Part 7US - Solvency Regulation

[blackjack]

Confused on this one regarding "association exams"...

Troxel & Bouchie say (p. 218): "If an insurer has annual direct premiums written of $1M or more or at least 20% of its writing in a zone, regardless of the dollar amount, a representative from that zone is invited to participate in the examination."

Ettlinger says (p. 153-154): "If an insurer's annual direct written premium equals or exceeds $5M in a zone, or if less than $5M has 30% of its total writings within a zone, the domiciliary regulator invites that zone to participate in the association examination."

Both papers written in 1995, so it's not a date issue. Which do we choose? Especially given the idea that we may not be asked a question "according to..." Never seen such a direct discrepancy.

Any help is appreciated.

[Redhead]

If the readings conflict, for a written essay, just make sure you state in your answer which author you are referencing, you should receive full credit.

[Maine-iac]

Red is right. If there is a conflict among authors, you can always say "according to" in your answer even if the question doesn't say "according to".

However, if you actually want to know the CORRECT answer, check with the NAIC. The exams, however, are all about learning the syllabus, not necessarily the same thing as learning the correct answer. :)

[Renshi G]

Confused on this one regarding "association exams"...

Troxel & Bouchie say (p. 218): "If an insurer has annual direct premiums written of $1M or more or at least 20% of its writing in a zone, regardless of the dollar amount, a representative from that zone is invited to participate in the examination."

Ettlinger says (p. 153-154): "If an insurer's annual direct written premium equals or exceeds $5M in a zone, or if less than $5M has 30% of its total writings within a zone, the domiciliary regulator invites that zone to participate in the association examination."

Both papers written in 1995, so it's not a date issue. Which do we choose? Especially given the idea that we may not be asked a question "according to..." Never seen such a direct discrepancy.

Any help is appreciated.

The two statements are actually a bit different. The first one says, "a representative from that zone" is invited to participate, while the second says "the domiciliary regulator invites that zone to participate". In the second case, the invited zone may send a team of 2 or more examiners rather than a single examiner.

If you are concerned about this, take Maine-iac's advice and ask someone at the NAIC (or ask the Chief Examiner of your local insurance commissioner's office). Better yet, find some RFers that are regulatory actuaries! PM them! :)

[blackjack]

Thanks for all your help!