Staff-T1
About
- Username
- Staff-T1
- Joined
- Visits
- 2,786
- Last Active
- Roles
- Administrator
Comments
-
Yeah this article was from 2014 which was way before ifrs17
-
The CAS sample answers are just that - A sample answer from a candidate that scored full marks. It is not the only accepted answer in the exam. For this specific case, it is weird that they specifically say only those 4 methods are accepted as 'spli…
-
Its mandatory for high risk homeowners to opt in, and optional for everyone else which is why they are making assumptions for the mid and low risk homeowners. Yeah im not sure about that -> It would seem that based on their description of the mo…
-
Yeap you are right! I must have fat fingered the IF formula but I have updated the formulas now
-
I do not know what file you have downloaded but this is the link to the right file https://www.cia-ica.ca/publications/223126te/
-
yeah they should be assets - I will confirm
-
No, realized gains/losses are actual gains and losses that are crystallized through selling of those assets. Provision for credit losses is an estimate for expected defaults on your loans. At a high level they are tow different formulas so they shou…
-
Yes, I think that is a mistake - Assets held for sale, other debt and deferred tax assets are indeed assets. The formula is correct in the wiki. Net reinsurance expense is usually negative which is why you do +(-xxx). I think cell K19 is missing a…
-
Your understanding is correct regarding the definition of premiums received, but for premiums receivable those can only be booked after the policy has incepted which is why it is zero here. In your example here, UEP will be 400
-
Paper is from 2012 so its still AAP, but I think saying in accordance with IFRS is fine too
-
Yes that is right - I would just stick to what's in the source just in the off chance your graders do not work on insurance in the Atlantic provinces, of which there are many and mistakenly grade you incorrectly
-
We have the reinsurance recovery as a -ve (-20) and the reinsurance premium to be +ve(50). This is consistent with inflows being a negative amount and outflows being positive
-
Tort recovery is what you can get from suing the at fault party. You shouldn't be able to claim recovery by suing someone if you have already gotten indemnity from collateral sources.
-
This is referring to a footnote at the end for a different case and is specifically referring to Fredrikson vs ICBC. So yes, in BC absolute liability would have been rejected but not in Ontario according to the study kit
-
It stands for Underwriters, yes. Did you read the source text?
-
I don't see a CCIR question in question 1 for the practice exam?
-
It's not one or the other in this case -> Deterrence means an act that will prevent occurrence of an event going forward. In this case, a punitive award is meant to prevent this from occurring again. The punitive award is the deterrence
-
S&Y could recover up to the limit of the agreement that was signed. There is nothing to claim from the tortfeasor as they would be fully covered by their insurance. The judge rules that because of the agreement, S&Y has lost subrogation righ…
-
No, it is not
-
The deterrence for the insurer is the punitive award. Just saying deterrence doesn't answer what the deterrence is
-
Both your answers would have been acceptable imo
-
Yes for SK and NB NB and NL are private
-
That's cause IFRS17 doesn't use gross written premiums to calculate the premium liabilities/LRC, but only premiums that you have on hand, which doesn't include premiums receivable. Technically, there's no coverage yet until you receive payment of pr…
-
I would go with Saskatchewan and Manitoba to be safer since ICBC competes with private insurers for physical damages, so it is not fully government mandated. They do provide coverage for commercial vehicles, yes
-
You have just listed the definitions of a high risk model exactly at the end of your question. "Does it make it high? What if it was tested extensively and validated using lots of different method, over a million simulations and even margin has be…
-
Well we don't need to consider it for the calculations of the report, but you need to disclose it in the notes to the financial statements, yes
-
Its listed throughout the article, for example taking responsibility of the work of others, wording of the opinion. Basically sections 2 and 3
-
Oh I see what you mean. The CAS is just calculating the unwind for one period, and for the second approach, they are calculating a complete unwind and are showing they will accept both answers. That's what I think anyways
-
1) Yes 2) I would just stick to GMM to be clear to examiners
-
That's right, but only at time 0. And this makes sense cause the whole purpose of the PAA is to provide a more simplified approach to measuring the LRC that is also more conservative