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”

Who helps when your COREP submissions fail? (part 2)

Last time, I discussed the need for smaller financial institutions to take a serious look at the XBRL credentials of COREP software vendors offering low-end XBRL solutions and highlighted the advantages of trusting XBRL expert CoreFiling and our flexible, easy, inexpensive Seahorse® solution.  However, larger banks and financial organisations needing a tightly integrated global reporting framework will require a more strategic approach.

Here, the need for proven XBRL expertise becomes even more crucial, but many traditional banking software vendors have little or no XBRL expertise and rely on externally sourced plug-in modules to cater for the XBRL data conversion.  Such modules often rely on hard-coding methods to detect the XBRL taxonomy against which the reporting documents are created.  This may result in a lack of flexibility and agility to respond when regulations change and the taxonomy alters.

Depending on the client situation, CoreFiling deliver robust yet flexible solutions in the form of either packaged applications, the XBRL Disclosure Management Platform™ (XDMP), or commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components integrated into a client environment.  Our solutions are taxonomy driven and built so that new versions of the taxonomy can be dropped into the system without the need for hard re-coding each time.

For example, the XDMP solution is the culmination of a highly focused development effort by CoreFiling in conjunction with its partner EMC, experts in document management, and a major consultancy firm.  It is based on COTS components and, just like Seahorse, it is underpinned by the True North® XBRL processing and validation engine, widely regarded as the most conformant and powerful validator on the market; the UK’s Financial Conduct Authority has chosen True North for its EBA reporting requirements and validation of the COREP and FINREP filings it receives from the UK financial market.

CoreFiling’s long-standing commitment to the furtherance of the XBRL standards and our active participation in the XBRL consortium that oversees the development of the XBRL specifications means that we have an exceptional understanding of XBRL technology, which in turn informs our development process.  Based on our extensive experience and insight, we are ideally placed to help our clients implement successful, flexible and compliant solutions.

Even if your traditional vendor is still struggling to produce XBRL documents in time for you to meet your COREP obligations, there’s no need to feel stuck. CoreFiling offer a safety net in the form of Seahorse to help filers overcome the immediate XBRL reporting obstacle.