BaFin consults on clearer insurer identity in white-label policies

BaFin published its consultation on 28 October 2026 on a draft circular for insurers distributing products under a partner’s brand. The draft circular says policyholders must be able to identify, unambiguously and before making a contractual declaration, the undertaking providing their cover and acting as their contractual partner. Comments can be emailed to BaFin by 25 November 2026, quoting reference WVA 1-QB 4402/00201#00014.

The proposal covers primary insurance undertakings using partner brands rather than appearing as the main brand. It excludes burial funds and pension funds. The document is a draft supervisory circular, not a final rule or a new statute. It sets out BaFin’s interpretation and administrative practice under existing provisions including sections 7 and 1a of the Insurance Contract Act (VVG), the VVG information regulations and section 23(1a) of the Insurance Supervision Act (VAG).

The disclosure standard

If issued, the circular would require insurers to disclose their legal identity in the relevant pre-contractual information and central contract documents. The insurer must be named clearly in:

- information under section 7 VVG and section 1 VVG-InfoV, including the general insurance terms;
- the insurance application; and
- the insurance policy.

All distribution information, including advertising, must be “fair, clear and not misleading”, translated from the draft’s wording. It must never create the impression that the partner undertaking is itself the insurer. Terminology must be visible, consistently used across channels and clearly defined.

BaFin identifies as “good practice” placing the insurer prominently at the beginning of the relevant information, for example under the heading “Information about the insurer”. It gives the formulation “Ihr Versicherer und somit Ihr Vertragspartner”, meaning “Your insurer and therefore your contractual partner”, as a helpful clarification.

The term “Risikoträger”, or “risk carrier”, may be used, but the draft says it should be explained clearly and accompanied by an indication that the entity is the contractual partner providing the cover. BaFin also considers it useful to state that the partner undertaking is responsible for arranging or broking the insurance.

The draft rejects wording such as “Unternehmen Y agiert im Hintergrund als Ihr Risikoträger”, translated as “Company Y acts in the background as your risk carrier”, because it does not clearly identify Company Y as the insurer. It also points to ambiguous descriptions such as “co-operation partner”, “insurance partner” or “risk carrier within the co-operation”, and to marketing such as “Partner Company Z insures you digitally”.

Information must not be hidden in footnotes or small print. The requirements also apply to digital distribution channels.

Accountability remains with the insurer

The draft places responsibility on the insurer even where a partner undertakes distribution or helps fulfil the information duties. Insurers would need suitable internal processes and controls, including the selection, management and monitoring of partners and other distributors.

The product approval process would also need to establish that the proposed distribution strategy matches the defined target market and that partners have the information needed to act in customers’ best interests. Where the partner is itself an insurer, its separate legal duties, including those arising from insurance mediation, remain in place.

This is the practical point for white-label businesses: outsourcing the customer journey does not transfer the insurer’s responsibility for making the contractual relationship intelligible. Affected firms would need to review brand language, application flows, policy documents, advertising, partner scripts and approval controls as one distribution system rather than as separate materials.

BaFin says it will monitor compliance under section 294(2) and (3) VAG and check implementation through further supervisory measures. Breaches may lead to supervisory action where a regulatory grievance exists. BaFin’s recent insurance-related enforcement includes the publication on 26 October of Ambra Versicherung AG’s licence revocation, effective 10 September, and an €8,500 fine against Kühne Holding on 23 October for delayed notification under the VAG. Those cases concern different failures, but show the circular would sit within active insurance supervision rather than voluntary branding guidance.

The draft circular would apply from the date of its publication if finalised. Comments close on 25 November 2026.