Abstract
Insurance distributors are increasingly using robo-advisors for a variety of tasks, ranging from facilitating communication with customers to providing substantive advice. Like many other AI-empowered applications, robo-advisors have the potential to pose substantial risks that should be regulated and corrected by legal instruments. In this article, we attempt to discuss the regulation of robo-advisors from the perspective of the Insurance Distribution Directive and the draft AI Act. We ask two questions for each. (1) From a positive legal perspective, what obligations are imposed on insurance distributors by the legislation when they deploy robo-advisors in their business? (2) From a normative perspective, are the incumbent provisions within that legislation effective at ensuring the ethical and responsible use of robo-advisors? Our results show that neither the Insurance Distribution Directive nor the AI Act adequately address the emerging risks associated with robo-advisors. The rules implicated by them regarding the use of robo-advisors for insurance distribution are inconsistent, disproportionate, and implicit. Legislators shall further address these issues, and authorities such as EIOPA and national competent authorities must also participate by providing concrete guidelines.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.