2020-04-21 Evan Greenberg.What Won’t Cure Corona: Lawsuits

Refer To：《2020-04-21 What Won’t Cure Corona: Lawsuits》。

Coronavirus has delivered the most severe blow to the American economy since the Great Depression. The contraction in growth and spike in unemployment will add to the human misery as the health crisis unfolds. How long the disaster will last—or how much worse it will get—is unclear. But it won’t help Americans or the economy to allow lawsuits to proliferate or to try to pin the damage on insurers like my company.

新冠病毒对美国经济造成的打击是自大萧条以来最严重的。经济的收缩和失业的激增将在健康危机蔓延的同时加剧人们的痛苦。灾难将持续多久——或者会变得多么严重——目前尚不清楚。但如果允许诉讼泛滥，或者试图将损害归咎于像我这样的保险公司，这对美国人和经济都不会有任何好处。

First, some history is in order. Many experts, including professional economists and leaders of the Federal Reserve, believe the great lesson of the 1930s was a failure of monetary policy. This accounts for the unconventional measures that Ben Bernanke’s Fed adopted after the financial crisis in 2008, now expanded by Jerome Powell’s Fed in the pandemic. In fact, there was an even bigger collective failure: competitive devaluations and protectionism, which undermined confidence and hastened the economic decline.

首先，有必要回顾一些历史。许多专家，包括专业经济学家和美联储的领导人，都认为，20世纪30年代的重大教训是货币政策的失败。这也解释了本·伯南克在2008年金融危机后，美联储采取的非常规措施，现在在疫情期间，由杰罗姆·鲍威尔的美联储进一步扩展。事实上，还有一个更大的集体失败：竞争性贬值和保护主义，这破坏了信心，加速了经济的衰退。

This is essential context for the debate in the U.S. about liability arising from the pandemic. The risk is a return of beggar-thy-neighbor policies. The modern version will be a wave of litigation filed against managers and boards of every kind of organization. Then there are efforts to damage one industry (insurance) to help another (small businesses). Nobody wins in this scenario.

这是美国关于疫情引发的责任辩论的关键背景。最危险的风险是“损人利己”的政策卷土重来。现代版的“损人利己”政策将是对各类组织的管理层和董事会提起诉讼的浪潮。然后，还会有人试图通过损害某个行业（保险业）来帮助另一个行业（小企业）。在这种情况下，没人能从中受益。

Unchecked litigation for any injury linked to the coronavirus would significantly increase uncertainty—for small businesses, nonprofits, corporations, universities, transit systems, shopping malls and retirement villages. All of them are trying to protect their people, serve the public, and preserve their organizations. Dealing with urgent needs, scarce information, and often dwindling resources, they make the best decisions they can. And now these businesses all face the threat of litigation for not only present decisions but even actions before the threat of coronavirus was evident. This is wildly counterproductive—and it will be expensive.

对与新冠病毒相关的任何伤害提起诉讼将显著增加不确定性——对小企业、非营利组织、公司、大学、公共交通系统、购物中心和养老社区等。所有这些组织都在努力保护员工、服务公众，并维护其组织的运转。面对迫切的需求、稀缺的信息和日益减少的资源，它们做出了最佳决策。现在，这些企业面临的不仅是因当前决策可能面临诉讼的问题，甚至是以前在新冠病毒威胁显现之前的行动。这是极其适得其反的——而且会非常昂贵。

Meanwhile, there is an effort to force the insurance industry to pay for losses related to the virus that it did not insure. Some businesses and policy makers think business-interruption coverage should pay out for the pandemic’s damage, even though those risks aren’t covered in these policies, nor were premiums collected for the exposure. This would violate the integrity of contracts set forth in Article I of the Constitution. If implemented, it would bankrupt the insurance industry to prop up other parts of the economy.

与此同时，有人试图迫使保险行业为其没有承保的与病毒相关的损失买单。一些企业和决策者认为，商业中断险应该赔付疫情带来的损失，尽管这些风险在这些保单中并未涵盖，也没有为这种风险收取保费。这将违背宪法第一条所规定的合同完整性。如果实施这一政策，保险行业将破产，试图用它来支撑经济的其他部分。

Insurance works by spreading risk across many individuals or businesses. The fundamental assumption is that only a few will have a fire or an illness at any given time. Insurance also covers natural catastrophes such as hurricanes, where many are making claims at once. But these events are limited both in geography and duration, allowing the same pooling of risk.

保险的运作是通过将风险分摊到许多个人或企业中。基本假设是，只有少数人在任何特定时间会遭遇火灾或疾病。保险还涵盖诸如飓风等自然灾害，许多人会在同一时间提出理赔。但是这些事件有地域和时间上的限制，这使得风险池的管理成为可能。

Pandemics are different. The coronavirus started in China but it has neither geographic boundaries nor a time limit. The loss potential in practical terms is infinite, but insurance companies have finite balance sheets. Only the government has the financial resources to deal with this pandemic—a fact recognized by the Fed’s extraordinary lending actions and the $2 trillion aid package passed by Congress.

大流行是不同的。新冠病毒起源于中国，但它没有地域界限，也没有时间限制。实质上的损失潜力是无限的，但保险公司拥有的资产是有限的。只有政府才具备应对这一大流行的财力——这一事实得到了美联储的非常规贷款措施和国会通过的2万亿美元援助计划的认可。

As it is, the coronavirus pandemic imposes a heavy burden on the insurance industry. The crisis means tens of billions of dollars of additional claims. The economic shutdown means revenues are down, which will reduce earnings in turn.

目前，新冠病毒大流行对保险行业造成了沉重负担。危机意味着数百亿美元的额外理赔。经济封锁意味着收入下降，这将反过来减少盈利。

Our balance sheets will also be hit: The value of assets will be diminished by market prices. Asset impairments will come from credit defaults and reduced real estate and equity valuations. The Fed’s interest-rate actions will weaken our investment income. These will be tough times for all businesses. Insurers don’t need—and aren’t asking for—special treatment. But these challenges could turn existential if the insurance industry is compelled to cover business interruptions it didn’t insure.

我们的资产负债表也将受到冲击：市场价格将削弱资产的价值。信用违约和房地产及股市估值下降将导致资产减值。美联储的利率政策将削弱我们的投资收入。这将是所有企业的艰难时刻。保险公司不需要——也不要求——特殊待遇。但是，如果迫使保险行业为没有承保的商业中断支付赔偿，这些挑战可能会变得关乎生死存亡。

For example, it is estimated that the nation’s small businesses will suffer losses from shutting down ranging from $250 billion to $430 billion a month. Insurance companies have a total of $800 billion in capital and surplus, which supports not only legitimate coronavirus claims but also day-to-day claims, plus hurricanes, wildfires and the like. That capital exists to support these exposures.

例如，据估计，美国的小企业因关闭而遭受的损失每月在2500亿美元到4300亿美元之间。保险公司总共有8000亿美元的资本和盈余，这些资金不仅支持合法的新冠病毒理赔，还支持日常理赔，以及飓风、野火等灾害的理赔。这些资本是为了支持这些风险敞口而存在的。

Standard industry policy forms, which are approved by regulators, stipulate clearly what business-interruption events are covered. The overwhelming majority of insured coverage requires physical damage such as a fire or flood that prevents the business from operating. Viruses aren’t covered.

标准行业保单表单，经过监管部门批准，明确规定了哪些商业中断事件是被承保的。绝大多数保险覆盖要求有物理损害，如火灾或洪水，导致企业无法运营。病毒是不被承保的。

As for business, Congress should grant limited immunity from litigation driven by the coronavirus crisis. Congress has done this before. No one knew the impact this pandemic would have on frontline crisis responders, businesses, organizations and others supporting society and the economy. Why hold any single industry accountable for human and financial consequences no one saw coming? Again, no special treatment for insurance—exempt us from immunity.

对于企业而言，国会应该授予有限的豁免权，免于因新冠病毒危机引发的诉讼。国会以前也曾这样做过。没有人知道这场疫情会对一线危机响应者、企业、组织以及支持社会和经济的其他部门产生怎样的影响。为什么要让任何一个行业为无人预见的人类和经济后果负责？再次强调，不要对保险业有特殊待遇——将我们排除在豁免之外。

Litigation may help the tort industry but it doesn’t serve the national interest. It would add to uncertainty, crippling prospects for an orderly recovery. It would repeat the beggar-thy-neighbor mistakes of the Great Depression. And it would violate the first rule in a crisis: Do no harm.诉讼可能有助于侵权行业，但不符合国家利益。它会增加不确定性，削弱有序复苏的前景。它会重蹈大萧条时期以邻为壑的错误。而且它会违反危机中的第一条规则：不造成伤害。

2020-04-21 Evan Greenberg.What Won’t Cure Corona: Lawsuits

2020-04-21 Evan Greenberg.What Won’t Cure Corona: Lawsuits

Article Comments Update

热门标签

Related Articles

2023-07-26 Chubb Limited (CB) Q2 2023 Earnings Call Transcript

2023-02-01 Chubb Limited (CB) Q4 2022 Earnings Call Transcript

2024-01-31 Chubb Limited (CB) Q4 2023 Earnings Call Transcript

2015-12-15 Evan Greenberg.Evan Greenberg Dropped Out, Then Built Insurance Behemoth

2015-12-16 Evan Greenberg.(Hank) Greenberg on (Evan) Greenberg: ‘He Leads From the Front’