1 / 23

Employee Benefits A spectrum of opinion

www.bermudacaptive.bm. JUN 2 - 4, 2014. Employee Benefits A spectrum of opinion. Employee Benefits a Spectrum of Opinion. Moderator: Brian Quinn, Managing Director, Granite Management Speakers: Jim Long, VP Client Relationships, Maxis

lavada
Télécharger la présentation

Employee Benefits A spectrum of opinion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. www.bermudacaptive.bm JUN 2 - 4, 2014 Employee Benefits A spectrum of opinion

  2. Employee Benefits a Spectrum of Opinion Moderator: • Brian Quinn, Managing Director, Granite Management Speakers: • Jim Long, VP Client Relationships, Maxis • Paul Sprague, Director Chemical Ins. Co. Ltd., a BASF Company • Diane Nendick, Global Benefits Manager, Microsoft • George O’Donnell, Technical Director, Aon

  3. Employers that have used captives for U.S. EB • Currently 21 companies have received approval from the U.S. DoL • Many more pending • Regulations tightening

  4. Insured EB Funding Mechanisms Least Financially Efficient Most Financially Efficient Fully Insured Self Insured Stop Loss Captive Reinsurance Multinational Pooling

  5. Maxis Network A Fronting Insurer’s Perspective

  6. Fronting Insurers Issues • Implementation: Company and fronting insurer key issues • Situs: Solvency 2/FATCA/other issues • Coverage's: Life/LTD/Medical/Voluntary/Stop Loss • New Horizons: DB buyouts, Ret Med, PCC’s for smaller groups • Success? How to define in years 1 -5?

  7. Fronting Insurers Issues • Expenses: Local fronting & Central coordination charges • Collateral: Cost of capital/reserve relief • Limits on ceded risk: Government imposed or insurer ‘rules’ • Structure: AP in advance/Quarterly in arrears/Other? • Risk Management: Stop Loss and Cat Re?

  8. BASF Case Study A Risk Manager’s Perspective

  9. BASF Case Study (Cont’d) • US Benefit Risks – How BASF May Involve the Captive • BASF will postpone utilizing captive for ERISA-regulated benefits • Reason: ERISA & DOL impose significant requirements, e.g.: • DOL exemption • Prohibition against commissions • Independent fiduciary to review and monitor the arrangement • Time and cost to administer • Major area of initial focus: Medical Stop Loss • Indemnifies the employer, not employees • DOL does not consider Medical Stop Loss an “employee benefit”

  10. BASF Case Study (Cont’d) • Rationale for Medical Stop Loss + Captive • Exposure to “catastrophic” medical claims has increased with the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) • Elimination of liability caps for plans • Increased availability of health coverage will accelerate trend for large claims • Although BASF can absorb health benefit risk, BASF desires to establish formal risk funding mechanism • BASF already owns the risk so Medical Stop Loss will dampen year over year volatility rather than reduce costs • Including Medical Stop Loss with uncorrelated P&C risks can smooth the captive financial results over long term

  11. BASF Case Study (Cont’d) • Strategy for non-US Insurable Employee Benefits • The company is conducting a feasibility study to involve Bermuda captive • Goal is to replace “out of date” pooling arrangements with more efficient captive program • Operational advantages may include streamlining of the administrative process, greater oversight of loss analysis and risk mitigation practices • Financial advantages may include cost of financing employee benefits, and cash flow • Employee advantages may include security of highly rated partners, competitive premiums and plan designs

  12. Microsoft Case Study A Human Resource Manager’s Perspective

  13. Reasons for change • Background: • Microsoft promoted multinational pooling to international subsidiaries to optimize their international benefits spend • We had three preferred pooling networks (Generali, Insurope and IGP) • Pool performance had been very strong the last few years; however, we believed there were additional cost savings and advantages to using a captive • Captive arrangement existed for some US Benefits • Advantages we identified for using a captive: • Local subsidiary should make significant further savings on international benefits spend (remove insurer profits and reduce need for broker) • Improved corporate governance, visibility and centralized control of benefit pricing and plan design • Potential to earn greater investment income by captive on premiums and reserves that are held by captive • Diversifies the risk of our existing captives and supports corporate initiative to move toward captive-centric framework • Increases captive leverage with reinsurance market

  14. Key Principles for Change Key Principles: • Financial Savings • Subsidiary - cost savings immediately realized fully by subsidiary in terms of upfront premium reduction • Corporate – optimize international benefit spend for subsidiaries and potentially realize other efficiencies (investment income, diversified risk, and leverage in reinsurance markets) • Plan Design • No change to plan design or coverage level • Terms and conditions are equal to or better than previous local insurance contracts • Move all insured Life, Disability and Accident policies into captive where legally permissible • Encourage insured Medical policies to captive (not mandated) • Retirement plans will not be considered for captive • Administration • Local insurer is strong in local market and provides quality service and administration • No increase for ongoing administrative efforts by local subsidiaries Scope: • Local provider (if coverage not currently by captive provider) • Terms and conditions equal to or better • Role of local broker Out of Scope: • Changes to plan design or coverage level • Local subsidiary continues to manage relationship with local provider

  15. Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 How we made the change Cross functional Steering Committee Joint Executive Sponsors Joint Business Owners Project Core Team: Business Risk Management Global Benefits Captive Manager Implementation Plan • Non-pooled countries Life, Accident and Disability policies moved to captive arrangement • Medical policies moved opportunistically • Other pooled Life, Accident and Disability policies moved to captive arrangement • Medical policies moved opportunistically • Generali existing pool converted to full captive arrangement • Medical policies moved opportunistically Success measurement • Incremental savings over 3 years (actual saving less pre captive average cumulative pooling dividend) • Individual subsidiary savings range in terms of % rate reduction • Migrated subsidiaries respond 70% favorable to captive project

  16. Results Results (75 “countries” migrated to captive) • “Incremental savings over 3 years (actual saving less pre captive average cumulative pooling)” Achieved: Incremental savings almost double our expectation • “Individual subsidiary savings range in terms of % rate reduction” Achieved: Minimum individual saving within 1% Maximum individual saving almost double our expectation • “Migrated subsidiaries respond 70% favorable to captive project” Achieved: 95% favorable

  17. A Consultants experience

  18. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 • Healthcare Restructuring • US healthcare sector = 15% of US economy • Profound healthcare restructuring is underway • Major drivers: • Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“Obamacare”) • Global economic pressures – US health costs are (way!) out of line with US’ trading partners • Emphasis on “Accountable Care”

  19. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 (Cont’d) • US Healthcare and Employers: • No caps on employer health plan liability • Employers have to re-think risk management for health benefits • Shifting organizational responsibilities within employers – greater role for Risk Management in managing health risk • Increasing recognition of captive’s role • Increasingly sophisticated reinsurance markets for captive health programs • Rev Rul 2014-15 may create new opportunities

  20. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 (Cont’d) • US Healthcare and Health Providers • New applications for captives: • Provider Risk under Accountable Care risk-sharing contracts • Participation in health plans marketed by insurance carriers • Medical Stop Loss for the provider’s employees • New applications complement traditional applications involving Professional Liability • Rev Rul 2014-15 may impact non-profit organizations

  21. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 (Cont’d) • EXPRO (Dept. of Labor Approvals) • Advance DOL approval generally required for Life, Long-Term Disability (“LTD”), Accidental Death & Disability (“AD&D”) • Previous expedited review & approval process known as “EXPRO” • About 30 captive arrangements were approved under EXPRO • EXPRO expired by 2012

  22. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 (Cont’d) • Since 2012, Coca-Cola and Intel have obtained individual (non-EXPRO) exemptions from the DOL • At least two other individual exemption applications have been submitted to the DOL • Others are “in the pipeline” • It appears likely that the next DOL approval will be granted under EXPRO

  23. US Captive Benefits Landscape in 2014 (Cont’d) • Summary • 2014 will be a pivotal year for US captive benefits programs • Utilization of captives by employers for health benefits • Utilization of captives by health providers • New tax guidance • EXPRO reinstated

More Related