• restrictions on the nature, quality and concentration of investments; • requirements pertaining to certain methods of accounting; • evaluating enterprise risk to an insurer; • rate and form regulation pertaining to certain of our insurance businesses;  • potential assessments for the provision of funds necessary for the settlement of covered claims under certain policies provided by impaired, insolvent or failed insurance companies; and • involvement in the payment or adjudication of catastrophe or other claims beyond the terms of the policies. State insurance departments conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of annual and other reports relating to the financial condition of insurance companies, holding company issues and other matters. Our Insurance business internationally is also generally subject to a similar regulatory scheme in each of the jurisdictions where we conduct operations outside the United States. Federal financial services modernization legislation and legislative and regulatory initiatives taken or which may be taken in response to conditions in the financial markets, global insurance supervision and other factors may lead to additional federal regulation of the insurance industry in the coming years. The Dodd-Frank Act effected sweeping changes to financial services regulation in the United States. The Dodd-Frank Act established the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”), which is authorized to recommend that certain systemically significant non-bank financial companies, including insurance companies, be regulated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve. The Dodd-Frank Act also established a Federal Insurance Office (“FIO”) which is authorized to study, monitor and report to Congress on the U.S. insurance industry and the significance of global reinsurance to the U.S. insurance market. The FIO also can recommend to the FSOC that it designate an insurer as an entity posing risks to the United States financial stability in the event of the insurer's material financial distress or failure. Our business could be affected by changes, whether as a result of potential changes to the Dodd-Frank Act, to the U.S. system of insurance regulation or our designation or the designation of insurers or reinsurers with which we do business as systemically significant non-bank financial companies. Although state regulation is the primary form of regulation of insurance and reinsurance in the United States, in addition to the changes brought about by the Dodd-Frank Act, Congress has considered various proposals relating to the creation of an optional federal charter and repeal of the insurance company antitrust exemption from the McCarran-Ferguson Act. We may be subject to potentially increased federal oversight as a financial institution. In addition, the change in the U.S. administration and the volatile political environment may increase the chance of other federal legislative and regulatory changes that could affect us in ways we cannot predict. With respect to international measures, Solvency II, the EU regime concerning the capital adequacy, risk management and regulatory reporting for insurers and reinsurers may affect our insurance businesses. Implementation of Solvency II in EU member states occurred on January 1, 2016, and as the Solvency II regime evolves over time, we may be required to utilize a significant amount of resources to ensure compliance. In particular, the European Commission and European regulators are undertaking a review of Solvency II, which is anticipated to be completed in the third quarter of 2021. In addition, despite the waiver of the Solvency II group capital requirements we received, Solvency II may have the effect of increasing the capital requirements of our EU domiciled insurers. Additionally, our capital requirements and compliance requirements may be adversely affected if the EU Commission does not deem the insurance regulatory regimes of the jurisdictions outside the EU in which we have insurance or reinsurance companies domiciled to be “equivalent” to Solvency II. Similarly, following the U.K.’s withdrawal from the EU, and the expiry of the transition period on December 31, 2020, our U.K. subsidiaries are now subject to a separate U.K. prudential regime, to which the same considerations will apply. The U.K.’s domestic prudential regime is currently identical to Solvency II, although the two regimes, and their respective requirements, may diverge over time. The U.K. has already declared that it considers the Solvency II regime as “equivalent” to its own. However, the EU is still determining whether to make “equivalency” declarations in respect of the U.K.’s prudential regime. It is also possible that any “equivalency” determinations made by either side could be withdrawn in the future, which would adversely affect our capital and compliance requirements. If our compliance with Solvency II, the U.K.’s prudential regime or any other regulatory regime is challenged, we may be subject to monetary or other penalties. In addition, in order to ensure compliance with applicable regulatory requirements or as a result of any investigation, including remediation efforts, we could be required to incur significant expenses and undertake additional work, which in turn may divert resources from our business. We may be unable to maintain all required licenses and approvals and our business may not fully comply with the wide 24