Description: This panel discussion is from the 1991 Meeting of the Society of Actuaries, held May 16-17 in New York. The panelists, a regulatory examiner, an independent accountant, and an industry representative examine and discuss the objectives and quality of today's financial examination process. They discuss objectives of each type of examination, guiding principles and procedures, how successful examinations are in protecting the public's interests, and whether the process needs fixing, and if so, how and what actuaries should do. Discussion from participants is included. From the Record of Society of Actuaries, Volume 17, No. 2.

Description: This presentation is a concurrent session from the 1991 Meeting of the Society of Actuaries, held April 18-19 in New Orleans. The panelists present the history and current status of the mandatory securities valuation reserve, ‘MSVR,’, discuss the work of the Ward Committee, established by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners to review and recommend changes to the MSVR, and discuss the regulatory viewpoint, including solvency, risk-based capital, Regulation 126, and the AVR or asset valuation reserve. Discussion from participants is included. From the Record of Society of Actuaries, Volume 17, No. 1.

Description: This panel discussed studies of the risk of loss due to changes in the interest rate environment. It addressed why the C-3 risk is important and how inflation and stability in interest rates can affect the financial soundness of life insurance companies. There was also a discussion of the theoretical work being carried out to calibrate the C-3 risk of variation in interest rates and to what extent the valuation actuary can properly recognize the risk of loss from changes in the interest rate environment within the framework of valuations laws and regulations.

Description: 1993 SOA Meeting, Quebec. Actuaries doing reserve testing under new valuation standards face decisions as to how to test for the C-1 or asset default risk. Related topics discussed: 1. The different purposes of evaluating C-1 risk. 2. Some of the evaluation methodologies used. 3. The sources of data to make your assumptions. 4. Some real-life issues and problems, focusing specifically on mortgage loans. 5. An overview of the Society's Credit Risk Study which looked at private placement and mortgage loan credit losses. 6. Practical considerations in modeling C-1 risk and living up to the applicable professional standards.

Description: This session from the 2003 Washington D.C. Spring Meeting discusses an overview of the development of the 2001 CSO Mortality Table, how the 2001 CSO affects term and whole life products, the tax issues that will arise from adopting the new table and any unresolved issues. From the Record of the Society of Actuaries, Volume 29, No. 1, Session 81PD.

Description: 1993 SOA Meeting, Quebec. This session was about product development in the age of age of risk-based capital including traditional capital measures, emerging trends, and NAIC changes.

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: Slides from a session at a meeting of the Society of Actuaries held in San Diego, CA, June 22-23, 2000 This session discusses recent developments within the American Academy of Actuaries and the National Association of Insurance Commissioners with regard to reserving requirements for equity-indexed annuities and life insurance.

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: 1998 SOA Annual Meeting, New York. Panelists discussed the activity of the newly emerging mutual holding company structure. Advantages and disadvantages of a MHC structure were addressed.