Want to see how sales training for insurance brokers can help teams simplify offers without sounding pushy?
Introduction to Funded Reinsurance: Why Is The PRA Tightening The Rules?
Funded reinsurance has moved rapidly up the regulatory agenda. What was once a relatively specialist part of the UK life insurance market is now receiving much closer attention from the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA).
The reason is straightforward. UK life insurers are using funded reinsurance more extensively, particularly alongside the growing bulk purchase annuity market. These arrangements can give insurers access to additional capital and different asset classes, but they can also create counterparty, collateral, concentration and recapture risks that are difficult to measure.
The PRA believes the existing regulatory treatment may not fully reflect those risks. In April 2026, it published proposals designed to change how certain funded reinsurance arrangements are valued under Solvency UK and to bring their treatment closer to economically similar investments.
For insurers, reinsurers, brokers and other firms operating around the life insurance market, this matters. Funded reinsurance is not being prohibited. However, the economics of future transactions could change significantly if the PRA’s proposals are implemented broadly as consulted on.
What Is Funded Reinsurance?
Funded reinsurance is a form of reinsurance commonly associated with annuity portfolios. A UK insurer transfers both insurance liabilities and related asset risks to a reinsurer. The insurer generally pays a substantial upfront premium, while the reinsurer becomes responsible for making future payments under the agreement.
This differs from traditional reinsurance arrangements that may primarily transfer mortality, longevity or other insurance risks. With funded reinsurance, the asset side of the transaction is particularly important.
The arrangement is normally collateralised. Assets are placed within an agreed collateral structure to provide protection to the insurer if the reinsurer fails to meet its obligations. That collateral can reduce risk, but it does not automatically remove it.
Asset quality, liquidity, valuation, cash-flow matching and the legal terms governing access to collateral can all affect the insurer’s eventual exposure. The financial strength of the reinsurer matters too.
This creates a central regulatory question. If an insurer transfers a portfolio through funded reinsurance rather than holding economically similar investments directly, should the capital consequences be substantially different?
The PRA increasingly believes they should not be. That is important for insurers assessing transactions and for advisers involved in complex commercial conversations. The wider question of whether insurance products and structures deliver appropriate outcomes is also examined in General Insurance Fair Value: Are Products Delivering?. Clear explanations of risk and value also matter in Sales Training for Insurance Brokers, where technical detail has to be translated into something clients can understand.
Why Is The PRA Concerned About Funded Reinsurance?
The PRA’s concern is not simply that funded reinsurance is growing. Its concern is that exposures could grow faster than the risks are recognised within insurers’ balance sheets and capital requirements.
The Prudential Regulation Authority says the current treatment does not appropriately reflect the underlying risks and can create incentives for insurers to use these arrangements rather than make economically similar investments directly.
That distinction matters. Regulation can influence commercial behaviour. If two economically similar exposures receive materially different capital treatment, insurers have an incentive to favour the structure carrying the lower regulatory cost.
The PRA is particularly concerned about complex exposures involving illiquid or private credit-related assets. These assets are not necessarily inappropriate. The problem is that their value, liquidity and behaviour under stress can be harder to assess than those of simpler and more liquid investments.
There is also counterparty concentration. A life insurer could build substantial exposure to a relatively small number of reinsurers. If one counterparty subsequently experiences financial difficulty, the insurer may need to bring the transferred assets and liabilities back onto its own balance sheet.
This is known as recapture risk. It is one of the reasons funded reinsurance cannot be assessed purely by looking at the position while everything is working normally.
The insurer needs to understand what happens if the arrangement fails under stressed conditions. That includes the assets it could receive, their value at that point and the capital required to support the recaptured business.
Why Has Funded Reinsurance Grown So Quickly?
The expansion of the UK bulk purchase annuity market provides much of the background. Defined benefit pension schemes have increasingly looked to insurers to secure member benefits through buy-ins and buyouts.
That creates opportunities for life insurers, but writing large volumes of annuity business requires substantial capital and investment capacity. Funded reinsurance can help insurers manage those demands by transferring part of the asset and liability exposure to a reinsurer.
Used carefully, it can therefore support capacity within the market. The PRA itself recognises that these arrangements can provide access to additional capital and asset classes.
But rapid expansion creates another problem. A structure that works well at relatively modest volumes can become more significant to financial stability as exposures increase across the industry.
The PRA has also observed the use of lower-rated counterparties and increased risk-taking within some collateral arrangements. If that trend continued alongside strong growth, the regulator believes undercapitalised risks could accumulate. Cost pressures elsewhere in insurance show why underlying risk needs to be understood properly, as explored in Motor Insurance Repair Costs: Why Are Claims Rising?.
For insurance businesses, this is a reminder that technical developments can quickly become commercial issues. Brokers and sales teams must be able to explain increasingly complex market changes without overwhelming clients. That communication challenge is one reason Insurance Broker Sales Training Courses should focus on clarity rather than simply teaching people to present more information.
What Is The PRA Proposing To Change?
The central proposal concerns the counterparty default adjustment, usually shortened to CDA. Under Solvency UK, an insurer that transfers liabilities through reinsurance recognises an asset representing the amounts it expects to recover from the reinsurer.
That recoverable cannot simply be treated as risk-free. Its value needs to reflect the possibility that the reinsurer could default.
The PRA proposes changing the CDA calculation for funded reinsurance so that the treatment more closely resembles the treatment of default and downgrade risks on comparable assets held directly.
The proposed approach uses the financial strength of the reinsurer as an important starting point. Credit quality and features of the collateral arrangement would then influence the resulting adjustment.
Strong collateral protections could improve the treatment. Relevant considerations include the amount of collateral, how well collateral cash flows match the reinsurance obligations and the credit quality of the assets within the collateral portfolio.
The PRA also wants firms to consider the worst collateral portfolio permitted under the contractual investment guidelines, rather than assuming that today’s portfolio will necessarily remain unchanged.
That point is significant. A collateral account might look strong when a funded reinsurance transaction begins. But if the contract permits the reinsurer to substitute those assets later, the insurer needs to understand the risk created by what could legally be held, not merely what happens to be held today.
This makes contractual design, investment guidelines and collateral controls more important. Firms will need to understand how those features affect both the economic risk and proposed regulatory treatment. The consequences of risk not being adequately reflected in protection are also relevant to SME Underinsurance: Why Are Businesses Still Exposed?.
Could Funded Reinsurance Require Significantly More Capital?
Potentially, yes. The PRA’s illustrative calculations show why the proposals have attracted attention.
Before the proposed changes, the PRA said firms generally held total capital equivalent to roughly 2% to 4% of the value of annuity liabilities for an average funded reinsurance transaction. It contrasted that with approximately 11% to 15% for comparable investments.
Under its proposed approach, the PRA estimated total valuation and capital charges of around 10% of the best estimate of underlying annuity liabilities for an average transaction. This includes the CDA, solvency capital requirement and risk margin.
However, the effect could vary considerably according to the strength of the reinsurer and collateral protections.
The PRA illustrated this variation using counterparties with different credit characteristics. Its estimates indicated materially higher requirements where a lower-rated counterparty was combined with weaker collateral controls.
For a hypothetical new bulk purchase annuity transaction where 15% of liabilities were ceded through funded reinsurance, the regulator estimated an increase in initial required backing assets of around 1.5% for a transaction using an average current counterparty. Its illustrations were much lower for a stronger AA counterparty and substantially higher for a BBB counterparty.
These are illustrations rather than universal figures. Actual effects depend on the structure of each transaction, the insurer’s model, collateral, counterparty strength, diversification and other risk characteristics.
But the direction is clear. If regulatory capital better reflects the economic risk, some funded reinsurance structures could become less financially attractive.
That could also change the conversations taking place throughout the insurance market. An Insurance Sales Trainer working with technical insurance teams should therefore help people communicate commercial consequences as clearly as the underlying product features.
Why Does Collateral Quality Matter So Much?
Collateral sits at the centre of the protection offered by many funded reinsurance arrangements. If the reinsurer defaults, the cedant may need to rely on those assets to support the liabilities it takes back.
The headline value of the collateral is therefore only part of the story.
An insurer also needs to consider what the assets are, how easily they could be valued or sold, their credit quality and whether their cash flows match the liabilities being supported.
Private credit and other illiquid assets can introduce additional uncertainty. Their values may be less observable than publicly traded securities, particularly during market stress. Liquidity can also deteriorate at exactly the point an insurer needs flexibility.
Correlation adds another layer of risk. The reinsurer could come under pressure at the same time as the collateral assets lose value. If both events are driven by similar economic conditions, the protection offered by collateral may be weaker than expected.
This explains why the PRA’s proposed framework rewards stronger collateral arrangements rather than treating every collateralised transaction in the same way.
Insurers also need effective investment guidelines. These determine which assets can enter the collateral portfolio and can therefore influence the insurer’s future exposure.
The key question is not simply, “What collateral do we have today?” It is, “What could this collateral portfolio look like under the contractual terms when conditions are difficult?”
That same distinction between features and genuine value appears in client-facing insurance conversations. B2B Insurance Sales Training can help teams explain why apparently similar solutions may carry very different levels of risk and value.
What Is Recapture Risk?
Recapture is one of the most important risks surrounding funded reinsurance. It describes the possibility that the cedant has to take previously transferred assets and liabilities back onto its own balance sheet.
Imagine an insurer transfers part of an annuity portfolio to a reinsurer. The arrangement performs as expected for several years. The reinsurer then suffers severe financial stress or defaults.
The insurer may suddenly need to regain control of the business. The important question becomes whether the collateral available at that moment is sufficient and suitable to support the returning liabilities.
If asset values have fallen, credit quality has deteriorated or the collateral does not match the liabilities properly, the insurer could face a significant capital impact.
The PRA’s 2025 Life Insurance Stress Test reinforced this concern. Its subsequent consultation noted that recapturing arrangements from a single funded reinsurance counterparty could materially affect firms’ capital positions, despite exposures being relatively modest at the end of 2024.
That helps explain the regulator’s forward-looking approach. Waiting until exposures are much larger before addressing the capital treatment could leave the industry dealing with risks after they have become more difficult to manage.
Insurers therefore need credible recapture planning. That means understanding potential triggers, collateral access, asset management requirements, operational capacity and the capital position that could emerge after a counterparty failure. Questions about complex insurance structures, costs and customer outcomes also arise in Leasehold Buildings Insurance: Are Costs Becoming Fairer?.
Will The PRA Changes Stop Insurers Using Funded Reinsurance?
That does not appear to be the objective. The PRA has not proposed banning funded reinsurance. Instead, it wants the regulatory treatment to reflect the underlying economics more accurately.
Strong transactions may therefore remain attractive. A financially strong reinsurer, robust collateral requirements, good cash-flow matching and carefully controlled investment guidelines could support a more favourable risk assessment than a weaker structure.
What may change is the incentive to use funded reinsurance primarily because it receives advantageous regulatory treatment compared with a similar direct investment.
This could influence pricing across the bulk purchase annuity market. If insurers need more backing assets for certain transactions, some of that additional cost could ultimately influence how aggressively they compete for pension scheme business.
It could also affect reinsurer selection. Credit strength, collateral terms and contractual flexibility may carry greater economic consequences under the proposed approach.
That does not automatically mean insurers will choose only the strongest counterparties. Commercial decisions involve price, capacity, diversification and risk appetite as well as credit ratings. But weaker structures may need to offer enough economic value to compensate for higher regulatory costs.
For insurance brokers, a similar principle applies when clients compare apparently similar propositions. Effective Insurance Broker Sales Coaching helps advisers move discussions beyond headline price and towards risk, suitability and long-term value.
When Could The New Funded Reinsurance Treatment Apply?
The PRA proposed an implementation date of 1 July 2027 for the changes contained in its April 2026 consultation.
Importantly, the proposals included a savings provision for arrangements where all covered risks had been fully transferred to the reinsurer on or before 30 September 2026. The proposed new CDA rules would not apply to those arrangements.
The consultation also proposed specific exceptions, including certain intra-group quota share arrangements and particular Part VII reinsurance structures subject to the detailed conditions in the proposed rules.
The distinction between existing and future business is important. The PRA stated that its proposals would not create a day-one balance-sheet impact for transactions protected by the savings provision. The funded reinsurance proposals sit within the wider prudential framework covered in Solvency UK: What Is Changing For Insurers In 2026?.
For new transactions, however, firms may need to assess the proposed capital consequences much earlier in the deal process. Counterparty selection, collateral guidelines and contractual terms could directly affect the economics.
The consultation closed on 31 July 2026. Firms should therefore distinguish carefully between the PRA’s existing supervisory expectations and the additional rules proposed in CP8/26 until the final policy position is confirmed.
This is particularly important when communicating regulatory change to clients. Statements about proposed requirements should not be presented as though they are already final rules.
What Should UK Insurance Firms Be Doing Now?
Firms exposed to funded reinsurance should understand their position before focusing on the eventual regulatory calculation.
That starts with counterparty concentration. Insurers need a clear view of how much exposure they have to individual reinsurers and groups, including how those exposures could change as the bulk purchase annuity market develops.
Collateral needs equally close attention. Firms should understand the assets currently held, the investment guidelines governing substitutions and the potential worst-case portfolio permitted by those guidelines.
Recapture planning should be practical rather than theoretical. Firms need to know what would happen operationally if a large arrangement returned to the balance sheet during stressed conditions.
Pricing models may also need to evolve. If the eventual rules increase the cost of certain funded reinsurance structures, deal teams need to understand that impact before committing to a transaction.
There is also a communication challenge. Regulatory, actuarial, investment and commercial teams need a shared understanding of the risk. A technically accurate explanation that nobody outside the specialist team understands is of limited value.
The same applies when insurance businesses speak to clients. In-House Insurance Sales Training can help technical teams explain complicated changes in plain English without stripping away the detail that matters.
What Could The Changes Mean For The Wider Insurance Market?
The implications extend beyond individual life insurers. Funded reinsurance connects UK insurers with global reinsurers, asset managers, private credit markets and pension risk transfer activity.
If the regulatory economics change, capital could move differently across that system.
Insurers may retain more assets directly. They may alter the proportion of new annuity business ceded to reinsurers. Some may favour stronger counterparties or negotiate tighter collateral terms. Reinsurers could adjust pricing or asset strategies in response.
Competition in the bulk purchase annuity market could change too. The PRA has specifically identified the possibility that the existing treatment creates competitive distortions. Firms making greater use of funded reinsurance may currently obtain a different capital outcome from insurers holding comparable risks directly.
Removing or reducing that difference could create a more consistent basis for competition, although individual firms will still have different investment strategies, internal models and risk appetites.
There is also a broader policy objective. The regulator wants the life insurance sector to remain capable of supporting productive investment while maintaining policyholder protection and financial resilience. That balance between effective regulation and proportionality is also central to Insurance Rule Simplification: What Is The FCA Changing?.
That balance matters. Regulation that is too weak can allow hidden risks to accumulate. Regulation that is unnecessarily restrictive can reduce capacity and make economically useful transactions harder to complete.
The challenge for the PRA is therefore not to eliminate funded reinsurance. It is to ensure firms have appropriate incentives to use it where the economics genuinely make sense.
What Does Funded Reinsurance Mean For Insurance Brokers?
Many insurance brokers will never arrange funded reinsurance directly. Even so, the issue illustrates a wider change taking place across insurance.
Risk is becoming harder to explain.
Regulatory requirements, capital structures, cyber exposures, private markets and increasingly complex insurance products mean clients often need more help understanding what they are actually buying.
That creates an opportunity for brokers who can simplify complexity without oversimplifying it.
A client rarely needs every technical detail immediately. They need to understand what the issue means, why it matters to them, what could happen if it is ignored and what decision they need to make next.
This is where product knowledge alone is not enough. Insurance professionals can understand a subject completely and still struggle to communicate its value clearly.
Good Sales Training for Insurance Teams should therefore help people turn technical knowledge into useful client conversations. The aim is not to pressure clients. It is to make complex decisions easier to understand.
Funded Reinsurance FAQs
Why is funded reinsurance used by life insurers?
Funded reinsurance can help a life insurer transfer both asset and liability risks associated with an annuity portfolio to a reinsurer. This can provide additional capacity and access to different investment opportunities, while helping insurers manage the capital and investment demands created by new annuity business. Funded reinsurance has become particularly relevant as the UK bulk purchase annuity market has expanded and life insurers have competed for larger volumes of pension scheme business.
Why does the PRA think funded reinsurance is risky?
The PRA considers funded reinsurance potentially risky because it can create counterparty default, collateral, concentration, liquidity and recapture risks. The regulator is particularly concerned about exposures involving illiquid assets and what could happen if a life insurer has to take transferred assets and liabilities back during financial stress. It also believes the current regulatory treatment can underestimate some funded reinsurance risks and create incentives to use these arrangements instead of economically similar direct investments.
Is funded reinsurance being banned in the UK?
No. Funded reinsurance is not being banned in the UK. The PRA’s proposals are designed to change its regulatory treatment rather than prohibit the arrangements. The objective is to make the capital and valuation consequences more closely reflect the economic risks involved. Funded reinsurance using stronger counterparties, robust collateral arrangements and appropriate contractual protections could therefore remain commercially attractive.
What is the counterparty default adjustment?
The counterparty default adjustment, or CDA, reflects expected losses arising from the possibility that a reinsurer fails to meet its obligations. For funded reinsurance, the PRA proposes changing the CDA calculation so that it better reflects the reinsurer’s credit strength, the quality and structure of collateral and risks comparable with those attached to economically similar investments held directly by an insurer.
Why is collateral important in funded reinsurance?
Collateral is important in funded reinsurance because it provides assets that the insurer may be able to rely on if the reinsurer defaults. However, the protection depends on more than the headline collateral value. Asset credit quality, liquidity, cash-flow matching, contractual investment guidelines and the insurer’s ability to access the assets during stress can all affect how much real protection the funded reinsurance arrangement provides.
What is recapture risk in funded reinsurance?
Recapture risk in funded reinsurance is the risk that assets and liabilities previously transferred to a reinsurer have to return to the original life insurer. If recapture happens during financial stress, collateral values may have fallen, credit quality may have deteriorated or the assets may no longer match the returning liabilities effectively. The insurer could then face operational pressure and a significant increase in capital requirements.
Could the PRA proposals make funded reinsurance more expensive?
Yes. The PRA proposals could make certain funded reinsurance transactions more expensive by requiring substantially more backing assets if the proposed treatment is implemented. The size of the impact would depend on factors including the reinsurer’s financial strength, collateral quality, contractual protections, investment guidelines and the insurer’s own risk profile and modelling. Stronger structures could therefore experience a different capital impact from weaker arrangements.
When are the proposed funded reinsurance changes due to take effect?
The PRA proposed 1 July 2027 as the implementation date for the funded reinsurance changes in its April 2026 consultation. The consultation also included a savings provision for arrangements where all relevant risks had been transferred on or before 30 September 2026. Because the document was a consultation, insurers should check the final PRA policy and rules before treating the proposed funded reinsurance requirements as settled.
Will stronger reinsurers receive better treatment?
Potentially. The proposed funded reinsurance methodology takes account of the reinsurer’s financial strength and allows features of strong collateral arrangements to influence the calculation. A stronger counterparty combined with robust collateral protections could therefore receive different treatment from a weaker structure. This means reinsurer selection, collateral quality and contractual protections could become even more important to the economics of future funded reinsurance transactions.
What should insurers review now?
Insurers using funded reinsurance should review counterparty concentrations, collateral investment guidelines, potential worst-case collateral portfolios, recapture plans and the capital implications of new transactions. They should also examine how contractual terms could affect future collateral quality and make sure commercial, investment, actuarial and risk teams share a clear understanding of how the proposed PRA funded reinsurance framework could affect pricing, capital and future transaction decisions.
Where Does Funded Reinsurance Go From Here?
Funded reinsurance is unlikely to disappear. It serves a genuine commercial purpose and can provide life insurers with useful capacity as the pension risk transfer market develops.
But the regulatory environment around it is changing.
The PRA’s position is that the capital treatment should better reflect the economic risks. If the eventual rules achieve that, firms will have less incentive to choose funded reinsurance simply because its regulatory treatment is more favourable than holding comparable investments directly.
That could make counterparty quality, collateral design and recapture planning even more important. It could also change the pricing of some bulk purchase annuity transactions and influence how insurers allocate capital.
The wider lesson is simple. Complex structures do not make risk disappear. They move it. The importance of understanding how insurance firms perform under severe conditions is also reflected in General Insurance Stress Test: What Will DyGIST Reveal?.
For UK insurers, the task is to understand where that risk ultimately sits and ensure enough financial resilience exists if conditions deteriorate. For brokers and other insurance professionals, the challenge is communicating increasingly technical changes in language clients can understand.
That is also why Insurance Broker Sales Workshops should focus on clarity, value and confident conversations rather than pressure. When the subject is complicated, making the decision easier to understand becomes part of the value you provide.
Funded reinsurance can continue to play a role in the UK life insurance market. But if the PRA’s proposed approach becomes final policy, firms will increasingly need to demonstrate that the capital treatment, collateral and counterparty strength genuinely reflect the risks they are taking.
We deliver tailored insurance broker sales training, insurance sales workshops and sales coaching for individual brokers, teams and insurance businesses across the UK. Training is built around genuine insurance client conversations rather than generic sales theory, helping brokers improve questioning, listening, needs discovery, value communication, objection handling, quote follow-up, cross-selling and renewal conversations. Whether you want to improve quote conversion, reduce the focus on price, develop broker confidence, increase client retention or create a more consistent sales approach across your insurance team, our sales training for insurance brokers helps brokers turn more opportunities into clients while keeping conversations natural, professional and pressure-free.
More Insurance sales training insights
Pure Protection Insurance: Why Is The UK Gap So Big?
Insurance Broker Consolidation: Is M&A Changing The Market?
Captive Insurance UK: Why Is The Market Set To Grow?
Travel Insurance Underwriting: Are Decisions Fair Enough?
Contents Insurance UK: Why Are Millions Still Uncovered?
Insurance Premium Finance: Are Customers Paying Too Much?
Ready to elevate your insurance broker sales techniques?
Whether you’re a B2B salesperson looking to enhance your sales skills or a leader aiming to sharpen your sales strategy in business-to-business selling, let’s work together to take your sales pitch to the next level
If you are comparing options, it helps to review a focused insurance broker sales training that shows how clearer value leads to faster client decisions.
