ashford, vice president at Sweet & Baker Insurance Brokers in San Francisco.

“Sometimes brokers have the best intentions, but in fact, we don’t take the time to actually speak with the clients to diagnose what they are lacking, and that can send us down that rabbit hole of offering services they don’t need or care about,” said Ashford, who has surveyed clients to better target their needs.

Other survey results include:

• Nearly six in 10 (59 percent) employers are unsatisfied with the information they receive that could help reduce the frequency and expense of claims.

• Nearly two-thirds (63 percent) of employers are unsatisfied with their current broker’s assistance in creating benefit statements.

Advertisement




According to the survey, employers listed their top three risk management challenges as keeping up-to-date on regulatory changes, controlling workers’ compensation costs and educating employees about safety.

They ranked their top three employee benefit challenges as managing health care costs; keeping in compliance and up-to-date on changing legislation, including health care reform; and benefits administration and employee benefits education.

Katie Kuehner-Hebert is a freelance writer based in California. She has more than two decades of journalism experience and expertise in financial writing. She can be reached at riskletters@lrp.com.
Share this article:

Sponsored Content by ACE Group

Contractors Face Complex Insurance Scenario

Contractors should consider many factors when building a multinational insurance program.
By: | October 1, 2014 • 5 min read
SponsoredContent_ACE

With today’s expanding global marketplace, U.S.-based construction companies naturally seek growth opportunities in foreign countries. For instance, China has been on a decades-long building spree. Middle Eastern nations continue to invest in massive developments. Cross-border construction activity among developed countries, particularly in Europe and Japan, remains robust.

That’s the good news for U.S. contractors considering or already involved in global projects. On the flip side, it’s critical to realize that international opportunities present different challenges than domestic projects.

Construction services represent a significant portion of global trade. World exports of construction rose 2% (to $115 billion) in 2012, the World Trade Organization estimates. The European Union and Asia represent the major share of that trade. Yet, while international trade in construction is on the rise, every country retains its own laws regarding insurance, so building a multinational insurance program represents a significant challenge.

ACE’s recently published whitepaper, “Global Construction: International Opportunities, Local Risks” focuses on educating risk managers about the complexities of going global.

Key issues for contractors to consider include:

Unique challenges

SponsoredContent_ACELegally speaking, compliance for U.S. contractors operating outside the U.S. is much more complex than for their domestic operations. For example, by operating in different countries, multinational contractors must adhere to a myriad of local national laws and regulations regarding the “duty of care” they owe to the general public and other third parties. While most of the developed world has established employer duty-of-care legislation, the majority of the countries where many of these new global projects are available have not. A contractor’s insurance program should be flexible enough to handle claims in several different jurisdictions and provide adequate coverage for awards granted in emerging, as well as developed, legal jurisdictions.

Continuity of coverage across borders

For projects in foreign countries, a proactive risk management strategy should not only address the wide range of exposures typical in a given construction project, but also the impact that the differing local laws and regulations may have on the insurance coverage. For example, a contractor may have to obtain local insurance policies for various lines of business to cover the risks associated with its operations and to be compliant with local insurance requirements.

Building multinational solutions

SponsoredContent_ACEA multinational program using “non-admitted” coverage can be a cost-effective alternative to local coverage. Such non- admitted coverage is usually arranged in the parent company’s home country to insure exposures in other countries. Some countries, however, don’t allow non-admitted coverage, while others may allow it subject to conditions such as prior approval. In the past the threshold question was whether non-admitted insurance could be used, but today companies should also consider potential changes in enforcement practices as well as evolving regulations.

Local services can be crucial

Besides compliance issues, companies should address issues such as how local claims will be handled and paid, and which other local services they may need in the event of a claim or incident. For example, companies building projects in the European Union may want to purchase environmental coverage that responds to the demands of the European Environmental Liability Directive in order to provide proper insurance protection for potential liability associated with damage to the environment or natural resources. On a broader level, catastrophe planning should be part of a global risk management strategy.

Public/private partnerships may bring new risks

Another consideration for contractors revolves around project structure. Typically in the U.S., construction projects have been driven either by the owners or the contractors and the insurance coverage reflected that through an owner- or contractor-controlled insurance program (OCIP/CCIP). Today, while more U.S. projects are being structured as public-private partnerships, because the structure is more common in Europe, U.S. contractors considering projects abroad may encounter it for the first time. Public-private partnerships raise questions about how risks and liabilities are apportioned among the parties, so contractors may find themselves sharing responsibility for risks that are not typically part of a standard project, or have increased exposures for professional liability.

M&As can impact insurance programs

SponsoredContent_ACEWith the growth of the global construction economy, and the rising need for the development or improvement of infrastructure in emerging economies, an increasingly multinational approach has led to consolidation and merger-and-acquisition activity in the construction marketplace. As this trend continues, companies also need to consolidate their insurance programs to achieve better efficiency by individual lines of business and to meet insurance requirements in different countries.

The takeaway: local risks, global solution

For contractors working in more than one country, maintaining consistent insurance coverage across borders while controlling costs clearly presents a number of challenges. By using a controlled master policy and admitted insurance from local carriers, contractors potentially gain greater insight into their claims trends and an increased ability to identify locations experiencing significant losses. With this information, contractors also will be in a better position to take corrective action and reduce losses.

Finally, while varying insurance regulations and markets must be addressed, contractors should evaluate the insurance carrier, its experience and presence in foreign markets and its relationships with local insurers around the world. When it comes to international construction projects, the right insurance coverage will play a crucial role in long-term success.

To learn more about how to manage global contracting risks, read the ACE whitepaper: “Global Construction: International Opportunities, Local Risks.”

This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with ACE Group. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.

With operations in 54 countries, ACE Group is one of the largest multiline property and casualty insurance companies in the world.
Share this article: