Loading...
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/149693
|
| Title: | 淨值比作為保險業法定資本監理指標之妥適性 —兼論適用於總體審慎監理之必要性
Study on Suitability for Adopting the Net Worth Ratio as an Insurance Regulatory Capital Standard — Further Discussion on Whether Applying it to Macroprudential Supervision |
| Authors: | 邱炯能
Chiu, Chiung-Neng |
| Contributors: | 林建智
Lin, Jan-Juy
邱炯能
Chiu, Chiung-Neng |
| Keywords: | 清償能力
資本適足性
淨值比
槓桿率
總體審慎監理
Solvency
Capital Adequacy
Net Worth Ratio
Leverage Ratio
Macroprudential Supervision |
| Date: | 2024 |
| Issue Date: | 2024-02-01 13:05:47 (UTC+8) |
| Abstract: | 依保險法第 143 條之 4 第 1 項規定：「保險業自有資本與風險資本之比率及淨值比率，不得低於一定比率。」基此，淨值比屬我國保險業法定資本監理指標，一旦低於一定比率，監理機關須依法採取相關監理行動或其他必要措施。惟淨值比僅透過業主權益與總資產之比率衡量最低資本要求，於其數值易受市場變化之影響而在短期內出現大幅波動，往往無法反映保險公司實際之清償能力，故淨值比是否適合作為保險業法定資本監理指標一問，便成為監理機關、保險公司及專家學者爭論之焦點。
基於以下三項理由，本文認為淨值比不適合作為保險業之法定資本監理指標，而應自保險法上刪除：其一，保險業資本監理之趨勢係從單一資本制度往風險資本基礎發展，而淨值比非以風險為之衡量方式本質上承襲單一資本制之精神及缺陷，與保險業資本監理趨勢相悖；其二，我國於 2026 年適用之ICS 將修正 RBC 於風險衡量上失準之缺陷，並以更加嚴格之標準檢視保險業之資本要求，故於適用 ICS 應無續行適用淨值比之理由；其三，淨值比具評估短市場風險之監理功能，惟基於保險業經營模式與資產負債結構，保險業實質之清償能力不易受到短期市場變化之影響，故淨值比無法正確反映保險業之清償能力。
此外，淨值比本質上屬於槓桿率之衡量方式，於近年來總體審慎監理之浪潮下，EIOPA參考銀行業之監理架構，指出基於總體審慎監理目的得將槓桿率作為控制系統性風險之監理工具。然而與 EIOPA 提出其他之監理工具比較，槓桿率之監理功能於總體審慎監理上仍存有未竟之處，且其監理功能得透過其他總體審慎監理工具替代，故槓桿率及淨值比於總體審慎監理上尚欠缺適用之必要性，惟考量 EIOPA 針對槓桿率之適用僅屬初步分析而非最終結論，故此議題之進一步研究仍有待後續實務及學理之發展。
According to Article 143-4, Paragraph 1 of the Insurance Act, “An insurance enterprise's ratio of total adjusted net capital to risk-based capital and the net worth ratio shall not be less than a certain ratio.” The net worth ratio is a regulatory capital standard of insurance industry, failure of which may lead to regulatory actions by supervisory authority. While the net worth ratio means the owner's equity divided by total assets, its value may easily affected by market changes and fluctuate significantly in a short term, which cannot measure the insurance’s solvency precisely. As a consequence, whether the net worth ratio is suitable as an insurance regulatory capital standard, has debated intensely among regulatory authority, insurance companies, and scholars.
For the three following reason, this paper holds that the net worth ratio is unsuitable as a regulatory capital standard in the insurance industry, and should be eliminated from Insurance Act. The historical changes of insurance regulatory capital standard is shifting from Uniform Capital Ratio approach to Risk Based Capital approach (RBC). But the non-risk based approach of net worth ratio inherits the spirit and shortcomings of Uniform Capital Ratio, which is contrary to the threads of insurance capital standard. Secondly, the Insurance Capital Standard (ICS) will be applied in our country in 2026, which will fix the inaccuracy of risk measurement of RBC and impose stricter requirements. As a result, when the is ICS applied in 2026, there should be no reason to apply the net worth ratio continually. Third, the supervisory function in assessing of net worth ratio is assessing the short-term market risks, while the unique business model and asset-liability structure of insurance industry make itself minorly impacted by short-term market changes.
Net worth ratio is one of the measure methods of leverage ratio, and in the threads of macroprudential supervision, European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) has referenced the regulatory framework of the banking industry and considered the leverage ratio be used as a macroprudential tool to control systemic risks. While compared with other potential macroprudential tools and measurement proposed by EIOPA, the function of leverage ratio has some deficiencies and could be replaced by other macroprudential tools and measures. As a result, this paper holds that there is no necessity for applying the leverage ratio (or net worth ratio) in macroprudential supervision. While consider the application of the leverage ratio is only a preliminary analysis rather than a final conclusion for EIOPA, the conclusion of this issue remains more academic research. |
| Reference: | 中文部分
一、專書
1.鄭榮治、郭榮堅，壽險數理要義：精算師入門基石，6版，2020年12月。
2.蔡政憲、高渭川、許文彥、梁正德、洪炳輝、張士傑、莊聲和、喬治華、黃芳文，保險業財務評估與監理，修訂1版，2013年1月。
3.鄭濟世，保險監管之理論與實務，2014年5月。
4.張士傑、蔡政憲，從學術理論到監理實務，2009年1月。
5.黃昱程，貨幣銀行學原理，6版，2019年7月。
6.張明輝，大會計師教你從財報數字看懂產業本質，2020年8月。
7.許文彥，保險學—風險管理與保險，修訂7版，2020年7月。
8.簡松棋，保險會計原理與實務，2006年1月。
9.陳錦村，風險管理制度與實務，2022年7月。
10.巴曙松、朱元倩、金玲玲，巴塞爾III與金融監管大變革，2015年10月。
11.李榮謙，新時代的貨幣銀行學概要，2版，2014年9月。
12.鄭濟世，我國壽險業資本適足性之研究，1998年12月。
二、書之篇章
1.謝人俊、吳宗錠，槓桿操作在金融危機中扮演之角色，全球金融危機專輯，增訂版，頁215-224，99年3月。
三、期刊論文
1.李照聖，解析壽險業金融資產重分類，月旦會計實務研究，59期，頁37-46，2022年11月。
2.鍾丹丹、李逢暉、陳奕任，IFRS 17實務之五：投資人之瞭解與因應，會計研究月刊，420期，頁52-58，2020年11月。
3.陳賢儀、施敏智，IFRS 17下保險業之資產負債配置管理，會計研究月刊，430期，頁102-109，2021年9月。
4.林建智，論保險監理之目標，保險專刊，50期，頁180-192，1997年9月。
5.林建智，論國際保險市場自由化與監理和諧化─兼論我國保險監理革新之策略運用，國政叢刊，2022年3期，頁1-13，2002年11月。
6.郝充仁、李雅婷、周蘭瑜，壽險業自我風眼及清償能力作業評估機制之探討—作業風險為例，保險經營學報，7期，頁1-17，108年4月。
7.高秀月、簡宣博，台灣地區產險業經營風險與資本適足性之研究，華人經濟研究，3：1期，頁33-70，2005年3月。
8.莊萱如、甘雯綺，認識影子銀行的固有風險：入門與實務經驗，國際金融參考資料，66期，頁143-184，2014年6月。
9.張士傑、黃雅文、洪銳棋、曾暐筑，人壽保險公司之風險及清償能力評估：檢視利率變動型人壽保險，管理學報，35卷3期，頁333-354，2018年9月。
10.馬建堂、董小君、時紅秀，中國的槓桿率與系統性金融風險防範，財貿經濟，41卷1期，頁7-23，2016年5月。
四、學位論文
1.譚雅蓁，保險業清償能力制度之探討—以歐盟Solvency II為例，國立政治大學風險管理與保險學系碩士論文，2009年1月。
五、研究計畫
1.梁正德，國際保險業清償能力監理制度之研究，金融監督管理委員會委託研究計劃，2013年12月。
2.黃雅文，保險業資產配置之決定及其影響，財團法人保險安定基金委託研究計畫，2011年11月。
3.黃淑君，總體審慎監理時代中央銀行為戶金融穩定之實務與挑戰，中央銀行金檢處出國報告，2011年8月。
4.莊治能，Basel III國際流動性管理新規定（LCR及NSFR）之探討—兼論瑞士LCR導入經驗，中央銀行業務局出國報告，2013年4月。
5.周正山，參加金融穩定學院（FSI）「金融穩定議題研討會」出國報告，行政院金融監督管理委員會綜合規劃處出國報告，2010年2月。
6.郭照榮，Basel III對金融體系與貨幣政策之可能影響及其因應之道，中央銀行金融業務檢查處委託研究報告，2013年1月。
7.梁正德，2015 年保險公司歐洲市場研討會報告，財團法人保險事業發展中心，2015年9月。
8.陳俐君，保險業之風險管理及其監理之研究，行政院金融監督管理委員會保險局，2005年10月。
六、政府與民間組織文書
1.中央銀行，從法定用途資金規範說明銀行對流動資產之需求，2019年4月，取自：
https://www.cbc.gov.tw/tw/cp-432-84980-4A34D-1.html
2. 中華民國銀行商業同業公會全國聯合會，銀行風險管理實務範本—資產負債管理分論及案例彙編，2016年4月，取自：
https://reurl.cc/prn7jl
3.中華民國人壽保險商業同業公會，我國投資型保險商品發展介紹，2019年1月，取自：
http://www.lia-roc.org.tw/index03/Invest.pdf。
4.勤業眾信，金融工具：攤銷後成本及減損，2010年9月，取自：
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/tw/Documents/audit/IFRS/tw-N029.pdf
5.勤業眾信，渡過難關：亞太地區保險清償能力資本要求動態更新，2022年7月，取自：
https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/tw/Documents/financial-services/rp20220518-insurance-solvency-capital-requirements-update-asia-report-tc.pdf
6.資誠聯合會計師事務所，保險公司自我風險與償付能力評估，2013年8月，取自：
https://www.pwccn.com/zh/consulting/consulting-insurance-orsa-may2013.pdf
七、研討會資料
1.林建智，保險險業資本適足監理之演化與辯證，保險業清償能力與資本監理制度，2022年台灣保險法學會學術研討會。
2.彭金隆，壽險業資本監理與財務會計，保險業清償能力與資本監理制度，2022年台灣保險法學會學術研討會。
英文部分
一、專書
1.Marrison, Christopher (2002), THE FUNDAMENTALS OF RISK MEASUREMENT, McGraw Hill
二、期刊論文
1.Kahane, Yehuda, Capital adequacy and the regulation of financial intermediaries, 1 JOURNAL OF BANKING AND FINANCE 207 (1977)
2.Cummins, J. David & Sommer, David W., Capital and risk in property-liability insurance markets, 20 JOURNAL OF & FINANCE 1069 (1996)
3.Baranoff, Etti G. & Sager, Thomas W., The Relations Among Asset Risk, Product Risk, and Capital in the Life Insurance Industry, 26 JOURNAL OF BANKING & FINANCE 1181 (2002)
4.Gatzert, Nadine & Wesker, Hannah, A Comparative Assessment of Basel II/III and Solvency II, 37 THE GENEVA PAPERS ON RISK AND INSURANCE - ISSUES AND PRACTICE 539 (2012)
5.Chodorow-Reich, Gabriel & Ghent, Andra & Haddad , Valentin, Asset Insulators, 34 THE REVIEW OF FINANCIAL STUDIES 1509 (2021)
6.Möhlmann, Axel, Interest rate risk of life insurers: Evidence from accounting data, 50 FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT 587 (2019)
7.Eling, Martin & Pankoke, David A., Systemic Risk in the Insurance Sector-A Review and Directions for Future Research, 19 RISK MANAGEMENT AND INSURANCE REVIEW 249 (2016)
三、政府與國際組織文書
1.BASEL COMMITTEE ON BANKING SUPERVISION (BCBS), PRINCIPLE FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF INTEREST RATE RISK (July, 2004), available at
https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs108.pdf
2.BASEL COMMITTEE ON BANKING SUPERVISION (BCBS), BASEL III: A GLOBAL REGULATORY FRAMEWORK FOR MORE RESILIENT BANKS AND BANKING SYSTEMS (December, 2010), available at
https://www.bis.org/publ/bcbs189.pdf
3.BASEL COMMITTEE ON BANKING SUPERVISION (BCBS), BASEL III: FINALISING POST-CRISIS REFORMS (December, 2017), available at
https://www.bis.org/bcbs/publ/d424.pdf
4.EUROPEAN INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL PENSIONS AUTHORITY (EIOPA), Systemic risk and macroprudential policy in insurance (December, 2018), available at
https://web.actuaries.ie/sites/default/files/erm-resources/003systemic_risk_and_macroprudential_policy_in_insurance.pdf
5.EUROPEAN INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL PENSIONS AUTHORITY (EIOPA), OTHER POTENTIAL MACROPRUDENTIAL TOOLS AND MEASURES TO ENHANCE THE CURRENT FRAMEWORK (December, 2018), available at
https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/system/files/2020-02/eiopa_other_potential_macroprudential_tools.pdf
6.EUROPEAN INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL PENSIONS AUTHORITY (EIOPA), SOLVENCY II TOOLS WITH MACROPRUDENTIAL IMPACT (May, 2018), available at
https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/system/files/2021-11/solvency_ii_tools_with_macroprudential_impact_0.pdf
7.EUROPEAN INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL PENSIONS AUTHORITY (EIOPA), OPINION TO INSTITUTIONS OF THE EU ON THE HARMONISATION OF RECOVERY AND RESOLUTION FRAMEWORKS FOR (RE)INSURERS (February, 2019), available at
https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/publications/institutions-eu-harmonisation-recovery-and-resolution-frameworks-reinsurers_en
8.EUROPEAN INSURANCE AND OCCUPATIONAL PENSIONS AUTHORITY (EIOPA), DISCUSSION PAPER ON SYSTEMIC RISK AND MACROPRUDENTIAL POLICY IN INSURANCE, (March, 2019), available at
https://www.eiopa.europa.eu/system/files/2019-04/2019-03-29_discussionpapersystemicriskmarcoprudentialpolicyinsurance.pdf
9.INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE SUPERVISORS (IAIS), INSURANCE CORE PRINCIPLES AND COMMON FRAMEWORK FOR THE SUPERVISION OF INTERNATIONALLY ACTIVE INSURANCE GROUPS (November, 2019), available at
https://www.iaisweb.org/uploads/2022/01/191115-IAIS-ICPs-and-ComFrame-adopted-in-November-2019.pdf
10.INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE SUPERVISORS (IAIS), APPLICATION PAPER ON RESOLUTION POWERS AND PLANNING (June, 2021), available at
https://www.iaisweb.org/uploads/2022/01/210623-Application-Paper-on-Resolution-Powers-and-Planning.pdf
11.NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE COMMISSIONERS (NAIC), LEVEL 1 DOCUMENT: ICS VERSION 2.0 FOR THE MONITORING PERIOD (November, 2019), available at
https://www.iaisweb.org/uploads/2022/01/191120-Level-1-Document-for-ICS-Version-2.0-for-the-monitoring-period1.pdf
12.NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF INSURANCE COMMISSIONERS (NAIC), NAIC OWN RISK AND SOLVENCY ASSESSMENT (ORSA) GUIDANCE MANUAL (November, 2022), available at
https://content.naic.org/sites/default/files/inline-files/naic-orsa-guidance-manual-final.pdf
13.INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF), GUIDANCE TO ASSESS THE SYSTEMIC IMPORTANCE OF FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (October, 2009), available at
https://www.imf.org/external/np/g20/pdf/100109.pdf
14.INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF), MACROPRUDENTIAL AND MICROPRUDENTIAL POLICIES: TOWARD COHABITATION (June, 2013), available at
https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2013/sdn1305.pdf
15.INTERNATIONAL MONETARY FUND (IMF), THE INSURANCE SECTOR–TRENDS AND SYSTEMIC RISK IMPLICATIONS (June, 2016), available at
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2795694
16.FINANCIAL STABILITY BOARD(FSB), KEY ATTRIBUTES OF EFFECTIVE RESOLUTION REGIMES FOR FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS (October, 2011), available at
https://www.fsb.org/wp-content/uploads/r_111104cc.pdf
17.EUROPEAN CENTRAL BANK, INSURERS’ INVESTMENT STRATEGIES : PRO- OR COUNTERCYCLICAL?, (July, 2019), available at
https://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/scpwps/ecb.wp2299~1d060f6979.en.pdf
18.MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (MAS), TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS FOR RBC 2 (May, 2019), available at
https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/MAS/resource/legislation_guidelines/insurance/circulars/07-19/RBC2-YE2018-Parallel-Run-Technical-SpecsClean-copy.pdf
19.MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (MAS), CONSULTATION PAPER ON PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR SYSTEMICALLY IMPORTANT INSURERS IN SINGAPORE (October, 2022), available at
https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/mas-media-library/publications/consultations/id/2022/consultation-paper--dsii-final.pdf
20.MONETARY AUTHORITY OF SINGAPORE (MAS), RESPONSE TO PUBLIC CONSULTATION ON PROPOSED FRAMEWORK FOR SYSTEMICALLY IMPORTANT INSURERS IN SINGAPORE (September, 2023), available at
https://www.mas.gov.sg/-/media/mas-media-library/publications/consultations/id/2022/response-to-consultation-paper-on-proposed-framework-for-systemically-important-insurers-in-singapor.pdf
21.BANK OF ENGLAND, THE PRUDENTIAL REGULATION AUTHORITY’S APPROACH TO INSURANCE SUPERVISION (July, 2023), available at
https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/prudential-regulation/approach/insurance-approach-2023.pdf
22.INSURANCE EUROPE, SOLVENCY II GLOSSARY (March, 2007), available at
https://piu.org.pl/public/upload/ibrowser/sol2_glossary_final_160307.pdf
23.INSURANCE EUROPE, INSURANCE-A UNIQUE SECTOR WHY INSURERS DIFFER FROM BANKS (June, 2010), available at
https://www.fecif.eu/news/FECIF545.pdf
24.INSURANCE EUROPE, WHY INSURERS DIFFER FROM BANKS (October, 2014), available at
https://www.insuranceeurope.eu/publications/488/why-insurers-differ-from-banks/
25.SYSTEMIC RISK CENTRE (SRC), HOW INSURERS DIFFER FROM BANKS-A PRIMER ON SYSTEMIC REGULATION (July, 2014), available at
https://www.systemicrisk.ac.uk/sites/default/files/downloads/publications/sp-3_1.pdf |
| Description: | 碩士
國立政治大學
風險管理與保險學系
110358021 |
| Source URI: | http://thesis.lib.nccu.edu.tw/record/#G0110358021 |
| Data Type: | thesis |
| Appears in Collections: | [風險管理與保險學系] 學位論文
|
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format | |
|---|
| 802101.pdf | | 3970Kb | Adobe PDF | 2 | View/Open |
|
All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.
|
