MAAA Membership

[emptiness]

Hi, I'm a foreigner who has never resided in USA. I'm interested in joining the AAA, having attained ASA and fulfilled the experience requirement. It seems that I can gain much from the professionalism and standards promulgated by the AAA.

I currently work at a multinational life insurer listed in US and a US-specific job I did is US GAAP reporting. Would this count as proving familiarity with US practices and would I be accepted into the AAA?

[Cho Da]

It seems that I can gain much from the professionalism and standards promulgated by the AAA.What would you gain by joining? You can download the standards for free. I am an FCAS who esides in the USA, and I would not be a member if my company didn't pay the dues.

[urysohn]

You don't need to be a member of the AAA to live by their professionalism standards. In fact, all members of the actuarial community (including those who are not designated) should try to live by them.

I can't tell if it was a typo or not, but if you worked on one project involving US regs, that doesn't mean you're qualified. They intentionally leave it one the wishy-washy side - do you feel that you are qualified?

Officially, the MAAA only allows you to sign certain state filings. If you don't need to sign, then you don't need the MAAA. Of course, you might choose to pursue it anyway.

[Maine-iac]

Obviously, only the AAA can give you the definitive answer to your questions.

However, based on my personal interpretations of the rules I would think you could become a member, under the General Qualifications for whatever your specialty is (e.g. General Casualty, General Health, General Life, or General Pensions)

You need extra qualifications to sign an NAIC annual statement
(The Specific Qualifications) and you wouldn't qualify under those unless you met at least some extra experience criteria.

But that would not mean you weren't a full member of the AAA.

But again, only the AAA can say for certain.
(www.actuary.org)

[emptiness]

I've gone into more detail the membership benefits of AAA and found that they are not really different from the SOA's. U guys are right. I don't think I'll pursue this especially when u gotta pay over USD400 in dues annually!

[Arlie_Proctor]

I can't speak for the SOA, but at least for CAS members, they are bound by AAA standards whether or not they are members. The standards are publicly available on the web, so that, in and of itself, is not a sufficient reason to join. If you are practicing outside the US and have web access to the standards, then your decision should (IMO) be based on a need for one of the following items:

1) A direct link to and input into the standard-setting process and/or
2) Participation in the PR and lobbying efforts of the AAA (neither the SOA or CAS engages in direct contact with lawmakers except through the practice areas of the AAA) and/or
3) Participation in communications with other professional societies (AICPA, etc).

The third item may be significant, as there are material items under discussion at present in international accounting that may be relevant to you. Check the AAA site for information.

[Mary Frances]

Arlie is correct. If you are already a member of the SoA and you are doing anything with US practice, you are already subject to the AAA qualification standards and the ASB standards of practice. You are also already subject to the SoA's code of conduct, which is identical to the AAA's (last year the Boards of the US societies adopted a common code of conduct). Your US-related actuarial activities are also under the jurisdiction of the ABCD when it comes to counseling and discipline.

[Anonymous]

Mary Frances:

I have a question for you that relates to Arlie's post. If you do join the AAA, are you subject to a higher standard while posting to internet bulletin boards, such as this one? I did not join the AAA for fear that they would monitor my posts on the Rebel Forum and the Water Cooler.

Thanks.

[Mary Frances]

Nope. Same standards apply to all actuarial organizations. All of the US orgs have the same Code of Conduct, and the CIA code is very close. http://www.casact.org/aboutcas/code.htm The potentially applicable precept is #1:

PRECEPT 1. An Actuary shall act honestly, with integrity and competence, and in a manner to fulfill the profession's responsibility to the public and to uphold the reputation of the actuarial profession.

and in particular annotation 4:

ANNOTATION 1-4. An Actuary shall not engage in any professional conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation or commit any act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession.

The ABCD does not, however, go around looking for people to investigate. Someone must make a complaint. That someone doesn't have to be an actuary. So if you "commit an act that reflects adversely on the actuarial profession" AND somebody complains to the ABCD, it doesn't matter if you are a member of the AAA or not. You will get investigated. You might get counseled. :o

[Mary Frances]

So much for being able to follow directions. I thought that I was inserting the path to the Code on the CAS website. Maybe somebody more computer savvy than me can fix it.

[Moderator2]

So much for being able to follow directions. I thought that I was inserting the path to the Code on the CAS website. Maybe somebody more computer savvy than me can fix it.

OK, it is fixed. Somehow the opening HTML tag had a negation in it. Only the closing one should have that. You are welcome, Moderator2

[Anonymous]

Mary Frances:

Thanks for the reply. Wow, that was really chilling news. Here's a hypothetical situation. Let's say that I have an actuary "friend" who enjoys trolling on the Rebel Forum. This person often engages in scatalogical humour, insults other posters, and incites arguments. Let's then say that someone turned my actuarial "friend" into the ABCD for this behavior. According to your post, my "friend" would then be subject to potential counseling. I think that should serve as a warning to us all to watch our behavior on this board.

What if, on the other hand, this "friend" of mine engaged in the same behavior on brunchma.com? Would bad behavior on that board be subject to the same potential punishment? Does it make a difference if the posts in question were made from work or home?

Thanks.

[Maine-iac]

I'm just guessing here, having no affiliation to the ABCD, but I suspect it would make a difference if friend Joe, when being revolting on brunchma.com, identified himself only as "perverted Joe" and made no reference to his profession, or if he called himself "Joe the Perverted Actuary" when being revolting.

In the former case, I doubt if the fink would get very far with his complaint. In the latter, Joe is holding the profession up to ridicule, even if his behavior doesn't directly touch on the profession, and the ABCD might start counseling.

Again, just my opinion. With luck, no test cases are being played out. :D

[urysohn]

I don't think most of the posts here fall into that questionable category. The posts a couple months ago by "plastics make it possible" (comparing life actuaries to criminals) certainly would.

[Anonymous]

I am very interested in discussing this in further detail. Here is another hypothetical question. Let's say that I am posting as "actuarial humorist" on brunchma.com. Let's also say that most of my "humor" involves bodily functions (e.g. flatulence and the like) and crude innuendo. Unfortunately, my best friend is aware that I am the "actuarial humorist", and he is very concerned about the impact that my posts are having on the public perception of the actuarial profession. So he reports me to the ABCD.

My question is this: how will the ABCD determine if my "humor" is really funny, or just plain crude?

On a related note .... that "plastics" guy made some very harsh criticisms of the life insurance industry in general, and life insurance actuaries in particular. Assuming that he was indeed an actuary, and assuming that we determined his RL identity and turned him in to the ABCD, how would the ABCD respond? Specifically, how will they determine if his criticisms and opinions were justified? I assume that the ABCD would be very interested in becoming involved in this type of a case. Does everyone agree?

[G. Gordon Wolfe]

So if someone gets arrested for a crime, say drugs or spousal abuse, and the news reports that they are an actuary, is that a reportable offense?

[Steve White]

On a related note .... that "plastics" guy made some very harsh criticisms of the life insurance industry in general, and life insurance actuaries in particular. Assuming that he was indeed an actuary, and assuming that we determined his RL identity and turned him in to the ABCD, how would the ABCD respond? Specifically, how will they determine if his criticisms and opinions were justified? I assume that the ABCD would be very interested in becoming involved in this type of a case. Does everyone agree?
I would not expect the ABCD to determine if his criticisms and opinions were justified, but whether they violated professional standards.

A test case is available: Andy Lang is an actuary and has made some very harsh criticisms of the life insurance industry in general and life insurance actuaries in particular. He's made those statements both here and on the SOA website, so the ABCD should be aware of them, and could recruit someone to complain if they wanted a test case. To Andy's credit, he's never hidden behind a pseudonym, so identity is not in question.

While "the truth", if such could be established, together with an argument of "in the public interest", should be an adequate defense for Andy, whether Andy's opinions are justified should not be the primary issue for the ABCD to consider.

I would not expect a complaint to lead to any action against Andy.

[Traci]

I would not expect a complaint to lead to any action against Andy.


No - but it WOULD be entertaining!

You don't happen to have their number handy? ;-)

[Don Quijote]

So if someone gets arrested for a crime, say drugs or spousal abuse, and the news reports that they are an actuary, is that a reportable offense?


Only if it can be argued that the crime involved actuarial services, or the existence of the criminal act, if undisclosed to principals, could be creating a material conflict of interest.

Financial fraud would probably fall into the first category, shooting annuitants in order to smooth actuarial gains and losses could fall into the second. I don´t think either of your two examples would be investigated by the ABCD even if you reported them.

I would also expect the ABCD, in the event of an arrest for a investigatable offense, to place the process on hold until the conclusion of the criminal trial to avoid prejudice.

[urysohn]

I'm not going to take the time to look it up but I think the guidelines say that "crimes" would include any felony or any financial-related misdemeanor.

If there are specific things you have questions about, I've heard the ABCD is quite happy to offer their opinion on things. For example, you could send them an email asking how they feel about certain types of comments on public message boards.

Most of the actions of the ABCD involve counseling rather than discipline. And most of the discipline is not career-ending by any means. As part of the AAA's annual report to the membership (I think. I know it shows up on my desk periodically), there is a summary of action taken by the ABCD. A lot of counseling, some solicited advice, and a little bit of discipline.

[Mary Frances]

I'm not a member of the ABCD, and I don't know how they would feel about things like internet posts. Why don't you ask them? They like to get questions. Or, alternatively, send an e:mail to the AAA Council on Professionalism and ask them to address the question in one of their point/counterpoint articles in the Academy newsletter.

[Anonymous]

Mary Frances:

Congratulations on your win!!

I dunno about your suggestion, though. A point/counterpoint between two stodgy old judges from the secret society of ABCD sounds a little boring to me. I've got a better idea. Maybe Arlie and I could go for a few rounds in a steel cage WWF-style brawl! If Arlie wins, we shut down the RF. If I win, we reinstitute Fat Love Fridays with no professional ramifications to any Fat Love participants.

[Dr T Non-Fan]

I don't consider any writings here to be acts. Thus, mischief managed.