Description: 1993 SOA Meeting, Quebec. The new SVL has expanded the scope and responsibilities of the valuation actuary. Topics covered: • Risk of legal liability for actuaries? • Vagueness of actuarial standards related to adequacy testing? • Reliance on other company experts? • Consultants versus company actuary perspectives? • The science versus the art of the process?

Description: This presentation is an open forum, session number 12OF, from the 2000 Valuation Actuary Symposium, held September 14-15 in Washington, DC. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners [NAIC] has proposed a requirement that certain products have risk-based capital [RBC] C-3 determined as the greater of a calculation based on fixed factors, and results of a formalized cash-flow test. The panelists provide a summary of the requirements of C-3 testing, followed by an open discussion regarding implementation issues and other questions.

Description: 1993 SOA Annual Meeting, New York. This session provided an update on the appointed actuary. Topics included: 1. Provided preliminary results of a 1992 cash-flow-testing survey that was sent to a number of life companies in the U.S. 2. A discussion of the position taken by one actuary who did not do cash-flow testing in forming an opinion for his company's 1992 annual statement. 3. How to deal with failed scenarios. 4. The evolution of the appointed actuary's role at MetLife. 5. How the process currently works at MetLife. 6. Insights on where MetLife sees the process going.

Description: This report, prepared by Advisory Subgroup I, was included as Appendix 3 of the 1987 Valuation Actuary Handbook. This advisory subgroup, or committee, was appointed by the New York Insurance Department and chaired by Donna Claire. This committee was charged with developing suggested regulations to deal with the concept of the Qualified Actuary and Actuarial Opinion and memorandum in accordance with New York’s recently amended reserve and nonforfeiture laws for guaranteed interest contracts and annuities with and without life contingencies. The actual regulation, New York Regulation 126, combines the work of the committee with Subgroup II, which focused on minimum reserve standards.

Description: 1993 SOA Spring Meeting, Boston. This session addressed the new risk-based capital requirement. Topics included: 1. How reasonable is the framework of basing the formulas on simplistic application of the C-1, C-2, C-3, and C-4 risks? 2. Will this be effective in stanching the proliferation of RBC formulas by the regulatory bodies? 3. Which lines of business are treated relatively badly by the formulas? 4. Is there realistically anything that can be done to prevent company comparisons and renkings? 5. What are the administrative problems faced by the regulators in the oversight process requirement that this will create?

Description: From the 1986 Valuation Actuary Symposium, held in Washington DC in October 1986 Discussion of emerging practice and regulations of the NAIC and New York Insurance Department with respect to requirements placed on the methods and assumptions used by the valuation actuary in producing the support for the Actuarial Opinion as to the adequacy of reserves for life insurance companies

Description: 1988 Valuation Actuary Symposium. This session discussed the current thinking of the Special Advisory Committee on the Valuation Law which was formed by the NAIC to significantly expand the scope and usefulness of the proposed actuarial opinion.

Description: This is a summary of the NAIC meeting held in September of 2008.

Description: From an interactive forum session at the 2001 Valuation Actuary Symposium, held in Lake Buena Vista, Florida, November 29-30, 2001 Discussion of the major financial reporting issues and concerns of senior actuaries in life insurance companies. Discussion focused cash flow testing methods and interpretation of results.

Description: 1994 SOA Spring Meeting, San Francisco. This session provided an overview on the following issues regarding solvency analysis: 1. Will the actuary perform a financial condition analysis or provide an opinion on solvency? 2. Will the analysis be for internal use only or for public reporting? 3. Progress on the SOA's Dynamic Solvency Handbook. 4. Dynamic solvency research. 5. Canadian experience with solvency testing.