| Dictionary: Re·in·sur·ance |
n.
1. Insurance a second time or again; renewed insurance.
2. A contract by which an insurer is insured wholly or in part against the risk he has incurred in insuring somebody else. See
Reinsurance
n.
| 5min Related Video: Reinsurance |
| Investment Dictionary: Reinsurance |
The practice of insurers transferring portions of risk portfolios to other parties by some form of agreement in order to reduce the likelihood of having to pay a large obligation resulting from an insurance claim.
Also known as "insurance for insurers" or "stop-loss insurance".
Investopedia Says:
This procedure is used by insurance companies to reduce the risks associated with underwritten policies by spreading risks across alternative institutions. It's like portioning out pieces of a larger potential obligation in exchange for some of the money the original insurer received to accept the obligation.
The party that diversifies its insurance portfolio is known as the ceding party. The party that accepts a portion of the potential obligation in exchange for a share of the insurance premium is known as the reinsurer.
Related Links:
Many investors do not understand how to determine the level of risk their individual portfolios should bear. Determining Risk And The Risk Pyramid
Understanding your contract can help you protect our family's financial security. Exploring Advanced Insurance Contract Fundamentals
| Insurance Dictionary: Reinsurance |
Form of insurance that insurance companies buy for their own protection, "a sharing of insurance." An insurer (the reinsured) reduces its possible maximum loss on either an individual risk (facultative Reinsurance) or a large number of risks (Automatic Reinsurance) by giving (ceding) a portion of its liability to another insurance company (the reinsurer).
Reinsurance enables an insurance company to (1) expand its capacity; (2) stabilize its underwriting results; (3) finance its expanding volume; (4) secure catastrophe protection against shock losses; (5) withdraw from a class or line of business, or a geographical area, within a relatively short time period; and (6) share large risks with other companies.
There are two broad forms of reinsurance: Proportional Reinsurance and Nonproportional Reinsurance.
| Law Encyclopedia: Reinsurance |
The contract made between an insurance company and a third party to protect the insurance company from losses. The contract provides for the third party to pay for the loss sustained by the insurance company when the company makes a payment on the original contract.
A reinsurance contract is a contract of indemnity, meaning that it becomes effective only when the insurance company has made a payment to the original policyholder. Reinsurance provides a way for the insurance company to protect itself from financial disaster and ruin by passing on the risk to other companies. Reinsurance redistributes or diversifies the risk or threat associated with the business of issuing policies by allowing the reinsured to show more assets by reducing its reserve requirements. The reinsurance industry has become more popular over the last decade because natural disasters and mass tort litigation have resulted in large payouts by insurance companies. Because of the large size of the payments, some insurance companies have become insolvent.
The parties to the reinsurance contract are the reinsurer, the reinsured, and the original policyholder. The reinsurer is the third party or the company issuing the reinsurance policy. Typically, reinsurers engage solely in the business of issuing reinsurance policies; however any company that meets the requirements and is authorized to issue insurance may issue such policies. The reinsured is the insurance company that issued the first policy and is now applying for reinsurance. The original policyholder or original insured is the party who purchased the original policy. When the reinsurance contract is between just the two insurance companies (the reinsured and the reinsurer), the original policyholder usually has no rights against the reinsurer.
The reinsurance policy covers the risk or liability associated with the original policy issued. The reinsurance policy must be for a specific insurable interest. The interest to be insured must exist at the time the reinsurance policy is issued; it cannot be created later. All or part of the liability of the original policy can be covered by the reinsurance, but nothing greater. The reinsurance policy cannot cover a period longer than the original policy. Generally, because the reinsurance is not a promise to pay the debt of another but to indemnify a potential liability, the statute of frauds does not require the agreement to be in writing. Most often in practice, however, reinsurance policies are written to avoid problems later.
The two basic types of reinsurance are facultative reinsurance and treaty reinsurance. Facultative reinsurance is issued on an individual analysis of the situation and facts of the underlying policy. It may cover all or a part of the underlying policy. By deciding coverage case by case, the reinsurer can determine if it wants the risk associated with that particular policy. Facultative reinsurance is used by the reinsured to reduce the chance of loss or risk associated with a certain policy.
Treaty reinsurance, on the other hand, is written to cover a particular class of policies issued by the reinsured. Examples of classes covered by treaty reinsurance are all property insurance policies or all casualty insurance policies written by the reinsured. Treaty reinsurance automatically passes the risk to the reinsurer for all policies that are covered by the treaty, not just one particular policy. Treaty policies are more general than facultative policies because the reinsurance decision is based on general potential liability rather than on a specific enumerated risk.
In addition to the two types of reinsurance issued, there are two ways that coverage can be allotted between the parties: either proportionally or non-proportionally. Proportional reinsurance is where the reinsured obtains coverage for only a portion or percentage of the loss or risk from the reinsurer. The proportion of coverage is typically based on the percentage of premiums paid to the reinsurer. For example, if the reinsured pays 40 percent of the premiums to the reinsurer, then the reinsured recovers 40 percent of its losses when it pays the original policyholder according to the original policy terms. The reinsured can only recover a portion of its total loss, not the entire amount. The amount actually paid by the reinsurer is not figured into the reinsurance contract, only the percentage of loss the policy will cover.
In contrast, non-proportional reinsurance covers a set amount of loss. A base or deductible amount is set in the reinsurance policy, and any loss exceeding that amount is paid by the reinsurer. The amount being paid by the reinsurer has no relationship to the premiums received. The reinsured, in effect, is reimbursed for all payments made under the original policy that exceed the deductible amount. The deductible amount can be figured either by each event or in the aggregate. Either type of coverage can be used in either facultative or treaty insurance contracts. The terms of the policy depend on the situation and the relationship the reinsured and the reinsurer have had in the past. Reinsurance policy terms can be made to be flexible for the appropriate facts at the time.
Although the terms of the policies can be flexible, several doctrines help to define the nature of the reinsurer and reinsured relationship. These doctrines are the duty of utmost good faith and the doctrine of "follow the fortunes." The duty of utmost good faith has several facets, including the requirement that both parties to the reinsurance contract deal with each other with candor and honesty. The duty assumes that both parties are sophisticated and knowledgeable in the insurance industry. As a result, they should be aware of what is relevant and necessary for the other party to know. The reinsured must follow the duty by disclosing all material facts to the reinsurer that relate to or affect the original policy and its calculated risk. The reinsured must essentially put the reinsurer in the same position as it would be in when deciding about the risks and the possibility of coverage on the original policy.
In addition, the duty requires that the reinsured act with honesty in negotiating any settlement with the original policyholder. If the settlement is not handled by following the appropriate business procedures, the reinsurer may not be bound by its terms and then does not have to pay under the policy coverage.
Lastly, the duty of utmost good faith requires the reinsured to provide adequate notice of any claim or potential claim to the reinsurer. For notice to be adequate, it should be given as soon as the reinsured becomes aware of a potential claim. To be aware, the reinsured must investigate with diligence to discover these possible claims. Notice is required to make the reinsured aware of the possible need for available funds in case a claim is filed. Notice also allows the reinsured to participate, if desired, in the defense of the underlying claim. Practically, reinsurers may also use the notice of potential claims to determine renewal of, or change in, premiums under the reinsurance contract. The duty of utmost good faith that is part of reinsurance policies requires the reinsured and reinsurer to deal with each other in an honest, sophisticated manner.
Also implicit to reinsurance policies is the follow-the-fortunes doctrine. "Follow the fortunes" means the reinsurer should follow along with the reinsured's payment to the original policyholder. Provided the reinsured makes a good faith payment that reasonably falls within the terms of the original policy to the policyholder, the reinsurer is then required to make payment according to the terms of the reinsurance policy. The reinsurer should make the payment even if payment is not specifically mandated under the terms of the policy but is arguably within the meaning of its terms. The doctrine is meant to encourage coverage by reinsurers and discourage unnecessary litigation by the parties over interpretation of the policy.
The follow-the-fortunes doctrine does have limits to protect the reinsurer from excessive payments. The reinsurer is not obligated to cover payments made by the reinsured that are clearly outside of the policy language. Also, the reinsurer is not obligated to follow the business fortune of the reinsured, only the insurance-related fortune of the company. The reinsurer need only indemnify for the type of loss intended by the policy, not losses due to uncollectible premiums. Losses clearly related to the business decision and not the policy are not within the scope of the doctrine. The follow-the-fortunes doctrine implies a duty by the reinsurer to indemnify reasonable payments made by the reinsured under the underlying insurance policy.
Once the policy terms and the parties' relationship are defined, several defenses are available to the parties to avoid liability. Defenses that may be available include normal contract defenses, inadequate notice and failure to disclose, or misrepresentation. Usually any defense available to either party to a contract would be available to either the reinsurer or the reinsured. Those defenses can include impossibility of performance, an act outside the parties' authority, actions by a party that are inconsistent with the policy, actions by a party that unreasonably increase the risk, or misconduct by the parties. Any defense that would be an option for a party under the original insurance policy is available for the parties to the reinsurance policy.
The defense of inadequate notice is available to the reinsurer. If the reinsured has violated its duty to give prompt and reasonable notice to the reinsurer, the reinsurer may be able to reduce or refuse payment under the policy. Because of the relationship between the parties, the reinsured is required to comply fully with all the terms of the policy or the reinsurer is not necessarily obligated. However, the reinsurer must often show that it has been prejudiced or hurt by the lack of notice in order to avoid liability on the policy.
The most common defense available to the parties is the failure to disclose (also referred to as fraud, misrepresentation, or concealment). This defense is tied heavily to the duty of utmost good faith because both deal with the disclosure of material facts. For the reinsurer to assert the defense of failure to disclose, the reinsured must have concealed some relevant or important information. Relevant information would include facts such as a claim previously filed under the original policy or an unusually high risk related to the original policy. The failure to disclose need not be an intentional statement known to be false; it could also be the reinsured's failure to investigate and determine the truth of a fact. When deciding if a fact or information is material or relevant, the courts ask if the misrepresented or withheld information, if disclosed, would have changed the reinsurer's decision to issue the policy. Just the false statement is not enough to avoid liability; the reinsurer must have acted upon that misrepresentation in such a way that it was prejudiced. If the reinsurer's decision or action would have been different regarding the risk, it may be relieved of liability.
Generally, the original policyholder has no rights against the reinsurer. Because the original policyholder has no contract with the reinsurer, they have no obligations to each other. This can be altered by inserting language into the reinsurance policy allowing the original policyholder to obtain payment directly from the reinsurer. Such language often is effective only when the reinsured becomes insolvent or unable to pay. These clauses are not often used because a reinsured can view such clauses as a lack of confidence in its ability to pay. The clause may be used in the case of a reassignment or sale of the policy to another insurance company to protect the original insured.
Without specific language in the policy, the original policyholder has few rights with the reinsured. If the reinsured becomes overly active in the claim process and defense, it could open itself to a direct claim. The original insured can bring an action against the reinsurer if the reinsurance policy requires the reinsurer to pay any claim directly to the original policyholder. The original policyholder is considered a third-party beneficiary and can sue either the reinsured or the reinsurer. The recovery obtained by the original policyholder cannot be more than the total loss.
| Wikipedia: Reinsurance |
Reinsurance is a means by which an insurance company can protect itself with other insurance companies against the risk of losses. Individuals and corporations obtain insurance policies to provide protection for various risks (hurricanes, earthquakes, lawsuits, collisions, sickness and death, etc.). Reinsurers, in turn, provide insurance to insurance companies. The company requesting the cover is called the cedant and the reinsurer can be called the ceded, although the latter term is not in common use.
Contents |
Functions of Reinsurance
There are many reasons why an insurance company would choose to reinsure as part of its responsibility to manage a portfolio of risks for the benefit of its policyholders and investors.
Risk transfer
The main use of any insurer that might practice reinsurance is to allow the company to assume greater individual risks than its size would otherwise allow, and to protect a company against losses. Reinsurance allows an insurance company to offer higher limits of protection to a policyholder than its own assets would allow. For example, if the principal insurance company can write only $10 million in limits on any given policy, it can reinsure (or cede) the amount of the limits in excess of $10 million.
Reinsurance’s highly refined uses in recent years include applications where reinsurance was used as part of a carefully planned hedge strategy.
Income smoothing
Reinsurance can help to make an insurance company’s results more predictable by absorbing larger losses and reducing the amount of capital needed to provide coverage.
Surplus relief
An insurance company's writings are limited by its balance sheet (this test is known as the solvency margin). When that limit is reached, an insurer can do one of the following: stop writing new business, increase its capital, or buy "surplus relief" reinsurance. Buying reinsurance is usually done on a quota share basis and is an efficient way of not having to turn clients away or raise additional capital.
Arbitrage
The insurance company may be motivated by arbitrage in purchasing reinsurance coverage at a lower rate than what they charge the insured for the underlying risk, which can be in the area of risk associated with any form of the asset that is being issued or loaned against. It can be a car, a mortgage, an insurance (personal, fire, business, etc.) and alike.
In general, the reinsurer may be able to cover the risk at a lower premium than the insurer because:
- The reinsurer may have some intrinsic cost advantage due to economies of scale or some other efficiency
- Reinsurers may operate under weaker regulation than their clients. This enables them to use less capital to cover any risk, and to make less prudent assumptions when valuing the risk.
- Even if the regulatory standards are the same, the reinsurer may be able to hold smaller Actuarial reserves than the cedant if it thinks the premiums charged by the cedant are excessively prudent.
- The reinsurer may have a more diverse portfolio of assets and especially liabilities than the cedant. This may create opportunities for hedging that the cedant could not exploit alone. Depending on the regulations imposed on the reinsurer, this may mean they can hold fewer assets to cover the risk.
- The reinsurer may have a greater risk appetite than the insurer.
Reinsurer's expertise
The insurance company may want to avail of the expertise of a reinsurer in regard to a specific (specialised) risk or want to avail of their rating ability in odd risks.
Creating a manageable and profitable portfolio of insured risks
By choosing a particular type of reinsurance method, the insurance company may be able to create a more balanced and homogenous portfolio of insured risks. This would lend greater predictability to the portfolio results on net basis (after reinsurance) and would be reflected in income smoothing. While income smoothing is one of the objectives of reinsurance arrangements, the mechanism is by way of balancing the portfolio.
Managing cost of capital for an insurance company
By getting a suitable reinsurance, the insurance company may be able to substitute "capital needed" as per the requirements of the regulator for premium written. It could happen that the writing of insurance business requires x amount of capital with y% of cost of capital and reinsurance cost is less than x*y%. Thus more unpredictable or less frequent the likelihood of an insured loss, more profitable it can be for an insurance company to seek reinsurance.
Types of reinsurance
Proportional
Proportional reinsurance (the types of which are quota share and surplus reinsurance) involves one or more reinsurers taking a stated percent share of each policy that an insurer produces ("writes"). This means that the reinsurer will receive that stated percentage of each dollar of premiums and will pay that percentage of each dollar of losses. In addition, the reinsurer will allow a "ceding commission" to the insurer to compensate the insurer for the costs of writing and administering the business (agents' commissions, modeling, paperwork, etc.).
The insurer may seek such coverage for several reasons. First, the insurer may not have sufficient capital to prudently retain all of the exposure that it is capable of producing. For example, it may only be able to offer $1 million in coverage, but by purchasing proportional reinsurance it might double or triple that limit. Premiums and losses are then shared on a pro rata basis. For example, an insurance company might purchase a 50% quota share treaty; in this case they would share half of all premium and losses with the reinsurer. In a 75% quota share, they would share (cede) 3/4 of all premiums and losses.
The other form of proportional reinsurance is surplus share or surplus of line treaty. In this case, a retained “line” is defined as the ceding company's retention - say $100,000. In a 9 line surplus treaty the reinsurer would then accept up to $900,000 (9 lines). So if the insurance company issues a policy for $100,000, they would keep all of the premiums and losses from that policy. If they issue a $200,000 policy, they would give (cede) half of the premiums and losses to the reinsurer (1 line each). The maximum underwriting capacity of the cedant would be $ 1,000,000 in this example. Surplus treaties are also known as variable quota shares.
Non-proportional
Non-proportional reinsurance only responds if the loss suffered by the insurer exceeds a certain amount, which is called the "retention" or "priority." An example of this form of reinsurance is where the insurer is prepared to accept a loss of $1 million for any loss which may occur and they purchase a layer of reinsurance of $4 million in excess of $1 million. If a loss of $3 million occurs,then insurer will retain 1 Million and will recovers $2 million from its reinsurer(s). In this example, the reinsured will retain any loss exceeding $5 million unless they have purchased a further excess layer (second layer) of say $10 million excess of $5 million.
The main forms of non-proportional reinsurance are excess of loss and stop loss.
Excess of loss reinsurance can have three forms - "Per Risk XL" (Working XL), "Per Occurrence or Per Event XL" (Catastrophe or Cat XL), and "Aggregate XL". In per risk, the cedant’s insurance policy limits are greater than the reinsurance retention. For example, an insurance company might insure commercial property risks with policy limits up to $10 million, and then buy per risk reinsurance of $5 million in excess of $5 million. In this case a loss of $6 million on that policy will result in the recovery of $1 million from the reinsurer.
In catastrophe excess of loss, the cedant’s per risk retention is usually less than the cat reinsurance retention (this is not important as these contracts usually contain a 2 risk warranty i.e. they are designed to protect the reinsured against catastrophic events that involve more than 1 policy). For example, an insurance company issues homeowner's policies with limits of up to $500,000 and then buys catastrophe reinsurance of $22,000,000 in excess of $3,000,000. In that case, the insurance company would only recover from reinsurers in the event of multiple policy losses in one event (i.e., hurricane, earthquake, flood, etc.).
Aggregate XL affords a frequency protection to the reinsured. For instance if the company retains $1 million net any one vessel, the cover $10 million in the aggregate excess $5 million in the aggregate would equate to 10 total losses in excess of 5 total losses (or more partial losses). Aggregate covers can also be linked to the cedant's gross premium income during a 12 month period, with limit and deductible expressed as percentages and amounts. Such covers are then known as "Stop Loss" or annual aggregate XL.
Risk-attaching Basis
A basis under which reinsurance is provided for claims arising from policies commencing during the period to which the reinsurance relates. The insurer knows there is coverage for the whole policy period when written.
All claims from cedant underlying policies incepting during the period of the reinsurance contract are covered even if they occur after the expiration date of the reinsurance contract. Any claims from cedant underlying policies incepting outside the period of the reinsurance contract are not covered even if they occur during the period of the reinsurance contract.
Loss-occurring Basis
A Reinsurance treaty from under which all claims occurring during the period of the contract, irrespective of when the underlying policies incepted, are covered. Any claims occurring after the contract expiration date are not covered.
As opposed to claims-made policy. Insurance coverage is provided for losses occurring in the defined period. This is the usual basis of cover for most policies.
Claims-made Basis
A policy which covers all claims reported to an insurer within the policy period irrespective of when they occurred.
Contracts
Most of the above examples concern reinsurance contracts that cover more than one policy (treaty). Reinsurance can also be purchased on a per policy basis, in which case it is known as facultative reinsurance. Facultative reinsurance can be written on either a quota share or excess of loss basis. Facultative reinsurance is commonly used for large or unusual risks that do not fit within standard reinsurance treaties due to their exclusions. The term of a facultative agreement coincides with the term of the policy. Facultative reinsurance is usually purchased by the insurance underwriter who underwrote the original insurance policy, whereas treaty reinsurance is typically purchased by a senior executive at the insurance company.
Reinsurance treaties can either be written on a “continuous” or “term” basis. A continuous contract continues indefinitely, but generally has a “notice” period whereby either party can give its intent to cancel or amend the treaty within 90 days. A term agreement has a built-in expiration date. It is common for insurers and reinsurers to have long term relationships that span many years.
Markets
Most reinsurance placements are not placed with a single reinsurer but are shared between a number of reinsurers. For example a $30,000,000 excess of $20,000,000 layer may be shared by 30 or more reinsurers. The reinsurer who sets the terms (premium and contract conditions) for the reinsurance contract is called the lead reinsurer; the other companies subscribing to the contract are called following reinsurers.
About half of all reinsurance is handled by reinsurance brokers who then place business with reinsurance companies. The other half is with “direct writing” reinsurers who have their own production staff and thus reinsure insurance companies directly. In Europe reinsurers write both direct and brokered accounts.
Using game-theoretic modeling, Professors Michael R. Powers (Temple University) and Martin Shubik (Yale University) have argued that the number of active reinsurers in a given national market should be approximately equal to the square-root of the number of primary insurers active in the same market.[1] Econometric analysis has provided empirical support for the Powers-Shubik rule.[2]
Insurers (that is to say, reinsureds) tend to choose their reinsurers with great care as they are exchanging insurance risk for credit risk. Risk managers monitor reinsurers' financial ratings (S&P, A.M. Best, etc.) and aggregated exposures regularly.
Top Reinsurers
- 1. Münchener Rück - Germany (US$31.4 billion Gross Written Premiums)
- 2. Swiss Re- Switzerland (US$30.3 billion)
- 3. Berkshire Hathaway / General Re - USA (n.a.)
- 4. Hannover Rück - Germany (US$12 billion)
- 5. SCOR – France (US$6.9 billion)
- 6. Reinsurance Group of America – USA (US$5.7 billion)
- 7. Transatlantic Re – USA (US$4.2 billion)
- 8. Everest Re – Bermuda (US$4.0 billion)
- 9. Partner Re – Bermuda (US$3.8 billion)
- 10. XL Re – Bermuda (US$3.4 billion)
(Based on the last company figures)
Retrocession
Reinsurance companies themselves also purchase reinsurance and this is known as a retrocession. They purchase this reinsurance from other reinsurance companies. A reinsurance company that sells reinsurance is a "retrocessionaire". A reinsurance company that buys reinsurance is a "retrocedent".
It is not unusual for a reinsurer to buy reinsurance protection from other reinsurers. For example, a reinsurer that provides proportional, or pro rata, reinsurance capacity to insurance companies may wish to protect its own exposure to catastrophes by buying excess of loss protection. Another situation would be that a reinsurer which provides excess of loss reinsurance protection may wish to protect itself against an accumulation of losses in different branches of business which may all become affected by the same catastrophe. This may happen when a windstorm causes damage to property, automobiles, boats, aircraft and loss of life, for example.
This process can sometimes continue until the original reinsurance company unknowingly gets some of its own business (and therefore its own liabilities) back. This is known as a "spiral" and was common in some specialty lines of business such as marine and aviation. Sophisticated reinsurance companies are aware of this danger and through careful underwriting attempt to avoid it.
In the 1980s, the London market was badly affected by the creation of reinsurance spirals. This resulted in the same loss going around the market thereby artificially inflating market loss figures of big claims (such as the Piper Alpha oil rig). The LMX spiral (as it was called) has been stopped by excluding retrocessional business from reinsurance covers protecting direct insurance accounts.
It is important to note that the insurance company is obliged to indemnify its policyholder for the loss under the insurance policy whether or not the reinsurer reimburses the insurer. Many insurance companies have experienced difficulties by purchasing reinsurance from companies that did not or could not pay their share of the loss (these unpaid claims are known as uncollectibles). This is particularly important on long-tail lines of business where the claims may arise many years after the premium is paid.
See also
- Aon Corporation
- Catastrophe bond
- Catastrophe modeling
- Financial reinsurance
- Industry Loss Warranties
- International Society of Catastrophe Managers
- Life Insurance Securitization
- Marsh & McLennan Companies
- Reinsurance Sidecar
- Reinstatement Premium Protection
References
- ^ Powers, M. R. and Shubik, M., 2006, "A 'Square-Root Rule' for Reinsurance," Revista de Contabilidade e Finanças (Review of Accounting and Finance), 17, 5, 101-107.
- ^ Venezian, E. C., Viswanathan, K. S., and Jucá, Iana B., 2005, "A 'Square-Root Rule' for Reinsurance? Evidence from Several National Markets," Journal of Risk Finance, 6, 4, 319-334.
External links
 |
Look up reinsurance in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. |
- The US Reinsurance Under 40s Group
- (French) APREF Association des Professionnels de la Réassurance en France
- (French) ENASS - Ecole Nationale d'Assurances website,(French National School of Insurance)
- Captive Review Captive Review
- Reinsurance Guru - reinsurance news and analysis Web-site
- Reinsurance, by Gary Patrick [1]
- Reinsurance Association of America
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
This entry is from Wikipedia, the leading user-contributed encyclopedia. It may not have been reviewed by professional editors (see full disclaimer)
Learn More
 | insurance |
| indemnity |
| policy |
Help us answer these
 | What are the differences between treaty reinsurance and facultative reinsurance? |
| What is the difference between proportional reinsurance and non-proportional reinsurance? |
| What is multiline reinsurance? |
Post a question - any question - to the WikiAnswers community:
Copyrights:
 |
 | Dictionary. Webster 1913 Dictionary edited by Patrick J. Cassidy Read more |
 |
| Investment Dictionary. Copyright ©2000, Investopedia.com - Owned and Operated by Investopedia Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Insurance Dictionary. Dictionary of Insurance Terms. Copyright © 2000 by Barron's Educational Series, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Law Encyclopedia. West's Encyclopedia of American Law. Copyright © 1998 by The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved. Read more |
 |
| Wikipedia. This article is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. It uses material from the Wikipedia article "Reinsurance". Read more |
Related answers
» More
ADVERTISEMENT
Answer these
- What is the differences between Treaty reinsurance and facultative reinsurance?
- Who are the buyers of reinsurance?
- The Reinsurance treaty?
Mentioned in
- Following the Fortunes (insurance term)
- Berkshire Hathaway Inc
- Unearned Reinsurance Premium (insurance term)
- Unauthorized Reinsurance (insurance term)
- reinsurer
- Specific Excess Reinsurance (insurance term)
- Surplus Release (insurance term)
- Traditional Risk Reinsurance (insurance term)
- Bordereau (insurance term)
- Cede (insurance term)
- Nonproportional Reinsurance (insurance term)
- ruin theory
- Futures Tied to Reinsurance (insurance term)
- Base Premium (insurance term)
|
