Description: In session 132 PD of the New York Annual Meeting panelists discuss the content and status of the draft NAIC Actuarial Guideline ZZZ and the work of the AAA Task Force on Variable Products with Guaranteed Living Benefits. The Black-Scholes option pricing method is also covered. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries, Vol. 24, No. 3.

Description: From session 75CS at the Spring regional meeting of the Society of Actuaries held in Atlanta, Georgia, May 24-25, 1999, Presenters identify issues and challenges faced by the valuation actuary when performing cash-flow testing on equity-indexed and variable products.

Description: This discussion at the 1989 Valuation Actuary Symposium by a Canadian regulatory panel covers reserves for AIDS, the impact of the proposed Policy Premium Method of reserving, and comments about the governmental examination process.

Description: This session at the 1989 Valuation Actuary Symposium looks at issues of the AIDS/HIV epidemic including the extra mortality, reserving options, a proposed actuarial standard of practice, and also covers the Canadian perspective.

Description: This session at the 1989 Valuation Actuary Symposium looks at issues created by changes in financial reporting in Canada related to the Policy Premium Method and dynamic solvency testing.

Description: Blazing the Path for a Unified Valuation System by David K. Sandberg from The Financial Reporter, June 2000, Issue No. 42.

Description: This session at the 1998 Valuation Actuary Symposium looks at how companies can use the cash-flow testing structure for additional analysis and be more useful to the managment of the company. The concept of transfer pricing within a life company is explained.

Description: This is an update, as of July 2020, on projects in process and those recently completed sponsored by the Financial Reporting Section.

Description: This article describes a simple but powerful tool for use by valuation actuaries and auditors when evaluating current assumptions for use in GAAP net premium reserve methods that require retrospective updating for actual experience and assumption changes. As a supplement, this tool can fill some holes left by existing tools. It produces results that can be compared to materiality thresholds at any level of aggregation, from a single reserve cohort up to the combination of all cohorts for all products subject to retrospective net premium reserve requirements. It can also serve as a benchmarking tool for estimated the possible effects of an assumption change or to help in explaining the effects of an actual assumption change.

Description: Risk adjustment is needed under IFRS 17 to reflect the compensation that a company requires for bearing the uncertainty about the amount and timing of the cash flows that arises from non-financial risk. Companies are also required to disclose the method and confidence level used for the calculation of the RA. However, IFRS 17 doesn’t specify a method and a confidence level, nor does it provide a list of specific risks that are considered to be non-financial risk. Companies need to define them based on their own preferences or existing practices. This article will introduce available approaches and discuss the confidence level approach with potential consideration stemming from industry preferences and illustrative examples.