Goodreturns piece on criticism of the RBNZ's decision not to extend AMP's exemption to Resolution Life contain some interesting quotes, some of which are hard to swallow.
The Australian Financial Review had accused RBNZ of making “a change in a 150-year-old regulatory practice for life insurance companies in New Zealand through an out-of-the-blue ASX announcement.”
The RBNZ contends that no law or regulation has changed, rather, what has changed is the nature of the business, which will be in run off. Again quoting from the story:
The bank [meaning the RBNZ] says exemptions like AMP’s “are granted on the basis that standards applicable to Australian incorporated insurers are broadly equivalent to New Zealand standards. In some circumstances, standards for Australian incorporated insurers favour Australian policyholders over New Zealand policyholders, including during ‘run-off,’” it says.
If you want to read the original AFR article (probably limited to subscribers, but I can't tell, as I am a subscriber) the link is here.