Page 45 - Annual Report 2017
P. 45

| 44                                                                                                                              45 |


 Thematic analysis on fees earned  Own Risk and Solvency Assessment  within the QFC. In 2017, the team supervised 59 authorised firms   During the year, significant enhancements were made to
            (financial institutions) and 28 Designated Non-Financial Businesses   the risk-rating models to better capture beneficial ownership
 The Investment Management department undertook a project to   The Regulatory Authority’s Insurance Business Rules 2006 require all   and Professions (DNFBPs).  and corporate structures; the quality of internal governance
 analyse the nature of the fees earned by QFC firms. The analysis was   QFC insurers that are limited liability companies, with effect from   arrangements and structures, including the adequacy and
 informative of the nature of advisory business carried out. It detailed   1 January 2015, to conduct an annual ORSA. This is a detailed,   AML/CFT regulatory framework  effectiveness  of  internal  audit  and  compliance  functions;
 the source of income for QFC firms, discerning between corporate   forward-looking examination of the adequacy of an insurer’s risk   The Regulatory Authority’s AML/CFT framework is underpinned by   the level of compliance with AML/CFT legal and regulatory
 advisory, capital markets and investment management activities.   management policies, procedures and controls, and the insurer’s   the AML/CFT Law No. 4 of 2010 that defines money laundering   requirements; and the effectiveness of the AML/CFT policies
 The pilot format will be converted into a standard template.   present and future solvency needs given the insurer’s particular risk   offences, assigns duties and obligations to financial institutions   and procedures against FATF standards.
 profile, stress testing and business plans.    and DNFBPs, established the National Anti-Money Laundering and
 Insurance Supervision   The Regulatory Authority reviewed a number of ORSA reports in   Terrorism Financing Committee (NAMLC), and set the fines and pen-  Under the revised model, the combination of the more quan-

 2017. On the basis of these reviews, there were improvements   alties for breaches of the law. Law No. 4 made it a criminal offence   tified assessments of the inherent risk levels and the effects
                                                                              of risk mitigation on the inherent risk levels has resulted in the
 In 2017, the Insurance Supervision team, responsible for 24 insurance   compared to prior years. Generally, firms appeared to have made   to provide financial or logistical support to terrorist groups or to raise   assignment of overall risk profile scores that improve alignment
 firms and intermediaries, conducted thematic reviews, assessed,   good progress in implementing the ORSA process. However, for   money for terrorist crimes in Qatar, and imposed penalties including   to international best practices. The enhanced model also facil-
 and analysed insurance firms’ Own Risk and Solvency Assessments   some firms enhancements and further embedding of the ORSA   jail sentences and fines. The Law is based on the standards issued   itates more informed peer analyses and better insight into the
 (ORSA) reports, and conducted risk assessment visits to a number   process in their businesses are still required.   by the International AML/CFT policy-making body, the Financial   aggregate AML/CFT risks that authorised firms face.
 of firms, all as key activities in its risk-based approach to supervision.  Action Task Force (FATF).
 Supervision communicated the review findings to the relevant                 Significant technology-related improvements were also made
 Insurance charts  insurers on an individual firm basis during risk assessment visits, high   The Regulatory Authority has issued two Rulebooks that regulate   to internal systems to facilitate the recording of AML/CFT issues
 level meetings and other interactions with senior management.   AML/CFT within the QFC. The Anti-Money Laundering and Combat-
 Please see page 72 for a selection of graphs highlighting some key   Firms viewed the feedback positively and recognised that the   ing Terrorist Financing Rules 2010 and the Anti-Money Laundering   identified during the risk assessments of DNFBPs. These included
 trends and facts relevant to the Regulatory Authority’s authorised   ORSA constitutes an important management tool for the Boards   and Combating Terrorist Financing (General Insurance) Rules 2012   links to the Electronic Submission System to facilitate the submis-
 insurance firms, as gleaned from the quarterly review of prudential   and senior management of these insurers. The Regulatory Authority   are collectively referred to as the AML/CFT Rules (Rules). These Rules   sion of required and ad hoc regulatory reports; the capabilities
 returns submitted on the XBRL-based reporting platform.  will review future ORSA reports to ensure the findings of this review   apply to all authorised firms and DNFBPs, including financial services   of supervisors to manage data on individuals performing reg-
                                                                              istered functions; and the creation and management of risk
 Thematic reviews  have been appropriately taken into account by relevant insurers   firms and other professional services firms such as lawyers, auditors,   mitigation programmes.
 and are reflected in the ORSAs.  accountants and trust service providers.
 Line of business review  AML/CFT supervisory approach                        Thematic reviews

 During the year, the Regulatory Authority conducted a thematic   ANTI-MONEY LAUNDERING/
 review of the performance of medical and motor insurance busi-  COMBATING THE FINANCING   AML/CFT supervisors base their understanding of the sectoral and   A programme of on-site risk assessments encompassing all 28
 ness lines, which together represent over 75 percent of the total   sub-sectoral risk factors on a high-level view from discussions with   active DNFBPs, employing the improved risk rating tool, was a
 insurance business written by QFC insurers. This review was con-  OF TERRORISM (AML/CFT)  and review of material published by the Regulatory Authority’s   key area of focus in 2017.
 ducted through a number of risk assessment visits held with QFC   Macroprudential team, supervised firms’ prudential and conduct   Taking into account the size, scale, and complexity of the
 insurers, as well as other on- and off-site investigations, including   The Regulatory Authority is committed to preventing QFC institu-  supervisors, and from the information obtained from firms about the   QFC’s DNFBPs’ activities, the overall AML/CFT risks arising for
 analysis of regulatory prudential return data.   tions from participating in activities that may constitute or facilitate   money laundering/terrorism financing risks they face. This approach   these firms, in terms of their customers and products, were
 financial crime. Anti-money laundering laws and regulations target   aids supervisors in identifying commonalities within each financial   limited.
 Medical and motor insurance lines performed reasonably well   market manipulation, trade of illegal goods, corruption of public   sub-sector and the financial sector as a whole.
 and contributed positively to QFC insurers’ net profit. Although the   funds and tax evasion, as well as the activities that aim to conceal   The National Action Plan
 quality of pricing varies across firms, with some using more sophisti-  these practices.   New models for risk-rating of firms
 cated models while others rely primarily on market rates to derive   Central to the Regulatory Authority’s risk-based approach to super-  The AML/CFT team drafted a number of guidance papers
 insurance premiums, premiums charged by firms proved to be ade-  Because laundering money is one way in which terrorists finance   vision is the employment of a proprietary risk-rating model to assess   and templates in this regard, covering a risk-based approach
 quate, in most cases, to cover the cost of claims and other related   their activities, money laundering and terrorism go hand in hand.   AML/CFT risks developed using the guidelines issued by FATF and the   (including  higher  risk  countries);  customer  due  diligence
 expenses with adequate margin for profit.     The Regulatory Authority is dedicated to the setting and implemen-  IMF model customised to the QFC environment. Broadly equivalent   (including reliance on third parties); correspondent banking;
 tation of standards to fight terrorist financing and other threats to   models have been designed and deployed for authorised firms and   beneficial ownership of legal persons and legal arrangements
 the QFC.                                                                     (including  transparency);  and  the  reporting  of  suspicious
            DNFBPs, with any differences a reflection of the nature of the firms
 The Regulatory Authority’s dedicated team of highly skilled AML/  and their respective activities.  transactions.
 CFT experts is responsible for anti-money laundering supervision
   40   41   42   43   44   45   46   47   48   49   50