EU Taxonomy insurance disclosures are heading for their biggest overhaul since the framework launched, after EIOPA opened a consultation on 1 July 2026 proposing a narrower underwriting metric alongside an entirely new one. The paper does not simply trim existing templates; it splits the current Taxonomy KPI into two separate gauges, drops the politically fraught gas and nuclear breakdown, and standardizes how insurers slice natural-catastrophe premiums. Whether that nets out as less paperwork or more remains the open question running through the text.
A narrower Adaptation KPI paired with a brand-new Green Insured metric
The centerpiece of the consultation is a redesign of the Adaptation Underwriting KPI, the ratio insurers currently use to show how much of their book qualifies as climate-resilient business under the Taxonomy. EIOPA proposes narrowing the denominator to include only Taxonomy-eligible lines of business, with revisions to both the Taxonomy and Eligibility ratios. In practice, that means insurers would no longer dilute their ratio with premium volumes that were never going to qualify in the first place, a change likely to push reported alignment percentages upward without any actual shift in underwriting behavior.
Rather than folding everything into that single revised ratio, the authority also wants a second, separate yardstick. The proposed Green Insured Activities KPI would capture all policies sold to companies that already report under the Taxonomy Regulation, extending coverage to retail housing and transport insurance that previously sat outside scope. Two KPIs replacing what was effectively one core ratio is precisely the kind of structural change that split opinion inside the industry even before the consultation text was published, since it asks insurers to build and maintain a second data pipeline rather than refine an existing one.
Nat-cat premium splits get a standard definition at last
One of the more technical but consequential proposals concerns how insurers separate natural-catastrophe cover from everything else in a policy. EIOPA wants the Eligibility Ratio standardized by requiring a split of premiums that cover only natural-catastrophe perils, with only contracts carrying such coverage counted toward the ratio. Until now, insurers have applied divergent internal methodologies to isolate nat-cat premium within composite policies, producing ratios that were not genuinely comparable across the market. A single definition should improve cross-insurer comparability, though it will require some carriers to rebuild allocation logic that has been in place since the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act first took effect.
The move sits alongside the broader supervisory recalibration already under way at EIOPA, which in a separate track has been finalizing Solvency II supervisory guidelines for January 2027 implementation, underscoring how much of the authority’s 2026 workload is aimed at tightening definitions insurers had previously been left to interpret on their own.
Gas and nuclear breakdowns dropped, group reporting trimmed
In a nod to the Omnibus simplification agenda, the consultation proposes removing gas and nuclear activity breakdowns from insurers’ Taxonomy reporting templates altogether, eliminating a disclosure line that had been a persistent source of political friction since it was first introduced for energy-adjacent economic activities. EIOPA is also proposing a simplification of group-level reporting so it focuses on the parent company’s main business, rather than requiring granular consolidation across every subsidiary line, and eliminating the voluntary requirement to report Taxonomy alignment for investment operational expenditure, a metric few insurers were completing in practice.
Stripping out the gas and nuclear split removes one of the most contested lines in the entire Taxonomy template, but it does so by deleting disclosure rather than resolving the underlying methodological dispute over how those activities should be classified.
These simplification proposals trace back to a mandate handed down well before the summer: in March 2026, the European Supervisory Authorities received a request from the European Commission for technical advice on simplifying and improving the Taxonomy Disclosures Delegated Act. EIOPA’s consultation paper is effectively its half of that joint response, running in parallel with equivalent work at EBA and ESMA for the banking and securities sectors.
A tight consultation window before the August deadline
EIOPA has left a compressed runway for feedback. A public hearing on the review is scheduled for 16 July 2026, from 09:00 to 12:30, giving trade associations barely two weeks from publication to prepare questions before facing the authority directly. Written responses follow shortly after: EIOPA has asked stakeholders to submit feedback via its online survey no later than 12 August 2026. Insurers hoping to flag implementation concerns, particularly around the new Green Insured Activities KPI’s data requirements, have roughly six weeks in total to make their case.
Notably, EIOPA is requiring that feedback be submitted through the European Commission’s online EUSurvey platform rather than by email, a procedural detail that channels all industry input into a single structured dataset the Commission can quantify and publish, rather than a scattered set of position papers. The consultation lands just after EIOPA’s Financial Stability Report published in June 2026, which had already flagged climate-related underwriting gaps as a supervisory priority for the sector.
EIOPA’s own news index confirms this consultation as its latest EU Taxonomy-related publication, arriving after a 24 June 2026 Financial Stability Report and a 15 June 2026 2025 Annual Report. Taken together, the sequence suggests the authority is closing out its first-half publication calendar with the disclosure file it considers most in need of a rewrite before the next reporting cycle begins.
