Announced: Seahorse® is the T4U Successor

After the recent EIOPA announcement that the XBRL reporting tool T4U will be decommissioned next month, many filers are now looking for a quick solution to keep their submissions compliant.

At CoreFiling, it’s our business to keep you compliant – that’s why we are proud to announce that we are offering a free trial to our cloud-based regulatory filing platform, Seahorse®. The successor to T4U.

This free trial gives you the opportunity to create one complete filing to submit to a regulator – and even better, users will have three months to explore the software before submitting their filing. Here are just some of the ways in which Seahorse® can help your organisation:

The Benefits

  • Seahorse® lets you create fast, error-free XBRL filings. Unlike T4U, its data rendering is XBRL-based, so the reports you send will never have data conversion errors or approximations. The data is 100% accurate every time.
  • Seahorse® is hosted in the cloud. Its architecture lets you update taxonomies instantly, with no tedious installations. You can create and view your filings anywhere, any time.
  • Seahorse® allows you to easily create XBRL filings in the familiar environment of Microsoft Excel.

How do I sign up?

Trial access is available to anyone. To claim your trial, simply visit our website and fill out the sign up form.

The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 5

How do I keep up to date with XBRL taxonomy changes?

The whole process of gathering relevant data and implementing an effective workflow to turn that data into valid XBRL reports is daunting enough, but the challenges do not stop there. What happens when the underlying XBRL taxonomy changes, as it undoubtedly will? What solutions are available to help smooth the reporting process?

The impact of Solvency II taxonomy changes

Without specialist insight into the taxonomy structure it is difficult to understand what changes have occurred from one version to the next and, more significantly, how the changes might impact both technical considerations and the preparation of XBRL reports.

Compliance with EIOPA business rules

The business rules imposed by EIOPA and the NCAs may also be amended from time to time, and this could have a profound effect on the data that needs to be reported. How will your reporting systems cope with frequent updates? How will you make sure that your systems remain current, producing totally valid XBRL documents that will not be rejected at the point of submission?

Some systems rely on hard-coding and may prove inflexible, so you would do well to make sure that you will not incur massive system and cost overheads just to bring your reporting into line each time.

Continue reading “The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 5”

The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 4

How do I report to my NCA?

Although it remains at the discretion of the individual NCA, many regulated firms will find that they must now submit their quantitative reports in XBRL, which may be an unfamiliar format presenting a new set of challenges, particularly since there is now so much more data to be handled (at a recent conference estimates were quoted at over 10K data items for solo reporting, and 200K for group reporting during the preparatory phase, increasing to around 40K and 800K data items respectively when full scope reporting arrives in January 2016).

Integration or standalone?

How to handle the data is a key issue. Many insurers will have existing workflow and security processes in place, but must now integrate them with the less familiar requirements of XBRL preparation, validation and rendering, so both the IT department and the business will need to engage to ensure that the relevant data can be captured and turned into the required reports.

Decisions need to be made: whether to create a standalone environment or embed reporting into current architecture; whether to rely on process professionals to provide the specialist XBRL capabilities (which may be outside their core competence), or to seek help from a dedicated XBRL technology company.

Continue reading “The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 4”

The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 3

What do I report?

As mentioned in the previous Blog Post, even firms that begin reporting during the Solvency II preparatory phase will notice a hefty increase in the number of templates they need to complete when full scope reporting arrives in January 2016.

Quantitative and qualitative reporting

Solvency II Pillar 3 brings a huge increase in the amount of data that needs to be reported. For example, for the first time detailed asset data must be included. Firms will also need to take into account a new set of reporting requirements, relating to both quantitative and qualitative disclosures. Under Pillar 3, the main focus is on two particular reports, which require both qualitative and quantitative data:

  • SFCR – Solvency and Financial Condition Report
  • RSR – Report to Supervisors

Public vs private reporting

Reporting also occurs on two levels – public and private. For example, a few of the quantitative templates and qualitative data will be made public in the SFCR, whereas all quantitative templates and a detailed set of qualitative data must be reported privately to the regulator in the RSR.
Continue reading “The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 3”

The count-down to Solvency II reporting – 2

Do I need to report and when?

In the second of our blog series, we examine which insurance undertakings will have to begin reporting under the preparatory phase that EIOPA has introduced as a precursor to full Solvency II reporting which finally takes effect in January 2016.

While all insurers are expected at least to start preparing for the full implementation of the Solvency II regime, only certain organisations meeting prescribed thresholds will need to report to their NCA during the preparatory phase, but this is due to begin in June 2015, so time is very short.

Interpretation of the EIOPA thresholds

The thresholds specified by EIOPA are:

  • Individual annual reporting for firms representing at least 80% of the national market share
  • Individual quarterly reporting for firms representing at least 50% of the national market share
  • Group quarterly or annual reporting for firms with more than EUR 12 billion (period ending during 2012)

Continue reading “The count-down to Solvency II reporting – 2”

The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 1

The insurance industry prepares

Although there are still several months to go before full scope reporting begins under the new Solvency II Pillar 3 regime, the deadline for preparatory reporting is imminent for those insurance undertakings included in the first phase.

The focus of Pillar 3 of the Solvency II regime revolves around supervisory reporting and transparency requirements, and will mean a seismic shift upwards in the volume of data to be extracted and reported as well as the frequency of the report submissions.

Reporting formats

So that it can manage and analyse the large amount of data reported under Solvency II, EIOPA has specified XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language) as the filing format. Although XBRL is only mandatory between National Competent Authorities (NCAs) and EIOPA, some NCAs are insisting that their regulated firms also submit their quantitative returns in XBRL, with narrative returns submitted in some other electronic format. For example, the Bank of England/PRA requires quantitative reports in XBRL and narrative reports in PDF format. This will, however, vary from country to country.

Continue reading “The count-down to Solvency II Pillar 3 reporting – 1”

CRD IV 2.3 taxonomy contains important new reports

New Liquidity Monitoring and Supervisory Benchmarking

The European Banking Authority (EBA) recently published version 2.3 of the CRD IV taxonomy. The announcement includes two brand new reports, supporting additional Liquidity Monitoring and Supervisory Benchmarking.

The EBA now stipulates that filings with a reference date of 30th June 2015 or later will need to be prepared against the new CRD IV 2.3 taxonomy.

Continue reading “CRD IV 2.3 taxonomy contains important new reports”

Not just a COTS product company… CoreFiling offer integration expertise to assist the wider XBRL community

CoreFiling are well known as producers of excellent COTS software products for regulatory markets around the world, helping both filers and regulators to take full advantage of XBRL technology.

What is less well known perhaps is that the company has an excellent knowledge of enterprise platforms and the necessary componentry when it comes to the integration of XBRL technology into the wider organisational infrastructure, particularly other vendors’ Analytical, Business Intelligence, Data Integration or B2B Process Integration platforms. This gives CoreFiling a distinct advantage as we are able to offer:

  • in-depth expertise and advice to customers and partners in the understanding of how to undertake complex integration projects
  • SOA style integration into existing infrastructure

Continue reading “Not just a COTS product company… CoreFiling offer integration expertise to assist the wider XBRL community”

Who helps when your COREP submissions fail?

The market is rife with vendors offering ‘inexpensive’ solutions to the imminent problem of filing COREP disclosures to National Competent Authorities around Europe.  In particular, smaller firms with relatively straightforward needs may be tempted by the promise of ‘cheap and cheerful’ products.  Creating the XBRL documents is a fairly simple process, but organisations should think through the wider issues.  Licensing the right application will not be enough, whatever your vendor tells you.

Many regulators are still finalising their reporting rules, but even at this late stage the EBA’s guidelines are quite likely to change before the due date for the first submissions.  Some vendors will struggle to cope when the regulatory requirements change, not only before the initial filing date, but when further alterations occur, as they will surely do over time.  To what extent do vendors really understand the implications?  How quickly can they react to ensure that fully compliant XBRL is generated?  What happens if things go wrong?

Proven XBRL expertise is vital, especially at the service level, if vendors are to overcome any problems encountered by their clients.

What makes CoreFiling different?  We have been developing XBRL products and offering expert XBRL consultancy for well over ten years.  CoreFiling are the firm that provides XBRL support to many of the world’s leading integrators and consultancy firms.  Our expertise is built on a deep understanding of the XBRL standard.  CoreFiling are active contributors to the XBRL consortium that oversees the XBRL specifications; the company undertook most of the work in developing the key technical specification behind Eurofiling.  This affords us deep insight into the standard and informs our products and services.

Seahorse®, available via key CoreFiling partners, provides a straightforward, Excel-based solution for COREP, FINREP and Solvency II filing.  However, behind Seahorse lies over 200 man-years of intellectual property and proven expertise.

You may be thinking that Seahorse sounds fine for smaller organisations, but what about larger financial institutions with more complex needs?

More in a few days’ time…