Staff - AC
About
- Username
- Staff - AC
- Joined
- Visits
- 1,404
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Your Odomirok citing refers to deductible paid and recoverable by the insurance company from the policyholder. The problem lists high-deductible unpaid loss below the deductible. It is not yet paid, thus not yet recoverable from the policyholder, so…
-
What the examiners were generally looking for was recognition that deferred tax on CUCG was covered in DTA. (And they allowed it if you explicitly assumed otherwise.) If DTA is not among the givens, there is no overlap to mind, so it should be fine …
-
It would increase by 400, as per the example. I can only think of "distortion" as being related to development patterns. I wouldn't consider the necessary restatement a distortion.
-
The sample answer does not state what type of subsequent event it considers this. I think it's Type 1. The passage on this subject on Odomirok page 73 is ambiguous as to whether a statement change is needed for Type 1. I now read the SSAP 9 sourc…
-
Sure, good luck.
-
The triangles display development patterns, which are being distorted due to removal of a block of business from a certain year. Part 1 does not display development patterns, so it doesn't suffer from the same issue.
-
Yes, but even so, you will be responsible for the extent covered in the article.
-
In 2017.F.15, incurreds are not given, so we have to work with paids and reserves separately. In 2018.F.17, incurreds are given, which makes the job easier. For the same set of accident years: incurred1 - incurred0 = paid1 - paid0 + reserve1 -…
-
Type 1 subsequent events, if material, are disclosed in the relevant note to the financial statement. Balance sheet items are not restated for these events. So, no, you would not reallocate to Cash.
-
Most of the SSAPs and ASOPs take the form of the definition of a concept/item that can be encountered in multiple places in various statements. For example, SSAP 5R defines liability, which can be found in multiple places. There are some that deal w…
-
It's because there is no reinsurance deficit with the $5M loss. So, zero takes 95% weight, and the alternative takes 5% weight, to give the expected RD.
-
It is also in UIE Part 2, as Direct and Assumed. There, it is the calendar year paid. In Sch P Part 1, it's the cumulative paid.
-
Yes, go ahead. This was an error in the wiki and we will rectify it soon. Thank you for pointing it out.
-
Schedule P Part 1. Cash Flow. Also, Underwriting and Investment Exhibit Part 2.
-
Sure, good luck.
-
Up until 2012, all unauthorized reinsurers were considered a higher credit risk and their reinsurance provision was promulgated accordingly. Since 2012, the avenue of becoming certified by an entity's domiciliary state was given to these unauthorize…
-
Yes, the equivalent action levels between Porter and Odomirok are those on the same row.
-
The text says 0.2% is an exception for "conforming" securities lending programs. This sounds like not all of them. Maybe that's why it wasn't mentioned in the wiki. I think the difference is collateral loaned to others (R0) versus collateral held…
-
No, we would not, according to SSAP 62. This is spelled out in paragraph 3 of page 15 of the Freihaut text.
-
Sure, good luck.
-
You cannot determine the T in this problem, because yearend reserves are not given: T includes recoverable on unpaid loss. In that sense, the givens are sloppy, because you technically need the T at which to cap the provision. T is not equal to P…
-
In 2014.S.19c, they calculate the surplus aid both for current and prior year, and use them in the adjustment, instead of using the shortcut mentioned in the text. I would think the text shortcut would be acceptable as well, and especially where dat…
-
The text answers this question, starting on p271, third paragraph from the bottom. Schedule F columns 35 and 36 are the charges differentiated for collateralization.
-
Total recoverable is the amount recoverable on paid and unpaid loss, as of 12/31/2014, the statement date. It does not change with whether the reinsurer is slow-paying or not.
-
Wiki is distinguishing between regular and special surplus, because special surplus is not available for dividends. Further down in the 2017.F.12 answer, wiki does say surplus (meaning total surplus) increases, but by way of special surplus.
-
"Substantially all" is usually used for quota-share situations, and the text does not provide a threshold for the percentage. You'll need to guess according to the givens of the problem. Could you give an example of the lack of timing risk you me…
-
I agree that in the prescribed recalculation, they are assuming current and prior surplus aid to be the same. I also agree that IRIS 8 should be similarly recalculated, even if it is not listed among the ratios to be recalculated when surplus aid…
-
The text does not offer an explanation for this. I think it's an attempt to exclude G from the base of the yield. The earned of current is a portion of the due & accrued of current + prior, so it may be taking G out of C+D for this purpose.
-
The excerpt you quoted says BSF applies to 01 (non-US govnt) and to 02-06 (unaffiliated). It doesn't say 01 is excluded.
-
Sure, good luck.