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: 1993 SOA Spring Meeting, San Diego. This session is about risk-based capital, NAIC activities, and how Blue Cross/Blue Shield's initiatives intertwine with the model bill on RBC that the NAIC has proposed.

Description: This panel at the SOA 1982 Spring Meeting in Colorado Springs presents a discussion on the implications of allocating specific assets to particular lines of business. The panel examines both the introduction and the management of specific allocation procedures and how the principal methods work in practice.

Description: This panel at the 1982 Society of Actuaries Colorado Springs Spring Meeting focus on the balancing act between growth and sufficient surplus from both a stock and mutual company perspective.

Description: To some degree, we all operate in an environment influenced by regulation and accounting standards. This session builds on the first session in this series by considering how regulators are reacting to the biometric influencers, then delving into the impact of changing accounting standards on how firms assess, value and report on their business. Consideration will be given to uncertainties around pending regulation, including those uncovered in the process of firms implementing Principles Based Reserving and those yet to come with modifications to GAAP. This session is for anyone interested in better understanding the impact and influence that regulatory and reporting uncertainty has on their work.

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: 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: 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: 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: 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.