保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
パラ
Introduction

和文

英文（「1 Introduction」への総論コメント）(General comment)

本 AP の位置づけを明確にするために、「1 Introduction」に「Application Papers In order to clarify the position of this AP, we propose adding the
do not set new standards or expectations. This Paper aims to provide guidance to following to ‘1 Introduction’:supervisors.」といった文言を追加すべきである。
Application Papers do not set new standards or expectations. This
Paper aims to provide guidance to supervisors.
3「この適用文書は、主に IAIS メンバーの監督業務に関する調査結果に基づいて While it is stated that "this Application Paper is largely based on theいる。」（「this Application Paper is largely based on the results of a survey among results of a survey among IAIS Members of their supervisory
IAIS Members of their supervisory practices. 」）とあるが、透明性の観点から、 practices.", from the perspective of transparency, we suggest adding
調査の概要（調査に参加した法域数・法域名や調査期間など）を追記すること an outline of the survey (e.g., which and how many jurisdictions
を提案する。

participated in the survey, and over what period of time the survey
was conducted).

5

パラ 5 にて「ICP は効果的な保険監督のための最低要件を設定」（「the ICPs While it is stated that "the ICPs establish the minimum
establish the minimum requirements for effective insurance supervision」）およ requirements for effective insurance supervision" and "to achieve
び「原則ステートメント及びスタンダードに規定された成果を達成」（「to the outcomes stipulated in the Principle Statements and Standards",
achieve the outcomes stipulated in the Principle Statements and Standards」）と there are also many parts that refer to ICP Guidance in this AP.
あるが、本 AP では ICP のガイダンスを参照している部分が多数存在する。明 For

clarification,

we

proposestatingthattheminimum

確化のため、ICP における最低要件は原則ステートメントおよびスタンダード requirements for ICPs are only the Principle Statements andのみであり、ガイダンスは要件ではないことを本 AP 内に明示することを提案 Standards, and that Guidances are not requirements.
する。
9「統制機能は、保険者の独立した部門とみなされ、少なくとも 1 人の自然人を It is stated that “A control function is considered an independent
その部門の長とする。」（「A control function is considered an independent unit unit of the insurer with at least one natural person as head of theof the insurer with at least one natural person as head of the unit. 」）とあり、 unit”. Although this can be construed to assume that each division
統制機能の各部門が独立している前提で記載されているように読めるが、ガバ of the control function is independent, our understanding is that
ナンスの在り方は管轄区域によって異なるものと理解している。

governance practices vary depending by jurisdiction.

1

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
例えば日本においては保険数理機能が複数の部門(Division)に跨って保険会社 For example, it is common in Japan that an insurer’s actuarial
全体として機能を発揮しているケースが一般的（※）であり、このような機能 function is fulfilled collectively across several divisions (*), and we発揮に特段の問題はないと認識しているため、このような統制機能のあり方も are aware of no particular problems with this practice. Therefore,
容認されることを確認したい。

we would like to confirm that such practices are clearly allowed.

（※）日本においては、例えば保険負債の評価について「基礎率の設定」や「再 (*) In Japan, it is a general practice that control functions are
保険の考慮」は商品部門が関与することもあり、また会計関連の事項は経理部 dispersed across multiple divisions. Taking the valuation of門、規制関連の事項はリスク管理部門が関与するなど、複数の部門にまたがっ insurance liabilities as an example, the product divisions areて統制することが一般的となっている。

involved for setting the base rate and reinsurance issues, theaccounting division for accounting related issues, and risk
management division for regulatory issues.

パラ 13 では「技術的準備金の妥当性」（「the adequacy of technical provisions」） Regarding "the adequacy of technical provisions", two different
に関し、以下のように連続する文章において「assessing」と「reviewing」とい expressions, "assessing" and "reviewing", are used in the following
う 2 種類の異なる表現が用いられているが、いずれも（妥当性を評価（evaluate) sentences. We would like to confirm that they carry the same
するという）同じ意味で用いられていることを確認したい。仮に異なる意味で meaning (the same as "evaluating the adequacy"). If not, the13

使用している場合には、差異を明確にしていただきたい。

difference should be clarified.

＜（参考）パラ 13 より抜粋＞(For reference, the following is an excerpt from paragraph 13.)

There was a consistent view among survey participants that actuaries developing There was a consistent view among survey participants that
products and setting prices; and actuaries assessing the adequacy of technical actuaries developing products and setting prices; and actuaries
provisions for those products, should be independent from each other.

assessing the adequacy of technical provisions for those products,

There was also agreement among the survey respondents on the need for should be independent from each other.
independence between those calculating technical provisions and those reviewing There was also agreement among the survey respondents on thethe adequacy of technical provisions.

need for independence between those calculating technical（調査参加者の間では、商品を開発し価格を設定するアクチュアリーと、それ provisions and those reviewing the adequacy of technical provisions.
らの技術的準備金の妥当性を評価するアクチュアリーとは相互に独立しているべきであるという一致した見解があった。

2

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
また、調査回答者の間では、技術的準備金を算出する者と、技術的準備金の妥当性を検討する者との間の独立性の必要性について合意が得られた。）
ある事業活動が外部委託された場合に関し「統制機能は、その責任の範囲内で、 It is stated that “If an activity is outsourced, the control functions –内部品質管理メカニズムが外部委託された活動に適用されているかどうか、お within the scope of their responsibilities – have the additional tasks
よび、どのように適用されているかをチェックする追加タスクを有する」（「 If to check whether and how internal quality control mechanisms arean activity is outsourced, the control functions – within the scope of their applied to the outsourced activity”, and “This includes verifying...
responsibilities – have the additional tasks to check whether and how internal whether this internal person has the necessary qualifications andquality control mechanisms are applied to the outsourced activity. 」）とあり、 seniority for this task”. Since it is not considered appropriate to
これには「内部ユーザーがこのタスクに必要な資格と職位を有しているかの検 make uniform judgments regarding qualifications and seniority,15

証も含まれる」（「 This includes verifying…whether this internal person has the depending on the size of the insurance company and the types andnecessary qualifications and seniority for this task.」）とあるが、資格と職位に activities of business that are outsourced, we propose adding “as
ついては保険会社の規模や外部委託の形態・内容によって画一的に判断するこ appropriate”, as follows:とは適切ではないと考えられることから、以下のとおり修文を提案する。
“This includes verifying whether an internal person is involved in<修文案＞

assessing if the external provider is carrying out the task properlyThis includes verifying whether an internal person is involved in assessing if the and, as appropriate, whether this internal person has the necessary
external provider is carrying out the task properly and, as appropriate, whether qualifications and seniority for this task.”
this internal person has the necessary qualifications and seniority for this task.
パラ 8 で、内部統制システムはリスクの適切なコントロールを確保するための In paragraph 8, an internal controls system is defined as a system forシステムとして定義され、パラ 10 では統制機能は内部統制システムの一部と定 ensuring adequate control of risks. Also, in paragraph 10, control
義されている。一方で、当該パラではリスク管理と内部統制が並列に書かれて functions are defined as part of the internal controls system.
20

いることから、AP 内における内部統制という用語の使い方を統一するため以下 However, in this paragraph, since risk management and internalのとおり修文を提案する。（パラ 26 も同様）

controls are dealt with in parallel, we propose the following revisions
to unify usage of the term ‘internal controls’ within the AP as follows<修文案＞(please also refer to our comments on paragraph 26):3

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
As noted in ICP 8.3, as part of the effective systems of risk management and As noted in ICP 8.3, as part of an effective system of riskinternal controls, “the supervisor requires the insurer to have effective control management and internal controls, “the supervisor requires thefunctions with the necessary […] independence…”

insurer to have effective control functions with the necessary […]independence…”「監督当局は、保険者の機能が好事例と整合しているかどうかを評価すべきで While it is stated that "the supervisor should assess how well anある。」（「the supervisor should assess how well an insurer’s functions align with insurer’s functions align with good practices", “good practices" aregood practices 」）とあるが、 good practices の定義が不明瞭であるため、「align not clearly defined. Therefore, we suggest deleting "align with goodwith good practices and 」は削除するか、あるいは定義を追記することを提案 practices” as below, or adding a definition:
21

する。
the supervisor should assess how well an insurer’s functions align
＜修文案＞

with

good

practices

and

are

compliantwithgovernancethe supervisor should assess how well an insurer’s functions align with good requirements.
practices and are compliant with governance requirements.
「統制機能のキーパーソンの任命、業績評価、報酬及び解任は、取締役会又は With regard to the question, "Are the appointment, performance
関連する取締役会の承認又は協議の対象となっているか。」とあるが、取締役 assessment, remuneration and dismissal of Key Persons in Control
会の承認等が求められる対象者は各社の実態に即して判断されるものであり、 Functions subject to the approval of, or the consultation with, the
例えば部門長（the head of a department）以下の任命、業績評価、報酬及び解 Board or relevant Board Committees?", individuals whose approvals
22

任について取締役の承認までは不要であることを確認したい。

are required by the Board etc. are determined in consideration withthe practical situation of each company. We would like to confirm
that Board approval is not warranted for the appointment,
performance assessment, remuneration and dismissal of positions
including and below heads of department.

「For example, having time-limited restrictions for when a person responsible for The meaning of the following phrase is not entirely clear. "Foran operational function (which may involve risk-taking), is able to take over as a example, having time-limited restrictions for when a person
22

Key Person in Control Function?」は意味が不明確であるが、「例えば、事業運 responsible for an operational function (which may involve risk営機能の責任者が、統制機能のキーパーソンとして業務を引き継ぐ場合に、そ taking), is able to take over as a Key Person in Control Function?"の時期に期限を設けているか。」（「For example, are there having time-limited We would construe the phrase to mean as follows: "For example, are4

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
restrictions for when a person responsible for an operational function (which may there having time-limited restrictions for when a person responsible
involve risk-taking) , is able to takes over as a Key Person in Control Function?」） for an operational function (which may involve risk-taking), is ableという意味と理解した。

to takes over as a Key Person in Control Function?"

そのうえで、本邦におけるメンバーシップ型の雇用形態においては第１線から Based on the above interpretation, it is a common practice in
２線・３線への異動は一般的で、time-limited restrictions ではなく、複数人の Japanese companies for employees to transfer from the first line to
チームにするなど直前部署への監査やモニタリング業務の付与の仕方で調整す the second or third line. Furthermore, instead of time-limited
ることも多いと想定されるため、「For example, …」は削除願う。

restrictions, it is expected that audits and monitoring of theimmediately preceding department may be addressed by modifying
how the task is carried out, such as forming audit and monitoring
teams of multiple people. Therefore, we suggest deleting thesentence “For example, having time-limited restrictions for when aperson responsible for an operational function (which may involverisk-taking), is able to take over as a Key Person in Control
Function?”

パラ 25 では「保険者の統制機能の独立性が損なわれる可能性がある兆候」 As an example of “Signs that the independence of an insurer’s（ 「 Signs that the independence of an insurer’s control functions may be control functions may be compromised”, it is stated that “The Key
compromised」）の例として「統制機能のキーパーソンに、取締役会または関連 Persons in Control Functions are not given the opportunity to meetする取締役会委員会および委員長と直接会合して、その業務について議論し、 directly with the Board or the relevant Board committees and
懸念があればそれを特定する機会を与えられていない。」（「 The Key Persons committee Chairs to discuss their work and identify concerns, if
25

in Controls Functions are not given the opportunity to meet directly with the any;”. However, regarding communication between the Key Persons
Board or the relevant Board committees and committee Chairs to discuss their in Control Functions and the Board, various appropriate means
work and identify concerns, if any;」）との記載があるが、統制機能のキーパー should be recognized according to the size and location of respective
ソンと取締役会等のコミュニケーションについては、保険会社の規模や所在地、 insurance companies and their governance. Therefore, we propose
ガバナンスの体制に応じた適切な手段が認められるべきであり、以下のとおり adding “or to take alternative ways”, as follows:
修文を提案する。

5

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見＜修文案＞

The Key Persons in Controls Functions are not given the

The Key Persons in Controls Functions are not given the opportunity to meet opportunity to meet directly or to take alternative ways with thedirectly or to take alternative ways with the Board or the relevant Board Board or the relevant Board committees and committee Chairs tocommittees and committee Chairs to discuss their work and identify concerns, if discuss their work and identify concerns, if any;any;
パラ 8 で、内部統制システムはリスクの適切なコントロールを確保するための In paragraph 8, the internal controls system is defined as a system
システムとして定義され、パラ 10 では統制機能は内部統制システムの一部と定 for ensuring adequate control of risks. Also, in paragraph 10, control
義されている。一方で、当該パラではリスク管理と内部統制が並列に書かれて functions are defined as part of the internal controls system.
いることから、AP 内における内部統制という用語の使い方を統一するため以下 However, in this paragraph, since risk management and internalのとおり修文を提案する。（パラ 20 も同様）

controls are dealt with in parallel, we propose the following revisions

26

to unify usage of the term ‘internal control’ within the AP as follows＜修文案＞(please also refer to our comments on paragraph 20):

This can happen when the business line focuses on the performance of thebusiness and places it above the importance of effective risk management and This can happen when the business line focuses on the performanceinternal controls within the insurer.

of the business and places it above the importance of effective risk
management and internal controls within the insurer.

「例えば、モデルリスクなどの定量的なリスク評価については、リスク管理機 While it is stated that "For example, the responsibilities of the risk
能 と 数 理 機 能 の 責 任 が 相 反 す る 可 能 性 が あ る 。 」 （ 「 For example, the management function and the actuarial function could conflict as
responsibilities of the risk management function and the actuarial function could regards quantitative risk assessments, such as model risk.", but
conflict as regards quantitative risk assessments, such as model risk.」 ）とある whether or not such conflict exists depends on which department is
27

が、相反するかどうかは、例えば当該業務をどの部門が担いどの部門が牽制す in charge of the business and which department checks the business.
るかによるものと考えられる。一般的な例示としては誤解を招く可能性がある Since it could be misleading to present it as a general example, it
ため、削除するか、以下のように「機能に関する部門間/部門内の分担の在り方 should be deleted, or the following phrase “depending on the次第では」と追記すべきである。

separation of responsibilities between functions or within afunction” should be added as follows:

＜修文案＞

6

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見
For example, depending on the separation of responsibilities between For example, depending on the separation of responsibilities
departments or within a department, the responsibilities of the risk management between departments or within a department, the responsibilities offunction and the actuarial function could conflict as regards quantitative risk the risk management function and the actuarial function could
assessments, such as model risk.

conflict as regards quantitative risk assessments, such as model risk.

「好事例は、保険者に対して、統制機能のキーパーソンの報酬の大部分が企業 It is stated that “A good practice could also be to suggest insurersのさまざまな報酬に依存せずに固定されていることを示唆している。」（「A that the predominant proportion of the remuneration of the Key
good practice could also be to suggest insurers that the predominant proportion Persons in Control Functions be fixed in order to prevent them fromof the remuneration of the Key Persons in Control Functions be fixed in order to depending too heavily on variable remuneration tied to businessprevent them from depending too heavily on variable remuneration tied to performance”. Although fixing the remuneration of Key Persons in
33business performance.」）との記載があり、統制機能のキーパーソンの報酬を固 Control Functions is seen as good practice, the reason does not seem
定化することを好事例としているが、その根拠は示されていない認識である。 to be expressly stated. Therefore, we propose to either state the
何故これが好事例と言えるのか根拠を示すべきであり、もし明確な説明が出来 reason, or remove the sentence if it cannot be explained. It should
ない場合には当該部分は削除すべきである。また、キーパーソンの分掌が定期 also be recognized that it is difficult to adopt a different
的に変わる人事制度を採用する会社においては、統制機能のキーパーソンのみ remuneration policy exclusively for Key Persons in Control
異なる報酬方針を採用することは困難であることも認識すべき。

Functions for a company that adopts a HR policy in which thedivision of duties of Key Persons change periodically.

「統制機能の報酬は、取締役会または取締役会の関連委員会の承認を得て、ま While it is stated that "the control functions' remuneration should
たはそれらと協議した上で定義されるべきである。」（「 the control functions’ be defined with the approval of, or after consultation with, the Board
remuneration should be defined with the approval of, or after consultation with, or a relevant committee of the Board.", individuals requiring
34

the Board or a relevant committee of the Board. 」）とあるが、取締役会の承認 approval by the Board etc. are determined in consideration with the
等が求められる対象者は各社の実態に即して判断されるものであり、例えば部 practical situation of each company. We would like to confirm that
門長（the head of a department）以下の報酬については取締役の承認までは不 Board approval is not warranted for remuneration of those in
要であることを確認したい。

50

positions including and below heads of department.

パラ 50 では ICP 8.3.17 を引用し、「各統制機能の部門長は、取締役会や取締 Citing ICP 8.3.17, it is stated that “the head of each control function
役会委員会の議長等と定期的な会合の機会を持つべき」（「the head of each should have the opportunity … to meet periodically … with thecontrol function should have the opportunity … to meet periodically … with the Chair of any relevant Board committee and/or with the Chair of the
Chair of any relevant Board committee and/or with the Chair of the full Board.」） full
7

Board”.

However,regardingcommunication,

various

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見としているが、コミュニケーションについては、保険会社の規模や所在地、ガ appropriate means should be recognized according to the size andバナンスの体制に応じて適切な手段が認められるべきである。
68

location of respective insurance companies and their governance.

大規模な保険会社であってもリソース・効率性の観点から統合が望ましいケー Even for large insurers, combination may be desirable from theスもあると考えられ、各社の特性等を踏まえて区分と統合のバランスを取るこ perspective of resources and efficiency, and it is important toとが重要と考える。よって「 For example,…」は以下のように修文することを balance classification and combination based on the characteristics
提案する。

of each company. Therefore, we propose revising the sentencestarting with "For example, ..." as follows:＜修文案＞
For example, in case of a large insurer with a complex business model, the For example, in case of a large insurer with a complex businesssupervisor may not allow any combination of control functions, whereas in the model, the supervisor may not allow any combination of control
case of smaller and less complex insurers, it may be appropriate acceptable for functions, whereas in the case of smaller and less complex insurers,
one function to be carried out by a single person or organizational unit.

it may be appropriate

acceptable for one function to be carried out

by a single person or organizational unit.
（例えば、複雑なビジネスモデルを持つ大規模な保険者の場合、監督当局は統制機能のいかなる統合も許可しないかもしれないが、小規模であまり複雑でない保険者の場合、1 つの機能を 1 人の個人または組織単位で実施することが適切な場合がある。）
73「保険会社の再建・破綻処理計画」（「Insurance legal entity’s recovery and Regarding "Insurance legal entity's recovery and resolution plans",
resolution plans」）に関し、再建計画及び破綻処理計画は ICP16.15、ICP12.3 recovery plans and resolution plans are stipulated in ICP 16.15, ICP
および CF 12.3.a において規定されており、保険会社個社については必要な場 12.3 and CF 12.3.a, and are produced only when necessary for
合にのみ策定されるため、「if any」を追記してはどうか。

individual insurance companies. Therefore, we propose adding "ifany" as follows:<修文案＞
Insurance legal entity’s recovery and resolution plans if any.
84

Insurance legal entity’s recovery and resolution plans if any.

「 保険者に対し、重要な外部委託契約については、契約開始前に監督当局に報 While it is stated to “Require the insurer to report material
告するよう義務付ける」（「Require the insurer to report material outsourcing outsourcing contracts to the supervisor before inception.”, imposing
contracts to the supervisor before inception. 」）とあるが、外部委託契約締結前 a reporting obligation on the supervisor before concluding an
8

保険監督者国際機構（IAIS）「統制機能監督 AP に関する市中協議文書」に対する損保協会意見に監督者への報告義務を課すことは、保険者の自主自律的な業務運営を阻害す outsourcing contract could disturb the insurer's independent
るおそれがあるため、当該項目は監督上の好事例から削除することを提案する。 business operations. Therefore, we propose deleting this item fromthe examples of supervisory good practice.
＜修文案＞
oRequire the insurer to report material outsourcing contracts to the supervisor
before inception. This may include a copy of the service level agreement if thesupervisor considers it appropriate in order to assess whether the insurer has
sufficient oversight rights; and84

外部委託に伴うリスクの評価に関し、「監督当局は保険者のソルベンシー評価 While it is stated that "supervisors compare the risk assessment with(ORSA) におけるオペレーショナル・リスクの関連する保険者の評価と、上記 the insurer's assessment of relevant aspects of operational risks in
リスク評価を比較することがある。」（「supervisors compare the risk assessment the insurer's Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)", whether
with the insurer's assessment of relevant aspects of operational risks in the to include the risk assessment associated with outsourcing in theinsurer’s Own Risk and Solvency Assessment (ORSA)」）とあるが、 外部委託に ORSA depends on the business and risks of each insurance
伴うリスク評価を ORSA に記載するかどうかは、保険会社の事業やリスクに応 company. Therefore, we would take this opportunity to point out
じて判断するものであり、必ずしも ORSA に記載があるわけではないことをご that this will not always be stated in the ORSA.
理解いただきたい。
以9上