graham
About
- Username
- graham
- Joined
- Visits
- 3,987
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Thx. I've inserted a link to that file in the wiki here: * https://battleactsmain.ca/wiki6c/CIA.PrLiabs#Maintenance_Expenses (I believe you should still be o.k. not discounting the maintenance expenses though.)
-
Yes, your question makes perfect sense. This is actually a common question and I've had it several times before in various different forms. There is a difference between these problems: * For the excess(deficiency) problem we don't care about i…
-
Great! Thanks for letting me know! I will make a note in the wiki about that.
-
You know what - I did misread the original question. I see now what the original poster was saying and it does make more sense than the answer in the examiner's report. The answer in the examiner's report double-counts the expense allowance in th…
-
Yeah, they use different terms to mean the same thing. Dumb. In 2015, they say "discounted", which makes you think it's somehow different from 2017 where the don't say discounted, even though both are APV. So, here's how I would resolve this. Fir…
-
But you are applying logical reasoning @jptardif2! (I wish they would have just said what removing Appendix B was supposed to mean.) When they've asked questions about ripple effects in the past, their grading has been fairly strict. If you state…
-
Hi @jyec00, There are actually a couple of old discussion threads about this. There is also a section in the wiki for premium liabilities (CIA.PrLiabs) that discusses maintenance expenses: * https://battleactsmain.ca/wiki6c/CIA.PrLiabs#Maint…
-
Hey @stratthixx, Just to point out - you can earn investment income on these amounts. See: * https://battleactsmain.ca/wiki6c/CCIR.ARinstr#Investment_Income_from_Insurance_Operations The investment strategy might be different if you're i…
-
To put it bluntly, the SCC is basically telling the legal profession to get off their lazy butts and make a better tort system! Because if they don't the SCC is going make sure things continue to go well for the plaintiffs while defendants will suff…
-
Thx @chrisboersma for looking up all the details. @stratthixx is right that the essential reason for a risk margin is to protect against adverse deviations. The additional reason to reward the insurer for taking on risk under IFRS 17 is more conc…
-
I think it's your APV formula. The last summand in your Excel formula is: * (F1 - K1) * B10 * D4 But the right parenthesis is in the wrong place. It should be: * (F1 - K1*B10) * D4 When I do the calculation, I get a final answer of…
-
Yes, I see how that's confusing. In BattleCard 10, I'm referring to loss payments from the reinsurer back to the insurer. (This is reimbursement for ceded losses.) But in BattleCard 12, the non-risk-limiting feature refers to premium payments from t…
-
Thx @chrisboersma. (The key is that the reinsurance MfAD should be applied to the ceded losses not the ceded premium. Good idea to review the "123" problems, both easy and hard versions for premium liabilities.)
-
That's a good question and I'm not sure I can give you a complete answer. In general, both cases refer to SABS (Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule) in Ontario. This document contains a detailed definition of catastrophic impairment. Here's the lin…
-
The quantity you have to calculate is the income just for CY 2016. If you don't subtract the previous year-end net claims of 47,876 , you will be including losses that were incurred in prior years (instead of just losses that were incurred in CY 201…
-
I think this problem is a straightforward application of the ROR formula. The only term missing is "Income from Subsidiaries" and this isn't provided so you have to assume it is 0. The formula for ROR, according to the MSA ratio source text, does no…
-
Yes, that's exactly what you would do. There is no other option. It might be an idea to note your assumption of no reinsurance just to show you really know what you're doing, but I'm not sure that was even necessary to get full points.
-
Well, yes, the insurance company does have a point. I found a pretty good explanation of that case below if you care to read it: * https://scc-csc.lexum.com/scc-csc/scc-csc/en/item/2000/index.do I can understand why the insurance company wa…
-
First note that in this problem, equity is used as a proxy for capital available. Now recall the fundamental accounting equation: * assets = liabilities + equity This equation is always true so it must be true for both the base and the adve…
-
I'm not familiar with the Frederickson case. Dillon v Guardian is from 1983 so there may have been a lot of developments in the 35+ years since then that I wouldn't know about, not having studied it. The main point of Dillon seems to be that if the …
-
First of all, the example provided in the source text is not a very good example for a few different reasons. You cannot reproduce their exhibit only with the information they give you. A partial answer to your question about why the gross reserv…
-
This fact is actually mentioned in the reading listed below. The source text is only available in the study kit. If you have the study kit, the syllabus reference is: * KPMG, “Research Report – Best Practices for Actuarial Involvement in the Re…
-
The comment I had made about BCAR being more robust is from page 9 of the reading in the paragraph under "Market Adjustments". But it's true I was somewhat reading between the lines when I drew that comparison to MCT. My overall understanding of …
-
Just to point out: negilgence was NOT accepted as an exception in: * 2017.Fall Q5b * 2016.Fall Q6b The examiner's report listed this answer as a "common mistake". But then in 2018.Spring Q6b, they did accept negligence as a valid exception…
-
You can never calculate a margin for the most recent accident year. The reason is that to calculate an excess(deficiency) margin, you have to have at least 1 other data point for comparison. If you think about what you're really calculating here,…
-
The correct answer is that investment income does include realized capital gains. Unfortunately, the people who create the exam questions are are not consistent. In exam questions from prior years, sometimes realized gains are included with investme…
-
I've read elsewhere that the sample answers, which are supposedly actual candidate response, are not always full-credit answers. I don't know for sure but if that's the case, it isn't very helpful. Even if the "the" was really meant to be "no" in…
-
You're correct that it isn't a great question. An aggregate limit doesn't mean anything if there's only 1 loss. They probably didn't intend to assume only 1 loss - they just didn't think through all the possibilities the situation allows for. I t…
-
Oh, I suppose I didn't address it. When I wrote those notes at the bottom, I was partly trying to think about the material from a higher conceptual level. To come up with a reasonable answer, I would first think in general about benefits of governme…
-
That reading (which is no longer on the syllabus) is: * Canadian Institute of Actuaries, “Educational Note: Implications of CICA Accounting Standards 3855 and 1530,” January 2007.