FW:
Sce, Michael ( (no email) )
Wed, 2 Sep 1998 13:39:59 -0400
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Sce, Michael
> Sent: Wednesday, September 02, 1998 1:36 PM
> To: 'Jim Shoenfelt'
> Subject: RE:
>
> 1) Correct
> 2) It does so only to calculate the penalties for Unauthorized &
> Authorized but slow-pay or not slow-pay. If you follow the
> calculations, they make sense. Amounts in dispute are only issues for
> these categories.
>
> 3) Retroactive Reins often (maybe always) are LPTs, a Financial Rein.
> On Pg 7, he says they're the same.
>
> Commutations imply there once was coverage with a reinsurer and now
> the primary company takes back the liabilities in exchange for a
> premium.
>
> 4) It's important because where the company is the owner, the company
> is liable should the life company go out of business. When the owner
> is the insured, the company may take the liability off its books & is
> usually considered not liable if the life company goes out of
> business.
>
> 5) Yes, they are. It's covered in the Standards of Practice papers.
> There are several. It's the whole issue of using Company or IRS
> payout patterns.
>
> 6) It's a long story. It's an effort to remain consistent with the
> past, but produce something we need in the present & future. Some
> industry professionals think we should be gross or net of discount, so
> Sched P tries to do both.
>
> 7) SFAS5 is for GAAP, but it has some general guidelines for accounts
> to follow as to what a contingency is & how to report it. The idea
> that SFAS5 allows insurers not to report losses stems from the
> interpretation of what a contingency is. According to SFAS5, it must
> satisfy the two conditions that they asset is probably impaired and
> the loss can be reasonably estimated. It's the second part that lets
> insurers off the hook. Hey, we can't estimate it, so we're outa'
> here!
>
> It's an interesting question because the motivation for using this
> (SFAS5) is to increase your company's stock marketability. If you can
> show you conform to SFAS rules, and it's to your benefit, then you
> have increased your stock's marketability.
>
>
> 8) CMP = commercial multi-peril policy. It includes property &
> casualty & time element covers (business interruption). GL is the
> casualty part only.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jim Shoenfelt [SMTP:jimshoenfelt@amdyne.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, September 01, 1998 10:00 PM
> To: Exam7
> Subject:
>
> Alright once again Ive got questions and no answers. Any help?
>
> 1) Line 1 of p. 3 is net of reinsurance recoverabels on unpaid losses
> - correct?
>
> 2) Schedule F - some parts the "overdue amount" includes "amounts in
> dispute" other times not. Why the difference?
>
> 3) Is there a difference between "retroactive reinsurance" and
> "financial reinsurance"? And if so, why does Feldblum's "Notes to
> Fin'l Statements" papre have note 18: Retroactive reinsurance in the
> Loss Reserve valuation section and "Note 17: Reinsurance commutations"
> in the "reinsurance section". They seem to be flip sides of the same
> coin - no?
>
> 4) Apparently an insurer must disclose how many annuities it buys
> where the insurer is the owner and payee of the annuity. Why would
> any regulators care about this - since it doesnt affect how reserves
> are treated anyway? (SeeNote to Finl statements study note p8)
>
> 5) Rsvs for Fed Inc Tax purposes are net of tab discount - but are
> tehy net of nontab discount too? (Which paper covers this?)
>
> 6) Why are part2 & 4 of schedule p gross of all discounts when part 1
> of schedule P is net of tabular?
>
> 7) Feldblum's "Notes to fin'l statements" says that insurers may have
> failed to report E&A exposures in the statutory annual statement
> because of SFAS#5's rules for reporting contingencies. Why would
> insurers be confused - isnt SFAS5 for GAAP reporting and A/S has its
> own reporting rules (which presumably means you reserve for expected
> value of incurred loss)? (See p. 19 of Nots to fin'l statements
> reading)
>
> 8) What are the basic differences between a CMP and a GL policy? (I
> mean even the basics - I don't know what a CMP is at all...)
>
> [Sce, Michael] That should cover it for today ; )
>
>
>