Saturday, September 6, 2025

Membership options

Home Blog Page 4

Goodwin hires Christopher Pozzo as partner in financial services practice 

Global law firm Goodwin has appointed Christopher Pozzo as partner in the company’s financial services practice. 

Pozzo has extensive experience advising clients across the insurance sector and beyond on a range of corporate and transactional matters.  

Subscribe to Ci Premium to continue reading
Captive Intelligence provides high-value information, industry analysis, exclusive interviews and business intelligence tools to professionals in the captive insurance market.

SRG acquires Ecclesia’s Netherlands and Belgium businesses 

Insurance intermediary, Specialist Risk Group (SRG) has completed the acquisition of German broker Ecclesia’s businesses in the Netherlands and Belgium. 

Originally announced in January 2025, this transaction marks SRG’s formal entry into mainland Europe and represents a significant milestone in its international expansion. 

Subscribe to Ci Premium to continue reading
Captive Intelligence provides high-value information, industry analysis, exclusive interviews and business intelligence tools to professionals in the captive insurance market.

Vermont, Cayman leading formations in another stellar 2025 – Ci DataHub 

0
  • Vermont, Cayman license more than half of the quarter’s new captives 
  • Healthcare sector contributes largest proportion of Q2 formations 
  • United States’ domiciles home to two thirds of new captives in 2025
  • Revised figures show Q1 formations in 2025 ahead of ‘23 and ‘24  

A flurry of captive formations from the healthcare sector has 2025 on track for a strong chance to match or beat new licence numbers of recent years.

In our second quarterly DataHub update, we share insights from the 57 new captives formed in Q2 across the 52 domiciles we are actively tracking.

We reported in May that 63 new captives had been formed in Q1 with this number now revised up to 79 since further licences were published.

This new data puts 2025 ahead of both 2024 and 2023 at the first quarter mark, and while the Q2 numbers lag behind at this moment, these are likely to see an increase too.

Healthcare’s captive love-in 

While Real Estate was the standout sector for new formations in the first three months of the year, Healthcare, an ever-reliable contributor of captive business particularly in the United States, has been the big contributor to new formations in Q2.

The sector now accounts for 11.7% of new formations in 2025, behind Insurance on 12.7% and just ahead of Real Estate (9.6%).

Among those healthcare organisations forming captives in the second quarter were San Diego-based Scripps Health, the San Juan Regional Medical Center and the Kentucky-headquartered Graves-Gilbert Clinic.

If you are not a subscriber to Ci DataHub and would like more information on these captives, including when they were licensed, where they are domiciled and who manages them, request a demo by emailing Lucy. 

While Cayman is expected to lead the charge on healthcare captives, to date in 2025 Vermont and Cayman have each licensed four, while others have been formed in Arizona, Hawaii and Washington DC. 

Vermont, Cayman bring the volume 

Across formations of all captive types and sectors, Vermont led the way in the second quarter with 19 new licences issued, followed closely by Cayman with 16.

Vermont also crossed the 700 active captive mark after a net addition of 17, having had two captives surrender licences during the quarter.

The industry sectors forming captives in Vermont reflect the global trend too, with Real Estate and Healthcare leading the way among new formations in the world’s leading domicile in 2025.

Domiciles across the United States have licensed 65.7% of the new captives formed in the first half of 2025, followed by Bermuda and the Caribbean jurisdictions with 19.7%.  

Formations across Europe, including the EU domiciles and offshore centres such as Guernsey, lag behind with 10.9%. 

While France has attracted much of the attention for new captive business since 2023, it is Luxembourg that has got off to a relative flyer this year with seven new captives licensed in the first half of 2025.



Companies from France (two), Germany (two), Belgium (two) and Spain (one) have chosen the Grand Duchy to domicile their captive emphasising the continued demand for specialist captive centres. 

In Asia in 2025, three captives have been formed – one each in Singapore, Hong Kong and Labuan. 

Established managers keep their share 

The captive management landscape, particularly in the US, remains diverse. 

While we continue to see consolidation, with the recent news Brown & Brown has agreed to acquire Accession Risk Management Group, Inc, meaning captive managers Oxford Risk Management Group and Risk Management Advisors will soon be part of a much larger group, new players continue to make their mark. 

Broker-owned giants Marsh and Aon do lead the way on new formations, however, with Aon contributing almost 20% of new Q2 2025 captives tracked by DataHub.

Across the entire first half of 2025, Marsh leads the way managing 14.4% of new captives, with Aon and Strategic Risk Solutions each on 12.4%.

To dig deeper into who is forming captives, where they are domiciled and who is managing them, request a demo of Ci DataHub to find out more and subscribe.

Propriety Insurance partner Grid151 on title insurance for real estate captives 

Propriety Insurance Advisors has formed a strategic partnership with Grid151 in an attempt to accelerate growth in title insurance uptake among real estate captives. 

Captive Intelligence reported in April that a significant opportunity existed for captive owners with large property portfolios to reinsure a layer of the title insurance associated with their properties. 

Subscribe to Ci Premium to continue reading
Captive Intelligence provides high-value information, industry analysis, exclusive interviews and business intelligence tools to professionals in the captive insurance market.

Fitch issues “systemic risk” warning over UK captive regime

Credit rating agency Fitch is warning the UK government that a new, proportionate captive regime could lead to “growing pockets of risk” accumulating “outside the core regulated insurance sector” and increasing systemic risk.

The intervention came after Captive Intelligence reported last month that the Treasury had instructed regulators to design a competitive and bespoke regulatory environment for captives, a move which has been widely welcomed and applauded by industry.

Subscribe to Ci Premium to continue reading
Captive Intelligence provides high-value information, industry analysis, exclusive interviews and business intelligence tools to professionals in the captive insurance market.

US brokers forced into group captive embrace, accelerates growth

0

The group captive concept has become so popular in the United States that more brokers and sub brokers are having to set up their own alternative offering to avoid being left behind, according to Rob Collins, captive segment leader and managing director at Guy Carpenter.

Speaking on the latest episode of the Global Captive Podcast alongside Linda Johnson, executive vice president and chief underwriting officer at Old Republic Risk Management, Collins explained what had been driving booming group captive utilisation in recent years.

“The growth in group captives is driven by the insured; the business owner’s desire to control their insurance costs and outcomes,” Collins said.

“Thirty-five to 40 years ago, this product was new to the market and was really only available to the largest buyers, the most sophisticated buyers.

“Now that’s not the case any longer. The idea of controlling your insurance outcome by commitment to safety and being able to have a stable, reliable product – it’s not always the cheapest product, but it’s something that provides tailored, customised coverages and has consistent pricing over the long term, and I think that’s really attractive to any risk manager or any CFO.”

Johnson pointed out that another area of significant growth for group captives has been the expansion into new lines of insurance, away from the traditional high frequency, low severity profiles.

“Now, in this marketplace, you are starting to see coverages that are much more severity driven, which is creating a new dynamic within the group captive market,” she said.

“We’re finding because of the sophistication of the captive consultants and the customers that are coming into this marketplace, that severity driven risks can equally be handled within the group captive models, which I find really fascinating. You wouldn’t have convinced me 30 years ago that that was a good place for them to be.”

The barrier to entry for group captive members has also been steadily decreasing, while the range in size of insurance buyers participating is broadening.

“We see many companies that are spending as low as $75,000 or a $100,000 on their casualty insurance programmes going into group captives,” Collins added.

“They’re doing that because the barriers to entry are very low these days. The capital contribution from them is relatively small, so they can leverage the stability of a group.

“If you have 50, or 100 or 300 members in a group captive, there’s a lot of stability and buying power that comes with that that they can tap into immediately with a pretty low barrier of entry from a capital perspective. Same with collateral; the collateral can be spread out and be manageable over a period of time.”

Guy Carpenter works with group captives on reinsurance buying and legacy solutions, while Old Republic provides fronting services to the growing marketplace.

Collins observed that the increasingly mainstream nature of group captives is only going to accelerate as more brokers spot the opportunity while seeing clients move into the strategy – with or without them.

The danger for brokers not embracing group captives is that they are left behind.

“The large captive managers that have driven the growth and product development within group captives over the last 30 to 40 years, they’ve relied on a pretty broad distribution network of brokers to feed business into their groups,” Collins added.

“What we’re seeing now, which is a little bit of a shift, is those other brokers, sub brokers, starting their own group captive division.

“So they’re looking to try to capture that business and control it themselves within their own agency or broker network, which is a different wrinkle. That just speaks to the fact that every broker needs to have an alternative solution for their customers, and if they don’t, they will either be left behind or be sharing their revenue – which is obviously precious to them – with other brokers and so I think that that will continue to fuel growth as well.

“We’re seeing new startups and we’re getting calls all the time from some of the brokers that have just been sub brokers in this space now looking to control that element of solution for their clients.”

Listen to the full episode and discussion on group captives on the Global Captive Podcast here, or on any podcast app. Just search for ‘Global Captive Podcast’.

GCP Short: America’s group captive surge

0
Rob Collins, Guy Carpenter
Linda Johnson, Old Republic Risk Management

In this GCP Short, produced in partnership with Guy Carpenter, Richard takes a closer look at the surge in group captive business in the United States.

Naturally on GCP we do tend to focus more on pure captives and even captive cell utilisation, but the growth in group captives, particularly in the United States, has been huge in recent year.

The US market brings large groups of mid market or smaller companies together to insure an increasing range of lines such as workers’ comp, auto, property and various liability coverages, and is opening up the captive concept to a huge pool of insureds.

Richard is joined by Rob Collins, Captive Segment Leader and Managing Director at Guy Carpenter, and Linda Johnson, Executive Vice President and Chief Underwriting Officer at Old Republic Risk Management.

Our two guests provide services to group captives across the US, and they share their views on why we are seeing such growth in this area, what is driving some of the new trends, and how to tackle certain challenges such as fronting, legacy management and reinsurance.

For the latest news, data-driven analysis and thought leadership on the global captive market, visit ⁠Captive Intelligence⁠ and sign up to our ⁠twice-weekly newsletter⁠.

Parametric tools for smarter captive strategies

Nazri Wong, Head of Commercial Operations at Brighton Management Limited.

Parametric insurance can play a valuable supporting role when traditional policies fall short, according to Nazri Wong, Head of Commercial Operations at Brighton Management Limited, a LECA1 rated Insurance Manager in Labuan IBFC.

There’s something frustrating about watching a loss unfold, knowing the damage is real but the policy might be worded otherwise. Maybe it’s a supply chain disruption triggered by a flood that didn’t quite breach the warehouse or a power outage that lasted just short of the deductible threshold. These aren’t rare events; they happen all the time. When they occur, traditional indemnity policies can leave a business exposed. This is where parametric insurance comes in.

Parametric insurance is designed for that space in between. It doesn’t aim to replace traditional cover but instead, adds structure to grey areas. For captives, which are already built to respond with flexibility, parametric solutions offer a practical way to strengthen risk programmes and provide faster, more targeted support.

What is Parametric Insurance?

Parametric insurance works differently from traditional indemnity cover. It’s based on objective, predefined triggers such as wind speed, rainfall, temperature, or seismic intensity. It’s a simple idea with powerful implications. Imagine a policy that responds the moment a Category 3 cyclone is recorded, or when rainfall exceeds 300mm in a single day. Once the agreed threshold is met, payment is made. This is the whole mechanism, in a nutshell. There are no disputes over coverage interpretation or waiting for claims investigations: only a timely, data-driven response.

Of course, parametric insurance isn’t a substitute for traditional coverage and it’s not meant to be. However, it can play a valuable supporting role where traditional policies fall short. Think of losses tied to non-damage business interruption, uncovered perils, or events that sit beneath large deductibles. These are precisely the types of risks that parametric insurance can address.



For captives, this makes a lot of sense. They have deep visibility into the parent company’s risk profile. They’re structurally close to the operational pain points and have the flexibility to structure solutions that the commercial market may not offer. Parametric coverage gives them one more tool to respond with speed, precision, and purpose.

How Can Captives Use Parametric Insurance?

Captives exist to solve problems the markets can’t always address. They’re closer to the risk, more involved in operational planning and often write coverage that’s narrowly defined or high frequency in nature. That makes them ideal vehicles for parametric solutions.

Instead of waiting for broader market capacity, a captive can design a parametric policy around the organisation’s specific exposures.

Let’s take a closer look via an example. A manufacturing company in Southeast Asia relies on a central warehouse that often gets cut off by flooding. The building itself isn’t damaged, but when the access roads are underwater, shipments are delayed and operations come to a standstill.

The company’s traditional insurance doesn’t cover this kind of loss. The company then uses its captive to set up a parametric policy. If rainfall measured at a nearby weather station exceeds a certain threshold over two consecutive days, the policy pays out. This helps cover the cost of rerouting deliveries or sourcing materials locally so the business can keep moving even when things go sideways.

This kind of approach isn’t just theoretical. When COVID-19 hit, Katoen Natie, a logistics company out of Luxembourg, took a hard blow. Similar to many others in the supply chain world, the company witnessed parts of its network grind to a halt. Lockdowns didn’t just slow things down – they cut off routes, stalled deliveries and forced businesses to shut down. However, as there wasn’t any associated  physical damage, traditional policies didn’t cover the losses.

Through its captive, Katoen Natie developed a parametric policy tied to specific triggers, such as government-imposed closures. It gave them quick access to capital during a period of deep uncertainty. The solution wasn’t perfect, but it filled a critical gap. This development demonstrated how captives can respond with speed and precision when the standard market falls short.

In each of these cases, the captive didn’t just mimic what the commercial market was already doing. Instead, it focused on a specific operational pain point, identified data that could be monitored in real time, and built a policy that responded at the right moment.

Captives have always been about flexibility. Parametric insurance just gives them one more way to use it. When designed well, these policies can provide timely support for risks that are otherwise uninsurable or left uncovered. This approach doesn’t aim to replace traditional coverage; rather, it focuses on creating solutions that truly work.

Benefits of Parametric Cover in Captives

Captives are well positioned to take on this role for several key reasons. One is their close alignment with the business, allowing them to engage directly with teams across operations, supply chain, finance, and even regarding ESG matters. This direct access provides captives with a clearer understanding of the actual risks involved, beyond what is reflected in historical loss data. Consequently, they can design policies that align more effectively with the organisation’s operational realities.

Captives have the advantage of agility. Unlike traditional insurers, who may wait years for data and depend on industry benchmarks before providing coverage, captives can swiftly address new or emerging risks. Whether the threat is related to climate change, cyber security, or reputation; a captive can create and implement a parametric policy in months instead of years.

When it comes to basis risk, which is the gap between what triggers a payout and the actual loss, captives tend to handle it differently. Unlike commercial insurers which tend to eliminate this gap entirely, captives may accept a slight mismatch in return for speed, transparency, and alignment with business needs – so long as the overall solution improves resilience.

For example, a captive might write a parametric earthquake cover that pays out when a magnitude 6.0 quake hits within a 50- kilometre radius, even if the actual site isn’t damaged. Why? Because the costs of evacuation, inspection delays, or lost production often follow regardless of physical loss. This may not be a perfect match, but it addresses a very real disruption.

Industries with high exposure to uncontrollable external events have started using this approach more actively. Agriculture is a clear example. Captives supporting farming cooperatives or food producers have utilised satellite data on soil moisture or heatwaves to trigger payouts that help offset crop losses or rising input cost.

In energy, some companies have explored parametric covers for wind speed or wave height to manage downtime in offshore operations. Even in healthcare, parametric policies tied to infectious disease outbreaks have helped captives cover surge costs or revenue drops that fall outside traditional policies. Across all of these examples, what stands out is how captives use their inside knowledge of both insurance and the business itself.

Labuan IBFC: A Strategic Jurisdiction for Captive Innovation

When a company is looking to set up a captive, the choice of jurisdiction isn’t just a box to tick as this decision directly affects how the captive performs and evolves. Labuan International Business and Financial Centre (Labuan IBFC), with its strong regulatory foundation, tax transparency, and specialised service ecosystem, offers a compelling environment for long-term captive success.

Labuan IBFC’s sound and well-established regulation provides the clarity, consistency, and oversight that captive owners need to operate with confidence. It strikes a balance between strong oversight and the flexibility required to support innovation.

Labuan IBFC also provides tax efficiency within a transparent and internationally aligned framework. It complies with global standards on tax and substance, giving businesses the benefits of a low-tax environment without compromising credibility or compliance. This is important, especially in current times when global rules have become more stringent.

Even the most well-structured captive needs the right ecosystem to operate effectively. Labuan IBFC brings together experienced captive managers, reinsurers, advisors, and ancillary service providers to support its captive insurance business. The latter includes company incorporation, trust and corporate secretarial services, and access to professional expertise such as legal, accounting, and tax services. Together they bring practical expertise and technical know-how to every stage of the captive’s lifecycle.

In addition to strong regulation, international tax compliance, and a mature ecosystem, Labuan IBFC offers a diverse range of innovative captive solutions tailored to different risk appetites. These include pure (single-owner) captives, group and association captives, master rent-a-captives (subsidiary rent-a-captives and external rent-a-captive), cell and multi-owner captives, as well as Protected Cell Companies (PCCs). Labuan IBFC is also the only jurisdiction in Asia that provides for the PCC structure within its legislation.

The release of new omnibus guidelines in 2023 marked a significant step forward in captive innovation for the jurisdiction. One of the key updates was the expansion of permissible risks, allowing captives to indirectly underwrite insurance interest risks. This shift gives captives more room to respond to complex, evolving exposures.

The guidelines also clarified the roles and responsibilities of PCCs, rent-a-captives, and other structures, thus making it easier for businesses to navigate setup and compliance.

Altogether, these changes reflect Labuan’s growing depth and capability in supporting more sophisticated and flexible captive arrangements. For companies that seek a forward-looking jurisdiction with both stability and innovation, Labuan IBFC offers a strong foundation to build on.

What ambitious looks like: designing a competitive UK captive insurance framework

Jonathan Edwards, Partner, Head of Insurance and Risk, HCR Law
Sophie O’Sullivan, Barrister, Outer Temple Chambers

On 15 July 2025, His Majesty’s Treasury (HMT), alongside the Prudential Regulation Authority (PRA) and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), announced plans to establish a bespoke regulatory framework for captive insurance, aiming to position the UK as a competitive global hub.[1]

Captive insurance, a self-insurance mechanism where a corporate group creates a wholly owned subsidiary to insure its risks, offers multinationals enhanced control over coverage, pricing and claims, often with tax benefits and cost efficiencies.



The UK’s current regime, tailored for commercial insurers, is ill-suited for captives due to its high costs, rigidity and lack of tailored provisions. For example, capital requirements, aligned with Solvency II standards (the EU’s regulatory framework for insurance and reinsurance companies) for large insurers, are disproportionately high for captives, which typically insure low-risk, group-specific activities.[2]

HMT’s November 2024 consultation and July 2025 response emphasised the need for a “genuinely competitive, bespoke captive insurance framework” [3] with a broader scope.

With consultations planned for summer 2026 and implementation targeted for mid-2027, the UK must consider global benchmarks in captive insurance like Bermuda, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man to design and implement an ambitious framework that leverages London’s insurance market while addressing industry demands for greater flexibility and proportionality.

Learning from global leaders

To build an ambitious and competitive framework, the UK must look to the structures implemented by leading captive domiciles.

Bermuda, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man dominate the global market, offering tailored environments which balance flexibility, proportionality, and oversight. Bermuda, one of the world’s leading captive hubs with over 600 captives in 2024,[4] uses a class-based capital system that lowers requirements for captives and imposes zero corporation tax. Importantly while the jurisdiction enjoys Solvency II equivalence for its commercial insurers, the captive classes are not impacted. This enables captives to underwrite diverse risks, including third-party business, allowing efficient risk pooling and coverage for related entities.

Guernsey, Europe’s largest captive domicile with over 200 captives[5], pioneered the Protected Cell Company (PCC) model, which enabled smaller firms to pool risks cost-effectively within a single legal structure. Its risk-based regulation and competitive tax regime support direct-writing captives that underwrite risks in the UK and beyond.

The Isle of Man emphasises proportionality, with variable capital requirements tied to business plans and support for PCCs, which are further bolstered by a favourable tax environment.

Ireland, Malta, and Vermont offer further insights. Ireland’s Solvency II-compliant framework, with a 12.5% corporation tax, benefits from EU market access. Malta’s 35% standard corporation tax is offset by refunds, and its PCC support enhances EU competitiveness.

Vermont, the leading US captive jurisdiction, offers a business-friendly, risk-based approach and exempts premiums from corporation income tax, making it a model for flexibility.

These jurisdictions share flexible capital requirements, proportional regulation, competitive tax structures, and innovative frameworks. In our view, the UK must adopt these elements whilst leveraging London’s status as Europe’s largest insurance market.

The UK’s opportunity: key pillars of an ambitious framework

HMT’s July 2025 consultation response emphasises the need for a broader scope, which would allow for a wider range of firms and risks, proportionate capital and reporting requirements, faster authorizations, and PCC support.[6]

In our view, an ambitious UK framework should rest on four pillars: (1) flexible underwriting, (2) proportionate regulation, (3) competitive taxation, and (4) innovative structures.

1. Flexible underwriting: direct writing and expanded risks

The UK must decide whether captives can write direct insurance or be limited to reinsurance. Direct-writing captives, which underwrite risks directly for the parent or related entities, reduce reliance on costly fronting arrangements.

Bermuda and Guernsey permit direct writing, enhancing their appeal. HMT’s response distinguishes between direct writing and reinsurance captives, but excludes direct writing of compulsory lines (e.g., motor third-party liability). An ambitious framework would fully embrace direct writing captives for non-compulsory lines, thereby minimising fronting costs for multinationals with complex risks.

HMT also stated its support for broader risk eligibility, which could include third-party risks like insuring franchises or supply chains, and allowing financial services firms to establish captives for limited purposes (e.g., first-party risks like property damage).

Bermuda’s model permits third-party underwriting, fostering innovation. The UK should allow limited third-party risks, with regulatory safeguards, to attract diverse captives while aligning with industry demands for flexibility.

2. Proportionate regulation: streamlining compliance

The UK’s current framework imposes high capital and compliance costs, deterring captives. HMT’s response advocates proportionately lower capital and reporting requirements and faster authorisations.

Bermuda’s class-based system and Guernsey’s risk-based supervision tailor requirements to captives’ risk profiles. The UK should adopt a tiered, risk-based approach, with lower capital for captives insuring low-risk group activities and higher thresholds for third-party or complex risks.

The Isle of Man’s efficient licensing and Guernsey’s streamlined approvals set a high standard. The PRA/FCA’s planned 2026 consultations should prioritise a fast-track authorisation process for straightforward captives, maintaining Solvency II equivalence for EU market access. This aligns with HMT’s ‘no new legislation’ stance, ensuring swift implementation by mid-2027.

3. Competitive taxation: incentivising domicile choice

Taxation is often a factor in domicile decisions and HMT’s call for a “genuinely competitive”[7] framework suggests tax reform openness.

Bermuda’s zero corporation tax, Vermont’s premium tax exemption, and Guernsey’s competitive regime attract captives. The UK’s 25% corporation tax (2025) is less competitive than Ireland’s 12.5%. To compete, the UK could exempt captive premiums from corporate income tax or offer reserve deductions, mirroring Vermont. Malta’s refundable 35% standard tax model also shows that flexibility enhances competitiveness.

Targeted relief for captives insuring group risks could make the UK a viable alternative to offshore hubs, leveraging proximity to the London insurance market.

4. Innovative structures: prioritising PCCs

HMT’s response and concurrent July 2025 Insurance Linked Securities and PCC consultation emphasise PCCs, which allow multiple entities to pool risks within a ring-fenced legal structure.

Guernsey’s PCC model lowers entry barriers for smaller firms.[8] The UK’s framework should streamline PCC setup and governance, as proposed in the July 2025 consultation, despite requiring legislative changes. This aligns with industry feedback for broader firm eligibility, including smaller companies.

Beyond PCCs, the UK could explore Incorporated Cell Companies (ICCs) for risks like cyber, D&O or climate events, as seen in Bermuda. Such innovations would differentiate the UK and attract forward-thinking multinationals.

Challenges and considerations

Balancing competitiveness with stability is critical. Overly lax regulation risks undermining the UK’s financial reputation, while excessive caution could continue to drive captives to Bermuda, Guernsey or elsewhere.

HMT’s response and the PRA/FCA’s statement emphasise pace, but the 2026–2027 timeline requires careful calibration to avoid rushed compromises.

Excluding compulsory lines for direct writing is prudent, but restricting third-party risks too tightly may limit appeal.

Conclusion: seizing the opportunity

An ambitious UK captive framework must combine flexible underwriting, proportionate regulation, competitive taxation, and innovative structures to rival its global competitors. By permitting direct writing captives for non-compulsory lines, allowing limited third-party risks, adopting risk-based regulation, offering tax incentives, and prioritising PCCs, the UK can attract high-value captive business.

A bold approach could redefine the UK’s role in global captive insurance, but timidity risks losing ground to established domiciles. Leveraging London’s insurance market, the FCA and PRA have a unique opportunity to create a bespoke regime by mid-2027, which balances competitiveness with stability.


[1] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/captive-insurance

[2] https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/prudential-regulation/publication/2025/july/captive-insurance-statement

[3] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/captive-insurance

[4] https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=006abdc4-b470-45ce-bd50-0ed5ed50dd68

[5] https://www.guernseyfinance.com/industry-resources/news/2024/guernsey-keeps-top-spot-as-europe-s-largest-captive-domicile/#:~:text=For%20the%20second%20year%20in,year%20in%20collaboration%20with%20AIRMIC.”

[6] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/captive-insurance

[7] https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/captive-insurance

[8]https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/687637f339d0452326e28e9d/Changes_to_the_risk_transformation_regulations.pdf

WTW could manage five French captives by year-end – Edwina Leclere 

WTW expects to manage up to five captives in France by the end of the year, according to Edwina Leclere, associate director of captives and insurance management solutions for France. 

WTW appointed Leclere in May to lead growth in the region and establish a captive management team based in Paris. 

Subscribe to Ci Premium to continue reading
Captive Intelligence provides high-value information, industry analysis, exclusive interviews and business intelligence tools to professionals in the captive insurance market.