Health and life insurers out of climate reporting
Health and life insurers will not face enforcement action if they fail to lodge climate statements while legislation removing them from New Zealand’s climate reporting regime makes its way through Parliament.
Thursday, June 18th 2026, 12:13PM 
4 Comments
Picture: Kirk Hope, FSC CEO
The Financial Markets Authority has confirmed it will take a “no action” approach from June 19 for affected insurers with upcoming lodgement dates for the 2025/26 reporting period, following the Government’s decision to remove health and life insurers from the climate-related disclosures regime.
The Financial Services Council welcomed the move, saying the previous requirements imposed significant costs without delivering clear benefits to customers.
FSC chief executive Kirk Hope said the Government deserved credit for listening to industry concerns.
“Health and life insurers do not insure homes, farms or roads against floods and storms. They protect people when they get sick, can’t work or when their family needs support,” Hope said.
“The previous regulations treated very different risks as if they were the same. That added compliance cost of $10-15 million a year without clear value for New Zealanders.”
Under the FMA’s approach, life and health insurers with balance dates from 31 March 2026 onwards will not be expected to lodge climate statements.
Firms will not need to apply for relief or notify the regulator that they are relying on it.
FMA general counsel Liam Mason said the regulator recognised many insurers faced uncertainty while waiting for the legislative changes to be enacted.
“We recognise that many life and health insurers will be impacted by the uncertain timeframe in which the amending legislation might be passed,” Mason said.
“This will mean that they do not know whether they will be required to lodge climate statements. This approach will avoid unnecessary compliance costs and promote the development of fair, efficient and transparent financial markets.”
Hope said the timing of the change was important as insurers faced pressure on premiums and consumers remained focused on household costs.
“This is a welcome relief at a time when health and life insurers are facing real pressure on premiums and Kiwis are watching every dollar. Removing unnecessary cost from the system is the right thing to do.”
He said climate risk remained important and insurers would continue managing it through governance and prudential oversight, but mandatory investor-style climate reporting was not the right tool for health and life insurers.
The FMA said it would continue monitoring the progress of the legislation and would review its position if the law changes had not been passed before insurers began preparing statements for the 2026/27 reporting period.
The regulator also noted that some insurers may choose to continue producing climate-related disclosures voluntarily. Any voluntary reporting would remain subject to the fair dealing provisions of the Financial Markets Conduct Act.
| « Is protecting retirement provision a life adviser’s duty? Part two. | Partners permanent premium reduction » |
Special Offers
Comments from our readers
Its interesting that 4 years before the intermediate 2030 Paris Accord cuts in, the world is light years (not just miles) away from the required trajectory.
Its a $1.0000001 bet that the closer we get to 2030 the more the can will be kicked down the road,
The climate related disclosure (CRD) requirement for the financial services industry is yet another example of the last Government adding unnecessary cost and complexity to business. Currently banks and insurers have to hire more staff specifically to meet their new climate disclosure requirements and these costs inevitably get past on to customers. The New Zealand consumer continues to be saddled with additional costs due to an avalanche of overregulation much of which has questionable benefit. The only people who seem to be winning from this additional regulation are Wellington bureaucrats and those climate enthusiasts’ who are positioned to make a buck or secure a job.
None of New Zealand's biggest climate polluters are associated with the financial services industry. Stats published by the Environmental Protection Authority in 2022 showed the biggest emitters were for milk, petrol, fossil (or natural) gas and meat businesses, with electricity, and steel companies rounding out the top group because of their fossil fuel use. By contrast, many of New Zealand’s biggest employers and profit makers (including banks, vineyards, telcos, healthcare companies and renewable energy providers) didn’t appear in the top climate polluter ranks because their emissions weren’t even high enough to qualify for compulsory reporting.
As another reader of Good Returns said last year "I suspect we’ll look back on this climate reporting in years to come, with confusion & questions. Whilst there is no doubt that climate controls are increasingly important, I’m unsure whether the energy, effort & expense in producing these reports are the best use of resources &/or going to make any difference…”
I look forward to the Ministry of Regulation reviewing and ultimately deciding to remove climate related disclosures as a compliance requirement for all of the New Zealand financial services industry.
Sign In to add your comment
|
|
Printable version |
|
Email to a friend |
