Powered by Lexis+®
Jurisdiction(s):
United Kingdom
CASE STUDY

“A lot of the work that I do is historic-the maximum sentences change at different points of time. It's really complicated and people get it wrong all the time. That's when having a timeline is really useful.”

1 High Pavement

Access all documents on Actuarial methods

Actuarial methods meaning

What does Actuarial methods mean?
Actuarial methods are the techniques actuaries use to place present values on assets, liabilities and cashflows for legal, regulatory and transactional purposes (for example, pension scheme funding, insurance reserving and corporate reporting). The expression is descriptive rather than a defined legal term, but particular regimes prescribe or constrain the method chosen. For defined benefit pension accounting under IAS 19 and FRS 102, the projected unit credit method is required. For UK statutory scheme funding (Pensions Act 2004 and the Occupational Pension Schemes (Scheme Funding) Regulations 2005), the scheme actuary, with the trustees, selects an actuarial method and assumptions to set the technical provisions, subject to The Pensions Regulator’s code and guidance. Comparable principles apply in Ireland under the Pensions Act 1990 and IORP II. In general insurance, Solvency II (and, in the UK, Solvency UK) uses recognised reserving methods. Common methods include projected unit credit, unit credit, entry age and attained age methods; in non-life, chain-ladder and Bornhuetter-Ferguson. Different methods can produce materially different funding deficits, contribution requirements, section 75 employer debt and buy-out pricing. Standard terminology and practice notes are published by the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries and the Society of Actuaries in Ireland. Usage is broadly consistent across England...
Speed up all aspects of your legal work with tools that help you to work faster and smarter. Win cases, close deals and grow your business–all whilst saving time and reducing risk.

View the related News about Actuarial methods

NEWS
McCloud Remedy costs are member costs: Court of Appeal upholds Treasury Directions; no indirect discrimination, no duty to consult, and PSED challenge fails under PSPA 2013 cost control mechanism

R (on the application of the British Medical Association) v His Majesty’s Treasury and another; R (on the application of The Fire Brigades Union and others) v His Majesty’s Treasury and another [2024] EWCA Civ 355 What are the practical implications of this case? Barring any further appeal, the Court of Appeal’s ruling places the McCloud Remedy’s costs on present scheme members, in the same way as other valuation components tied to member profiles (for example life expectancy and pay growth), rather than on scheme employers. Employers, together with the Exchequer, continue to shoulder variability from financial and technical assumptions, such as the discount rate and actuarial methods. Unsurprisingly, members are unlikely to view this favourably, particularly where it can fairly be said that the government’s own failure to avoid discriminatory treatment when setting up the new public sector pension arrangements gave rise to the McCloud Remedy in the first place. Nevertheless, the outcome aligns with the way the Remedy has been constructed and with the policy context...

Read More Right Arrow

View the related Practice Notes about Actuarial methods

PRACTICE NOTES
Valuing DB pension liabilities: scheme-specific funding (technical provisions) and low dependency, buy-out, PPF s143/s179, CETVs, IAS 19/UK GAAP and related funding concepts

THIS PRACTICE NOTE APPLIES IN RELATION TO DEFINED BENEFIT LIABILITIES How defined benefit (DB) liabilities ought to be assessed depends on a number of factors, in particular: the valuation approach to be adopted. Common exercises undertaken comprise the following: scheme-specific funding valuations as required under Part 3 of the Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004) solvency (or buy-out) valuations as required by the Occupational Pension Scheme (Scheme Funding) Regulations 2005, SI 2005/337, reg 7 valuations required by the PeA 2004, ss 143 and 179 (often described respectively as s 143 valuations and s 179 valuations) neutral estimates to meet the requirements of Technical Actuarial Standard 300 (Pensions) cash equivalent transfer values (CETV) as specified under the Occupational Pension Schemes (Transfer Values) Regulations 1996, SI 1996/1847 IAS19 and UK GAAP valuations whether the liabilities under review concern past service or future service, as distinct categories This Practice Note sets...

Read More Right Arrow
PRACTICE NOTES
UK defined benefit occupational pension scheme funding: statutory regime, 2024 low‑dependency strategy, valuations (Fast Track/Bespoke), recovery plans, employer covenant, disclosure and deficit/risk management

THIS BEGINNERS’ GUIDE APPLIES TO DEFINED BENEFIT OCCUPATIONAL PENSION SCHEMES This Beginner’s Guide explores the legal framework in relation to the funding of registered defined benefit occupational pension schemes (DB schemes), including: the statutory scheme-specific funding regime and how it operates the funding and investment strategy actuarial valuations scheme funding negotiations the Pensions Regulator’s approach to scheme funding, and methods of managing scheme funding deficits The statutory scheme-specific funding regime The Pensions Act 2004 (PeA 2004) brought in the current ‘scheme-specific’ funding regime for DB schemes. It took effect on 30 December 2005, superseding the earlier Minimum Funding Requirement (MFR) and transposing into UK law the scheme funding provisions of the IORP Directive 2003/41/EC on the activities and supervision of institutions for occupational retirement provision, which was later repealed and recast as the Archived Directive (EU) 2016/2341 (Archived IORP II). Note that neither the 2003 IORP Directive, nor Archived IORP II form part of UK domestic law,...

Read More Right Arrow