从NAIC示范法案看欧盟新保险客户/投保人保护规则

Q2 Social Sciences Global Jurist Pub Date : 2020-01-18 DOI:10.1515/gj-2019-0039
Leo P. Martinez, Pierpaolo Marano
{"title":"从NAIC示范法案看欧盟新保险客户/投保人保护规则","authors":"Leo P. Martinez, Pierpaolo Marano","doi":"10.1515/gj-2019-0039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Effective October 1, 2018, the Member States of the European Union had to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of January 20, 2016 on insurance distribution (IDD). The IDD arose out of a desire to give insurance customers equal protection regardless of the type of distributor from which they obtained insurance. Essentially, the IDD seeks to level the playing field of protections for insurance customers by simplifying, consolidating, and expanding customer protections when needed. The IDD has the stated goal of focusing on “the area of the disclosure of information” to customers. The directive is intentionally broad and applies “to persons whose activity consists of providing insurance or reinsurance distribution services to third parties.” Although it is much too early to predict the course of the IDD within the European Union, a comparison can be drawn with the Model Acts promulgated by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) in the United States to glean an inkling as to where the IDD might be headed. Parts of the Model Acts have been in place for a number of years and, while the legal regimes they cover are modestly different, there are nonetheless broad lessons that can be drawn in the comparison of the two. Whether the path of the IDD follows the arc of the Model Acts, or not, will perhaps be attributed to three instrumental aspects: 1. The IDD is unquestionably focused on customer protection. The NAIC is more nearly concerned with uniformity. It may be that the IDD’s focus will contribute to better traction among the EU Member States then Model Acts have experienced in the United States. 2. Unlike the IDD, the NAIC Model Acts are not comprehensive with respect to customer protection. 3. The NAIC Model Acts have seen inconsistent adoption by the states, a factor that has contributed to a lack of uniformity and constancy across any number of insurance products. While the IDD should not suffer from spotty adoption, the relative flexibility of the EU Member States in adopting more stringent rules may lead to a lack of uniformity and consistency similar to that of the Model Acts. Thus, the IDD may very well face the same headwinds faced by the Model Acts in the United States. Accurate predictions are always elusive when dealing with the implementation of regulation and legislation. Accordingly, we will watch with curiosity whether the IDD, which takes a much more global approach in customer protection, will see more success.","PeriodicalId":34941,"journal":{"name":"Global Jurist","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0039","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The New EU Rules on Insurance Customer/Policyholder Protection Viewed against the NAIC Model Acts\",\"authors\":\"Leo P. Martinez, Pierpaolo Marano\",\"doi\":\"10.1515/gj-2019-0039\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Effective October 1, 2018, the Member States of the European Union had to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of January 20, 2016 on insurance distribution (IDD). The IDD arose out of a desire to give insurance customers equal protection regardless of the type of distributor from which they obtained insurance. Essentially, the IDD seeks to level the playing field of protections for insurance customers by simplifying, consolidating, and expanding customer protections when needed. The IDD has the stated goal of focusing on “the area of the disclosure of information” to customers. The directive is intentionally broad and applies “to persons whose activity consists of providing insurance or reinsurance distribution services to third parties.” Although it is much too early to predict the course of the IDD within the European Union, a comparison can be drawn with the Model Acts promulgated by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) in the United States to glean an inkling as to where the IDD might be headed. Parts of the Model Acts have been in place for a number of years and, while the legal regimes they cover are modestly different, there are nonetheless broad lessons that can be drawn in the comparison of the two. Whether the path of the IDD follows the arc of the Model Acts, or not, will perhaps be attributed to three instrumental aspects: 1. The IDD is unquestionably focused on customer protection. The NAIC is more nearly concerned with uniformity. It may be that the IDD’s focus will contribute to better traction among the EU Member States then Model Acts have experienced in the United States. 2. Unlike the IDD, the NAIC Model Acts are not comprehensive with respect to customer protection. 3. The NAIC Model Acts have seen inconsistent adoption by the states, a factor that has contributed to a lack of uniformity and constancy across any number of insurance products. While the IDD should not suffer from spotty adoption, the relative flexibility of the EU Member States in adopting more stringent rules may lead to a lack of uniformity and consistency similar to that of the Model Acts. Thus, the IDD may very well face the same headwinds faced by the Model Acts in the United States. Accurate predictions are always elusive when dealing with the implementation of regulation and legislation. Accordingly, we will watch with curiosity whether the IDD, which takes a much more global approach in customer protection, will see more success.\",\"PeriodicalId\":34941,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Jurist\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1515/gj-2019-0039\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Jurist\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0039\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Jurist","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/gj-2019-0039","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

摘要自2018年10月1日起生效,欧盟成员国必须实施必要的法律、法规和行政规定,以遵守2016年1月20日欧洲议会和理事会关于保险分销(IDD)的指令(EU)2016/97。IDD产生的原因是希望为保险客户提供平等的保护,无论他们从哪种类型的分销商获得保险。从本质上讲,IDD寻求通过在需要时简化、整合和扩大客户保护,为保险客户提供公平的保护。IDD的既定目标是专注于向客户“信息披露领域”。该指令有意宽泛,适用于“向第三方提供保险或再保险分销服务的人”。尽管在欧盟范围内预测IDD的发展还为时过早,可以将其与美国全国保险专员协会(NAIC)颁布的《示范法案》进行比较,以了解IDD可能走向何方。《示范法》的某些部分已经实施多年,尽管它们所涵盖的法律制度略有不同,但在比较两者时可以吸取广泛的教训。IDD的道路是否遵循《示范法》的弧线,也许可以归因于三个工具性方面:1。IDD无疑专注于客户保护。NAIC更关心的是一致性。与美国的《示范法案》相比,IDD的重点可能有助于更好地吸引欧盟成员国。2.与IDD不同,NAIC示范法案在客户保护方面并不全面。3.《NAIC示范法案》在各州的采用不一致,这一因素导致了许多保险产品缺乏一致性和稳定性。虽然IDD不应因采用不及时而受到影响,但欧盟成员国在采用更严格规则方面的相对灵活性可能会导致缺乏与《示范法》类似的统一性和一致性。因此,IDD很可能会面临与美国《示范法》相同的阻力。在执行法规和立法时,准确的预测总是难以捉摸。因此,我们将好奇地观察IDD是否会取得更大的成功。IDD在客户保护方面采取了更全球化的方法。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The New EU Rules on Insurance Customer/Policyholder Protection Viewed against the NAIC Model Acts
Abstract Effective October 1, 2018, the Member States of the European Union had to bring into force the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive (EU) 2016/97 of the European Parliament and of the Council of January 20, 2016 on insurance distribution (IDD). The IDD arose out of a desire to give insurance customers equal protection regardless of the type of distributor from which they obtained insurance. Essentially, the IDD seeks to level the playing field of protections for insurance customers by simplifying, consolidating, and expanding customer protections when needed. The IDD has the stated goal of focusing on “the area of the disclosure of information” to customers. The directive is intentionally broad and applies “to persons whose activity consists of providing insurance or reinsurance distribution services to third parties.” Although it is much too early to predict the course of the IDD within the European Union, a comparison can be drawn with the Model Acts promulgated by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) in the United States to glean an inkling as to where the IDD might be headed. Parts of the Model Acts have been in place for a number of years and, while the legal regimes they cover are modestly different, there are nonetheless broad lessons that can be drawn in the comparison of the two. Whether the path of the IDD follows the arc of the Model Acts, or not, will perhaps be attributed to three instrumental aspects: 1. The IDD is unquestionably focused on customer protection. The NAIC is more nearly concerned with uniformity. It may be that the IDD’s focus will contribute to better traction among the EU Member States then Model Acts have experienced in the United States. 2. Unlike the IDD, the NAIC Model Acts are not comprehensive with respect to customer protection. 3. The NAIC Model Acts have seen inconsistent adoption by the states, a factor that has contributed to a lack of uniformity and constancy across any number of insurance products. While the IDD should not suffer from spotty adoption, the relative flexibility of the EU Member States in adopting more stringent rules may lead to a lack of uniformity and consistency similar to that of the Model Acts. Thus, the IDD may very well face the same headwinds faced by the Model Acts in the United States. Accurate predictions are always elusive when dealing with the implementation of regulation and legislation. Accordingly, we will watch with curiosity whether the IDD, which takes a much more global approach in customer protection, will see more success.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Global Jurist
Global Jurist Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
期刊介绍: Global Jurist offers a forum for scholarly cyber-debate on issues of comparative law, law and economics, international law, law and society, and legal anthropology. Edited by an international board of leading comparative law scholars from all the continents, Global Jurist is mindful of globalization and respectful of cultural differences. We will develop a truly international community of legal scholars where linguistic and cultural barriers are overcome and legal issues are finally discussed outside of the narrow limits imposed by positivism, parochialism, ethnocentrism, imperialism and chauvinism in the law. Submission is welcome from all over the world and particularly encouraged from the Global South.
期刊最新文献
‘The Food Must Reach the Hungry’: Lessons from Judicial Enforcement of Right to Food in India On the History of Water as a Human Right and Its Recognition in the Cuban Constitution Capitalising on Uncertainty: Exploring the Failure of International Law to Address the Risk Generated by the Proliferation of Space Debris Two Tales of the Energy Commons Through the Lens of Complexity Achieving a Common Future for all Through Sustainability-Conscious Legal Education and Research Methods
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1