Executive Life Insurance Company of New York

GABC Obligations Transferred to Pacific Life

The Guaranty Association Benefits Company (GABC) has successfully transferred its remaining annuity obligations to Pacific Life Insurance Company and its subsidiary, Pacific Life & Annuity Company (together, “Pacific Life”). Pursuant to an Assumption Reinsurance Agreement (ARA) among the parties, Pacific Life assumed approximately $1.1 billion in annuity liabilities from GABC effective July 1, 2026.

The closing of the ARA was subject to a number of conditions, including approval from the court overseeing the liquidation of Executive Life of New York (ELNY)—the Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of Nassau (the Liquidation Court). In December 2025, GABC filed an Order to Show Cause seeking such approval from the Liquidation Court. On April 20, 2026, the Liquidation Court approved the ARA. In part, the approval order states, “All Persons, including but not limited to GABC, NOLHGA, the PGAs, the Life Insurance Companies (as defined in the Restructuring Agreement) and the Supplemental Benefits Participating Companies. are released from any and all future obligations under or related to the Restructuring Agreement upon Closing except only the obligations of GABC and the Receiver under Sections 6.2.2 and 6.2.3 of the Restructuring Agreement (related to the Net Proceeds Transfer).”

Pacific Life now has direct responsibility for the payment of all benefits and for all obligations under the GABC annuities it assumed. Additional information about the sale and contact information for Pacific Life are available on GABC’s website at www.gabenefitsco.com.

Going forward, GABC will satisfy its obligations under the ARA and the Agreement of Restructuring in Connection with the Liquidation of ELNY and will begin to wind down its operations.

Task Force Chair – John Colpean; Staff Contact – Katie Wade

New Jersey GA Seeks Executive Director

The New Jersey Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Association (NJLHIGA) is seeking candidates for its Executive Director position. The NJLHIGA seeks an experienced leader with expertise in insurance products and regulation, financial analysis, insurer receiverships and insolvencies, and/or insurance guaranty association operations.

Interested parties should contact NJLHIGA Board Chair Rich Bowman via email at [email protected].

Missouri GA Seeks General Counsel

The Missouri Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Association and Missouri Property & Casualty Insurance Guaranty Association are seeking to obtain the services of an individual or law firm to serve as outside general counsel to one or both associations. The general counsel will serve as legal advisor to one or both associations and their Boards of Directors. The issues encountered range from statutory opinions, Board governance best practices, representing the association on national multi-state liquidations, employee liability issues, and representing the associations in litigation.

The general counsel is expected to monitor current, new, and pending state and federal legislation as well as case law as applicable to the associations. The general counsel should inform and provide direction to Board members and the Executive Director regarding compliance issues and any impact on the associations.

Any attorney designated to provide any portion of the services must be a member in good standing of the Missouri Bar. The selected individual or firm will report to and be managed by the Executive Director and Board Chairs from each association.

Interested parties should contact Executive Director Tamara Kopp ([email protected]) by July 31, 2026.

International Developments

On June 24, 2026, the European Insurance and Occupational Pensions Authority (EIOPA) published its June Financial Stability Report, finding that Europe’s insurers, reinsurers, and occupational pension funds remain well positioned, supported by strong capital buffers and ample liquidity, even as the nature of their risks shift. While EIOPA identifies no individual exposure as systemic today, it warns that geopolitical, credit market, climate, and technological pressures could compound in periods of stress and open new channels for shocks to propagate across the financial system. Key takeaways from the report include:

• The Insurance Recovery and Resolution Directive (IRRD) is advancing toward implementation, which EIOPA regards as central to managing failing insurers across the EU. The report features a staff-authored article on page 96: “Continuity at a Price: Key Challenges to Credible Resolution Funding under the IRRD.” At a high level, the article argues that the IRRD’s crisis-management goals will hold up in practice only if Member States secure dependable ways to pay for resolution, noting that external funding sources such as insurance guarantee schemes (IGSs) are essential.
• Allocations to alternative and less-liquid investments continue to grow but remain a contained share of portfolios among European insurers. Nevertheless, uncertain valuations, liquidity mismatches, concentrated positions, and refinancing risk warrant continued supervisory attention.
• Insurers’ expanding use of artificial intelligence (AI) is delivering efficiency gains but elevating risks regarding third-party dependencies, privacy, and algorithmic bias. Supervisors now rank digital and cyber threats second only to macroeconomic risk.
• Amendments from the Solvency II review will become effective in January 2027 and aim to improve proportionality, strengthen the regime’s macroprudential and sustainability dimensions, lessen reporting burdens, and reduce quantitative requirements for the industry, which will reportedly result in a release of regulatory capital. EIOPA will monitor how firms deploy that capital, as lighter charges on equity and securitization holdings may encourage additional risk-taking.
• EIOPA has deferred its EU-wide insurance stress test from 2027 to 2028 to avoid overlapping with the Solvency II and IRRD launches, opting instead for an exploratory, top-down exercise in 2026 based on existing data.

NAIC Updates

At its June 23, 2026, meeting, the RBC Investment Risk and Evaluation Working Group adopted a framework for the treatment of collateralized load obligations (CLOs), as well as collateralized bond obligations (CBOs) and collateralized debt obligations (CDOs), for year-end 2026 reporting. Additional refinements to the framework are expected for future reporting years, and the working group will hold a call to prioritize such changes in the coming weeks. Philip Barlow (Chair, DC) brought each key decision point to a vote. Here are the results:

• Scope: The risk charges derived from rating agency ratings will be applied to all CLOs (including middle market (MM) CLOs), CBOs, and CDOs. Regulators emphasized that rating agencies use similar methodologies to rate MM CLOs as they use for broadly syndicated loan (BSL) CLOs. The working group will determine in the future whether the American Academy of Actuaries should perform the same analysis on MM CLOs that was performed for BSL CLOs during this process.
• Inclusion of Tranche Thickness: Tranche thickness will be incorporated into the risk charges for BSL CLOs only. Baa3 or lower tranches with a thickness of 4% or lower will receive a higher risk charge.
• Resulting After-Tax Factors: In light of these votes, the working group approved new after-tax factors for CLOs, CBOs, and CDOs.
• Treatment of Residual Interests: The working group agreed to keep the current 45% pre-tax factor for residuals.
• Flooring of Charges to Corporate Bonds: The working group voted against flooring the risk charges to the corporate bond factors for the same ratings, suggesting that this would go against the data-driven analysis performed by the Academy.
• Portfolio Adjustment Factor: The working group agreed to utilize a flat 1.0 portfolio adjustment factor (PAF) (Option 1 proposed by the Academy). The working group also adopted the ACLI’s proposal to include CLO issuers (the CLO vehicles, not underlying loan obligors) in the issuer count used for the bond PAF determination, consistent with current RBC instructions.

The changes now go to the Capital Adequacy Task Force, which was scheduled to meet on June 30 to discuss the issue. If adopted by the task force, they will head to the Financial Condition Committee, which is scheduled to meet on July 8.

The Reinsurance Task Force met on June 22 to finalize its response to the Statutory Accounting Principles Working Group (SAPWG) regarding the treatment of derecognized net negative interest maintenance reserve (IMR) in the context of reinsurance collateral (see SAPWG Ref #2025-22). The central question is whether derecognized net negative IMR (realized losses) should reduce reinsurance collateral requirements in a manner symmetrical to collateral increases caused by derecognized positive IMR. The task force approved a recommendation to use the asymmetrical approach (excluding negative IMR from the calculation of reserves to be collateralized), while noting that the ultimate decision rests with SAPWG as a technical accounting matter outside the task force’s charges.

Several regulators (MO, IL, WI, and TX) voiced support for the asymmetrical approach, noting that while the symmetrical treatment is conceptually more intuitive, the existing 10% admission cap on net negative IMR makes it difficult to implement without unintended consequences for reinsurance. Hans Avery (ACLI) argued the symmetrical approach better aligns collateral with the economics of reinsurance and creates parity between balance sheet requirements for retained risk and collateral for unauthorized reinsurance. Sheldon Summers (Claire Thinking, Inc.) raised a separate concern about collateral adequacy under principle-based reserving (PBR), noting that aggregation benefits may result in collateral that understates a ceding company’s exposure; regulators acknowledged this as a distinct issue that may warrant additional consideration by the Life Actuarial Task Force. The Reinsurance Task Force will not meet in person at the Summer National Meeting but will hold an interim call approximately three weeks prior.

Privacy Updates

On June 18, 2026, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson told MLex that the agency expects a sharp uptick in data privacy enforcement in the second half of 2026—potentially at a pace difficult to track. Federal enforcement has lagged this year behind activity in states like California and Texas, but Ferguson signaled that is beginning to change. Ferguson also noted that future capacity could expand under the proposed SECURE Data Act.