The Online Directory can take a few days to update after attestation is submitted. It’s totally a self-test, unless it comes up in a hearing, or a filing. My boss had to provide his CE record (with notes) when he was challenged by an attorney as he gave expert witness testimony.
Local actuarial clubs sometimes provide organized professionalism material at their meetings that seems perfectly acceptable as continuing ed. Some reading also qualifies. I like to track with TRACE.
Unlike most states, Washington has several rules that define “qualified actuary” and require qualification before signing anything as an actuary. Last year’s attestation doesn’t suffice. Updating the Online Directory has always been accepted AFAIK.
So Washington doesn’t consider someone qualified if, as of November 1, they haven’t completed all their CE for that year, or for whatever reason simply haven’t yet attested? Even though they are an MAAA and whatever else in good standing? That’s absolutely insane, and utterly wrong, especially since they are relying on the various professional entities to tell them who is qualified, but aren’t bothering to do any research as to how these organizations define qualified.
If an actuary doesn’t attest, the Washington law allows them to submit whatever evidence they want to demonstrate qualification. Attestation seems the simplest route. (The Academy has said many times that there is no such thing as “in good standing.”)
I am an MAAA. I am in compliance with the SOA through the end of this year. Seems like I meet the requirements and Washington is making up its own rules based on a lack of understanding of how the SOA defines compliance.
" … acting within the scope of his or her training, experience and qualifications AND: …" I knew an FCAS who was caught signing annuity actuarial memos for state filings (not Washington). His profuse apology plus a signed memo from an annuity actuary were ultimately accepted. ABCD might have been scary.
Utah had a law (maybe still does) that allowed an actuary to get an insurance agent’s license without taking the agent’s exam. Until the mid-1980s, half of the actuaries in the Yellow Pages (remember those?) had never taken an exam. Utah adjusted to require some credentials - AAA, FSA, ASA, FCA, FCAS, ACAS, …
I did the attestation, but no, I don’t have to eventually. I could sign this filing and quit being an actuary forever. Why should I have to be compliant for the year AFTER I file?
No, I don’t work in Olympia. I do the attestation as early as possible, in part because the Online Directory automatically changes my status to “Retired” instead of “In Reporting Period.” (I’m not sure how they determine that, maybe by being over 65. )
Maybe they should wait to review the filings until January, then check attestations.
When I started my job, I changed my status. My boss was upset that it didn’t immediately change. When I asked the SoA, they said that it can take a few days to update.
So that’s why I attest as soon as I can. “Retired” is not what I want my boss to see.
Organized requires participation from members of more than one company, which we’ve obviously got. It also requires “live interaction” which they seem to harp on asking & answering questions.
It certainly seems to meet the spirit of their definition in that we can ask questions and get answers. But it might be pushing the bounds of “live interaction”… I dunno.
I can get answers faster on here if a bunch of us are going back & forth than I can on a webinar. The webinar might not even get to my question at all.
I agree that reading a thread hours after the fact wouldn’t count as organized. But if a bunch of us are effectively having a live online chat, what is basically what was happening at the time I made that post, it seems like it meets the AAA’s rules.
)
Maybe they should wait to review the filings until January, then check attestations.