A Guide to CRS Reporting Requirements for Insurance Companies

Nicolette Chasse
October 30, 2017

The Common Reporting Standard (CRS) is fast becoming the global standard for tax information reporting outside the United States. As more countries adopt CRS, and as penalties for late, incorrect or missed CRS filings become more severe, financial institutions need to know what their compliance requirements are. Following are clarification and detail about what insurers need to know about CRS reporting obligations.

Establishing Key Terms

Under the CRS, the term “Financial Institution” means a Custodial Institution, a Depository Institution, an Investment Entity, or a Specified Insurance Company.  (CRS, Section VIII: Defined Terms, A.3).

 A “Specified Insurance Company” is “any Entity that is an insurance company (or the holding company of an insurance company) that issues, or is obligated to make payments with respect to, A Cash Value Insurance Contract or an Annuity Contract.” (Section VIII, A.8).  Insurance companies that only provide general insurance or term life insurance will not be specified insurance companies, nor will reinsurance companies that only provide indemnity reinsurance contracts.

Typically, an insurance company meets the criteria of a Specified Insurance Company if:

  • It’s regulated as an insurance business in the country where it does business
  • More than 50% of the company’s gross income in the past calendar year came from insurance, reinsurance, and annuity contracts
  • At any time in the last calendar year, the combined value of the entity’s assets associated with insurance, reinsurance and annuity contracts was more than 50% of its total assets for that year.
  • The entity issues cash value insurance or annuity contracts

Insurance companies that provide only general insurance or term life insurance are typically not classified as FIs; likewise, reinsurance companies which provide only indemnity reinsurance contracts and insurance brokers are typically not considered to be FIs.

Of the five types of financial accounts that must be reported under CRS, two relate to insurance companies: annuity contracts and cash value insurance contracts.

Reporting Requirements

Under the CRS, all reporting FIs have the obligation to report the following:

  • Name, address, jurisdiction(s) of residence, TIN(s), date of birth, and place of birth of each reportable person that is an account holder
    • For insurers, reportable TINs may include insurance contract numbers.
  • The account number
  • Name and identifying number of the reporting FI
  • Account balance or value at the end of the relevant calendar year or other appropriate reporting period

The CRS does note that in reporting account balances or values, that Cash Value Insurance Contracts and Annuity Contracts, FIs should report the Cash Value or surrender value of the contracts.  (Section I, A.4).  

In order to meet the requirement to report residence of the account owner, insurers who provide Cash Value Insurance Contracts may rely on the current residence address in its records until  1) there is a change of circumstances that that causes the FI to know or have reason to know that the residence address is incorrect or unreliable, or 2) that the time of pay-out (whether full or partial)  or maturity of the Cash Value Insurance Contract.

Insurance companies do not have to report, review, or identify a preexisting individual account that is a Cash Value Insurance Contract or an Annuity Contract provided that the FI’s jurisdiction prevents FIs from selling contracts to residents of that jurisdiction.

Due Diligence Requirements

The CRS establishes an alternative due diligence procedure for Cash Value Insurance Contracts and Annuity Contracts in Paragraph B of the Special Due Diligence Rules.  The CRS advises that a reporting FI may presume that an individual beneficiary (other than the owner) of a Cash Value Insurance Contract or Annuity Contract receiving a death benefit is not a reportable person, and that FIs may treat such accounts as other than a reportable account unless the reporting FI has actual knowledge or reason to know that the beneficiary is a reportable person. If the beneficiary is a reportable person, the FI is required to follow the procedures established in paragraph B of Section III.

The Commentary to the CRS notes that an alternative procedure similar to the above may be necessary for certain employer-sponsored group insurance contracts or annuity contracts.  In such cases, the Commentary suggests adding a provision to account for group insurance contracts. In cases where such group insurance plans exist, the Commentary advises a provision to state something similar to the following: “A Reporting Financial Institution may treat a Financial Account that is a member’s interest in a Group Cash Value Insurance Contract or Group Annuity Contract as a Financial Account that is not a Reportable Account until the date on which an amount is payable to the employee/certificate holder or beneficiary, if the Financial Account that is a member’s interest in a Group Cash Value Insurance Contract or Group Annuity Contract meets the following requirements: 

  • The group cash value insurance contract or group annuity contract is issued to an employer and covers twenty-five or more employees/certificate holders;
  • The employees/certificate holders are entitled to receive any contract value related to their interest and to name beneficiaries for the benefit payable upon the employee’s death; and
  • The aggregate amount payable to any employee/certificate holder or beneficiary does not exceed $1 million.

(Commentary on Section VII, paragraph 13; pg. 153). The last provision is provided if the Financial Institution does not have a direct relationship with the employee/certificate holder at inception of the contract and thus may not be able to obtain documentation regarding their residence.

Conclusion

Insurers who fall under the definition of Financial Institution provided by the CRS are obligated to report on Cash Value Contracts and Annuity Contracts, so long as such contracts are allowed in the jurisdiction the FI is reporting from. These FIs have an obligation to comply with the due diligence requirements that the CRS imposes on them, and can make use of an alternate procedure to comply.

Take Action

Find out how Sovos enables insurers to navigate CRS compliance.

Get in touch to learn more about the Sovos Compass regulatory update service.

Sign up for Email Updates

Stay up to date with the latest tax and compliance updates that may impact your business.

Author

Nicolette Chasse

Nicolette Chasse is a Junior Regulatory Counsel at Sovos Compliance. Her main areas of focus are Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) reporting under FATCA and CRS and 1099 Federal Withholding Reporting. Nicolette received her B.A. at Trinity College and her J.D. at Penn State’s Dickinson School of Law. She is a member of the Massachusetts Bar.
Share This Post

LATAM VAT & Fiscal Reporting
May 20, 2020
Sovos Acquires Taxweb, Extends Tax Determination Capabilities in World’s Most Challenging Compliance Landscape

Earlier this month Sovos announced its second acquisition of 2020, completing our solution for Brazil with an unparalleled offering that solves tax compliance in the place where it is most challenging to do so.  Too many companies doing business in Brazil have been burdened by managing multiple point solutions for continuous transaction controls (CTCs), tax […]

E-Invoicing Compliance EMEA Italy VAT & Fiscal Reporting
December 2, 2020
Italian Tax Controls: Five Key Facts to Know Before the New Year

While Italy rolled out its continuous transaction controls (CTC) reform in 2019, 2020 has been a year of expansion. Italian authorities plan to leverage all potential benefits of the successful implementation of the country’s central e-invoicing platform. Many of the updates will either be launched or enforced in the upcoming year, or later in 2022. […]

Tax Compliance Tax Information Reporting United States
December 1, 2020
Unclaimed Property Dormancy Periods by State: What You Need to Know

Understanding unclaimed property dormancy periods by state and executing the appropriate decisions can make or break your company’s unclaimed property program. This is due primarily to the fact that each state has varying dormancy periods. To complicate matters even further, each state has specific dormancy periods for each corresponding property type. As a result, determining […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 1, 2020
How Was the Nevada Economic Nexus Law Modified?

When the Supreme Court ruled on South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc., remote sellers and marketplace facilitators across the country had to make changes in how they collected and remitted sales tax. The Nevada economic nexus law is one example of a state modifying its requirements for both remote sellers and marketplace facilitators in relation to […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 1, 2020
Does Oregon Have Economic Nexus Rules?

Following the South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. decision, the majority of states enacted legislation on how remote sellers and marketplace facilitators must collect and remit sales tax. However, Oregon has no economic nexus because it does not have a sales tax. Enforcement date: N/A Sales/transactions threshold: N/A Measurement period: N/A Included transactions/sales: N/A When You […]

Sales & Use Tax United States
December 1, 2020
Is There a Missouri Economic Nexus Sales Tax?

After the South Dakota v. Wayfair, Inc. decision, almost every state incorporated changes to how remote sellers must collect and remit sales tax. However, Missouri has not yet finalized legislation relating to an economic nexus sales tax. While Missouri has introduced several bills aimed at enacting economic nexus rules, none have become law. But this […]