How Do Insurers Apportion Premiums When the Risks Are Unknown?

Elliot Shulver
August 6, 2019

This blog was last updated on September 14, 2021

Global insurance programmes will cover risks in multiple jurisdictions throughout the world and allocating the premium between all these jurisdictions can be a major challenge for insurers.  It gets even more complicated when the risks of that particular programme are unknown at the time of contract inception.

Bon voyage

This could be, for example, where a ship is being insured for a voyage around the world.  In this particular scenario the exact route, number of port stopovers, or length of time spent at any one port may not be known at the exact time the insurance contract is taken out.

So, how should the premium be allocated and to which jurisdictions?

Many tax regimes don’t provide guidance on how premiums should be apportioned and leave it to the insurer to use a fair and reasonable apportionment method. This needs to be justifiable and shouldn’t be used as a way of reducing tax liabilities. The UK tax authority, HMRC, provide examples of apportionment, including one relating to marine and ships’ journeys. It states that the UK portion of a worldwide marine cargo cover policy can be calculated by taking the number of intra-UK journeys divided by the number of worldwide journeys.

A challenge for insurers

The insurer will therefore need to estimate the premium allocation, which could be based on historical data for such ships or for the type of journey the ship is going to make. This will then create the tax liabilities in the corresponding jurisdictions for which taxes should be declared and settled in the appropriate tax periods. Once the ship’s journey has begun, and a more accurate level of risk can be calculated, the relevant adjustments can be made to the taxes already declared.

This in turn creates additional issues relating to under and over declarations of tax as well as the extra administrative burden in adjusting the returns. Over declaring can be a significant problem in Italy where refunds are not allowed and in jurisdictions with Stamp Duty regimes, such as Malta and Cyprus, where refunds are only allowed after a cooling off period. Not declaring enough tax can also be a problem and may leave taxpayers open to penalties or possible questions from tax authorities.

Reducing the business risk

It is important, therefore, that an insurer can justify their premium apportionment and back this up with reliable and consistent data sets. This will ensure risks are minimised especially when determining the correct amount of tax due in each jurisdiction.

The challenges an insurer faces when allocating their insurance premiums to jurisdictions that may be unknown can be complex and risky. Careful monitoring and valid historical records should help to reduce the risks involved and to ensure a compliant approach to insurance premium taxes around the world.

 

Take Action

To read more about the insurance landscape and tax compliance, download Trends: Insurance Premium Tax and follow us on LinkedIn and Twitter 

Sign up for Email Updates

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

Author

Elliot Shulver

Consulting Manager, IPT compliance for indirect taxes at Sovos. A chartered accountant with 6 years’ experience of indirect tax, including IPT, VAT and Gambling Duties, Elliot is responsible for our Consultancy practice, as well as providing regulatory updates for our global compliance solution suite.
Share this post

North America Sales & Use Tax
February 6, 2025
The Tariff and Sales Tax Mishmash – Untying the Mess

This blog was last updated on February 6, 2025 Talk of tariffs dominates the current news cycle with some commentators suggesting that tariffs will spell disaster for our economy while others say the exact opposite. We’ve seen the stock market sometimes fluctuate as tariffs are announced but later suspended, leaving us to wonder whether an […]

retailer dtc wine shipping
North America ShipCompliant
February 6, 2025
Retailer DtC Wine Shipping: The Time Has Come

This blog was last updated on February 6, 2025 By Tom Wark, Executive Director, National Association of Wine Retailers We are often reminded by the media and those in the wine industry—as well as by wine enthusiasts—that the three-tier system of alcohol distribution in most states hinders consumer access to the expansive number of wines […]

Montana 1099-DA
North America Tax Information Reporting
February 5, 2025
State Filing Alert: Montana’s New 1099-DA Requirements for Crypto Brokers

This blog was last updated on February 5, 2025 Reporting digital asset transactions on Form 1099-DA just got a little more complicated. For 2025 transactions, crypto brokers that file Form 1099-DA with the IRS will be required to file the 1099-DA with the State of Montana. This makes Montana the first state to introduce a […]

North America ShipCompliant
January 23, 2025
DtC Wine Shipping in 2024: A Year-in-Review

This blog was last updated on January 28, 2025 The direct-to-consumer (DtC) wine shipping channel faced a storm of challenges in 2024, navigating some of the toughest market conditions in over a decade. As inflation tightened wallets and consumer behaviors shifted, the industry recorded its steepest declines in shipment volume and value since the inception […]

Form 1099-DA Crypto Transactions
North America Tax Information Reporting
January 21, 2025
What is Form 1099-DA and How Does it Impact Crypto Transactions?

This blog was last updated on January 24, 2025 The IRS has released Form 1099-DA and its accompanying instructions for filing for TY 2025. Form 1099-DA is the newest IRS information return, designed for reporting digital asset proceeds from broker transactions and is required to be filed by brokers managing digital assets such as NFTs […]