In October 2026, Captive.com reported eight new Cayman international insurance licences for the third quarter, citing CIMA statistics. Its 20 October article identifies one Class B(i) and seven Class B(iii) licences, including three portfolio insurance companies. The reported year-to-date total reached 28.
These are international insurance figures, not a verified count of new employee benefits captives. The included portfolio insurance companies should not be added again to the eight approvals.
For an employer considering captive financing, domicile activity is context for a feasibility assessment. It does not demonstrate the proposed programme’s economics, claims performance, service quality or capital requirements. Those questions need their own evidence and professional advice.
Connect governance to the proposed business
Independent non-executive directors (INEDs) should challenge how the proposed business fits the licence, risk appetite and resources, while requiring clear accountability for underwriting and service providers.
A decision paper should separate public market statistics from assumptions specific to the employer’s proposal. It should identify the sponsor’s objective, alternatives, unresolved questions and the relationship between financing and employee-facing delivery. A corporate structure alone would not answer the operational questions about providing cover and administration.
The useful next step is to ask advisers for an assessment of the employer’s options and what has changed since the last review. Cayman’s latest figures justify attention from the captive community, while leaving suitability to be tested programme by programme.
Share this:
- More [2]
