Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Exams - Please Limit Discussion to Exam-Related Topics > SoA > EA Exams
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 07-11-2018, 11:38 AM
ACTEX_Pubs ACTEX_Pubs is offline
Member
Non-Actuary
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 101
Default ACTEX Study Manual for EA-2F Exam

ACTEX Study Manual for EA-2F Exam

NEW AUTHOR!

The ACTEX Study Manual for EA-2F is a comprehensive manual. The Fall 2018 edition has been updated by a NEW AUTHOR, Michael Reilly, to reflect the current syllabus, with over 160 practice questions and solutions and detailed solutions to past exams, including the 2017 EA-2F Exam. The book is designed to teach funding methods and how to solve actual questions using the concepts being taught rather than to just read about them.

View a sample
__________________
ACTEX Learning | Mad River Books
PO Box 715 | New Hartford, CT | 06057
P (800) 282-2839 | Support@ActexMadRiver.com
www.ActexMadRiver.com
Visit ACTEX_Pubs on Twitter & Facebook
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-04-2018, 02:41 PM
hotqueso hotqueso is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Posts: 1
Default

Chapter 2 page 19 states in the third paragraph from the bottom that the "examples below.. are based on these tables which are reproduced at the end of this book" Yet I only find the 2016 tables shown on pages 275-277. It seems the exercises are using the 2017 factors which aren't provided yet it is stated that the exercises use the tables in the book.

Spent a decent amount of time trying to figure out what I hadn't understood about using these factors before I realized the book may be wrong about the factors in use. Please explain.

Thanks
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-04-2018, 06:01 PM
ac414 ac414 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Chicago area
Studying for EA 2-F
College: Purdue University/DePaul University
Posts: 46
Default

I also noticed some errors on the 2017 solutions. There were a couple occasions when the NRB was using 3 year average and the solutions did not reflect that. Also a lack of explanation on many of the problems.
__________________
P FM MLC EA 2-L, VEE

EA 2-F
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-15-2018, 02:32 PM
MichaelR_8584 MichaelR_8584 is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
College: Temple U.
Posts: 4
Default Greetings from Actex EA-2F Author

Hello everyone,

I just wanted to introduce myself as the new author of the Actex EA-2F manual. If you have any questions, feedback, or errata to report please do not hesitate to reach out. It goes a long way towards making the manual as good as it can be for present and future candidates.

Best,

Michael
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-15-2018, 02:33 PM
MichaelR_8584 MichaelR_8584 is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
College: Temple U.
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hotqueso View Post
Chapter 2 page 19 states in the third paragraph from the bottom that the "examples below.. are based on these tables which are reproduced at the end of this book" Yet I only find the 2016 tables shown on pages 275-277. It seems the exercises are using the 2017 factors which aren't provided yet it is stated that the exercises use the tables in the book.

Spent a decent amount of time trying to figure out what I hadn't understood about using these factors before I realized the book may be wrong about the factors in use. Please explain.

Thanks
You are correct, the problem solutions were based on the 2017 tables but the 2016 tables were the only ones included in the final publication. The intent was to include the 2017 tables but it appears these were unintentionally left out of the final publication. Thank you very much for noting this Ill pass this along to the publisher. Sorry for the inconvenience, I can only imagine how frustrating it was.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-15-2018, 02:35 PM
MichaelR_8584 MichaelR_8584 is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
College: Temple U.
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ac414 View Post
I also noticed some errors on the 2017 solutions. There were a couple occasions when the NRB was using 3 year average and the solutions did not reflect that. Also a lack of explanation on many of the problems.
I went through the 2017 exam again and identified two questions that were based on a 3-year average NRB that you may be referring to: Questions 3 and 23.

The solution to Question 3 appears to be correct but it does not mention that the 401(a)(17) salary limitation applies to the accrued benefit – which is why $270,000 was used in the formula instead of the $285,000 current salary with scaling factors applied. I agree that this could have been made more clear and I will make a note for the next edition.

The solution to Question 23 appears to have an error in that the computation of the benefit was based strictly on projected final pay instead of a final 3-year projected average. The effect on the numeric solution was not large enough to change the letter answer, but here is what the numeric answer should have been:

Benefit = 25% x $125,000 x [(1.03^15 +1.03^14 +1.03^13) / 3] x [5/25] = $9,456 (instead of $9,737)
AL = $9,456 x [230,685 / 20,994] x 1.06^-15 = $43,355 (instead of $44,644)

Were these the questions that you were referring to? If not, would you be able to point me to the questions you were referring to? I’d like to make sure that any necessary revisions are made for the 2019 edition.
Thank you very much for your feedback and I apologize for the inconvenience.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-15-2018, 04:20 PM
ac414 ac414 is offline
Member
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: Chicago area
Studying for EA 2-F
College: Purdue University/DePaul University
Posts: 46
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelR_8584 View Post
I went through the 2017 exam again and identified two questions that were based on a 3-year average NRB that you may be referring to: Questions 3 and 23.

The solution to Question 3 appears to be correct but it does not mention that the 401(a)(17) salary limitation applies to the accrued benefit which is why $270,000 was used in the formula instead of the $285,000 current salary with scaling factors applied. I agree that this could have been made more clear and I will make a note for the next edition.

The solution to Question 23 appears to have an error in that the computation of the benefit was based strictly on projected final pay instead of a final 3-year projected average. The effect on the numeric solution was not large enough to change the letter answer, but here is what the numeric answer should have been:

Benefit = 25% x $125,000 x [(1.03^15 +1.03^14 +1.03^13) / 3] x [5/25] = $9,456 (instead of $9,737)
AL = $9,456 x [230,685 / 20,994] x 1.06^-15 = $43,355 (instead of $44,644)

Were these the questions that you were referring to? If not, would you be able to point me to the questions you were referring to? Id like to make sure that any necessary revisions are made for the 2019 edition.
Thank you very much for your feedback and I apologize for the inconvenience.
Don't have it in front of me but that sounds about right.
__________________
P FM MLC EA 2-L, VEE

EA 2-F
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 11-15-2018, 05:47 PM
Rick_G's Avatar
Rick_G Rick_G is offline
Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Just south of the Big Chicken
Posts: 2,185
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelR_8584 View Post
The solution to Question 3 appears to be correct but it does not mention that the 401(a)(17) salary limitation applies to the accrued benefit – which is why $270,000 was used in the formula instead of the $285,000 current salary with scaling factors applied. I agree that this could have been made more clear and I will make a note for the next edition.
You should not be using the 270,000 value at all, since that only applies to the 2017 pay. The prior three years' 401(a)(17) limits should be applied separately to each prior year for the 01/01/2017 three year average pay (for the accrued benefit).
__________________
Rick Groszkiewicz


Now offering online seminars and everything else under the sun for actuarial exams.
EA-2F and EA-2L and EA-1

Last edited by Rick_G; 11-15-2018 at 07:10 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 11-19-2018, 11:14 AM
MichaelR_8584 MichaelR_8584 is offline
SOA
 
Join Date: Nov 2018
College: Temple U.
Posts: 4
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick_G View Post
You should not be using the 270,000 value at all, since that only applies to the 2017 pay. The prior three years' 401(a)(17) limits should be applied separately to each prior year for the 01/01/2017 three year average pay (for the accrued benefit).
You're right - when calculating the accrued benefit we use the 401(a)(17) limits that apply for 2014, 2015, and 2016. Ultimately, the 415 limitation overrides in this problem. I'll make a note to edit the accrued benefit for the next edition. Final answer will not change. Thank you Rick!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:37 AM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.29555 seconds with 11 queries