cgott42
02-24-2009, 01:04 AM
Felblum's paper on Surplus:
Can someone explain TIA's explanation of how an INCREASE in the non-admitted assets from one year end to the next would cause a DECREASE to surplus.
Their explanation centers around the fact that the balance sheet must "balance"-
Can someone explain what they are saying as a change in an asset (e.g. non-admitted assets) wouldn't affect other assets (admitted) or liabilities.
The balance sheet "balances" b/c there is a balancing item - namely surplus.
Can't the non-admitted asset increase due to NEW premium which came in and are over 90 days overdue- i.e. the past amount of non-admitted assets has stayed the same, just additional (new) premium is overdue.
Can someone explain TIA's explanation of how an INCREASE in the non-admitted assets from one year end to the next would cause a DECREASE to surplus.
Their explanation centers around the fact that the balance sheet must "balance"-
Can someone explain what they are saying as a change in an asset (e.g. non-admitted assets) wouldn't affect other assets (admitted) or liabilities.
The balance sheet "balances" b/c there is a balancing item - namely surplus.
Can't the non-admitted asset increase due to NEW premium which came in and are over 90 days overdue- i.e. the past amount of non-admitted assets has stayed the same, just additional (new) premium is overdue.