ETM Blog
NAIC Forum
Randy will be publishing NAIC related content, articles, and posts.
February 2012 - NAIC Reports Corrections Affecting 2011 Annual Statements
- Hits: 427
- 9 Comments
- Subscribe to updates
- Bookmark
This week, the NAIC has reported corrections to the 2011 Annual Statement Instructions and posted the corrections to the Blanks Working Group website. Additionally, the NAIC has reported certain validations on the Supplemental Health Care Exhibit – Part 2 contain a logic error resulting in false failures. Other NAIC validations are also returning false failures (Note 9 Income Taxes if you report a Deferred Tax Liability and Life RBC Page 2 Bonds if you report short-term invested assets on SCDLPT1 Line 8999999).
First, let’s look at the Instruction corrections posted by the NAIC this week dated 02/12:
A correction to the Cash Flow instruction’s section for Cash from Investments Worksheet affects the NAIC statement types Fraternal, Health, Life, Property/Casualty and Title. Look under the heading titled Schedule A – Verification Between Years and you will see the reference “(Report on Line 13.4 of Cash Flow)”. This reference should follow the reference for Line 3, not precede it, which the NAIC correction resolves.
An additional instruction correction is found for the Health Statement to the Underwriting and Investment Exhibit – Part 2C – Section A and Section B. In Section A the correction is in the following sentence: “As an example, Column 2, Line 2 should be the claims incurred in 2007 and paid in 2008 2007 and 2009 2008.”
In Section B the correction is in the following sentence: For example, Column 2, Line 2 will be for claims incurred in 2007, paid in 2007 and 2008, and any remaining liability or aggregate claim reserve remaining on those 2007 claims as of year-end 2009 2008.”
The Title Statement Instructions for the Statement of Income Line 1.3 is also corrected as follows: “The amount shown on this line should agree with the amount shown on the Operations and Investment Exhibit, Part 1A, Total of Line 3, 4, 5 and 6, Column 4.”
If you are completing the Supplemental Health Care Exhibit then be aware the following NAIC validations on Part 2 contain a logic error which results in a false failure. Subject to the Aggregate 2% Rule, a reporting entity has the option to report amounts in Column 11 or in Columns 8, 9, 10. The NAIC validation returns a false failure if you opt to report amounts in Columns 8, 9 and 10. Your software vendor may provide an update to correct these NAIC validations, otherwise; report the failed validations as bad NAIC checks in your April Filing. The rule numbers are _ZAAU900066, _ZAAU900070 thru _ZAAU900078, _ZAAU900092, _ZAAU900143 through _ZAAU900148.
And lastly, the NAIC is aware that on Note 9 a validation is returning a false failure if the reporting entity reports a net deferred tax liability. The validation fails when Note 9 line 09A01F, Deferred Tax Assets Non-admitted, equals zero and a Deferred Tax Liability is reported on the Liabilities schedule. As of today, the NAIC has indicated a correction to the validation or the Instructions is not planned. The rule numbers affected are Health Statement XZASN000028, Life Statement LZASN000033, Property/Casualty PZASN000147, and Title TZASN000014.
The NAIC is also aware that Life RBC validation LXARU900015 on Page 2 Bonds returns a false failure when short-term invested assets are reported on SCDLPT1 Line 8999999 as does validation LXARU900007 when long-term bonds are reported on SCDLPT1 Line 6599999. The validations do not include these amounts but should. The NAIC has not indicated if the validations will be corrected or removed. Report as invalid NAIC validations in your RBC Filing.
Comments
Supplemental Health Care Exhibit and A&H Experience Exhibit
Hi Randy,
We're following up with the NAIC on a crosscheck error between the SHCE and the AHPEE for direct and net earned premiums as it relates to the rate credits, as well as direct incurred losses. Rate credits are included in AHPEE earned premiums but in incurred losses in the SHCE. Have you heard from anyone else on this? We're not having a lot of luck with the NAIC on it.
RE:Supplemental Health Care Exhibit and A&H Experience Exhibit
Tammie,
I have not heard from the NAIC or other filers on this issue. Several of the changes to SHCEPT2 this year address the reporting of rate credits. In the Health Premiums Earned section Line 1.5 Paid rate credits was added and Line 1.6 Reserve for rate credits CY and 1.7 Reserve for rate credits PY are now opened for data entry. In the Direct Claims Incurred section the same lines for rate credits PD, CY reserves and PY reserves were added. If I learn of new information I’ll pass it along.
RE:RE:Supplemental Health Care Exhibit and A&H Experience Exhibit
It appears to me that there is a bug in the SHCE if you have any rate credits. The issue seems to be that in Part 2, rate credits are not included in direct earned premium (line 1.11), but they are included in net earned premium (line 1.16). These two numbers are required to match the AHPEE, but there's no way they can both match. If you put an adjustment on line 1.15 to force the direct earned premium to match, the adjustment will flow through to line 1.16 as well so that this doesn't match.
There is a similar issue with the incurred claims, for much the same reason.
RE:RE:RE:Supplemental Health Care Exhibit and A&H Experience Exhibit
Recently, the NAIC has acknowledged that the SHCEPT2 - GT validations to AHPEE may not work if you are reporting rate credits. The specific rules the NAIC referred to are _XAAU900390 and _XAAU900392, direct earned premiums and total incurred claims. Two additional validations may have a similar issue.
For _XAAU900390 SHCEPT2 – GT rate credits are not included in the calculation for earned premiums Line 01.11 but are included in AHPEE Summary Part 4 earned premiums so the validation will have a difference related to rate credits.
For _XAAU900392 SHCEPT2 – GT rate credits are included in the calculation for total incurred claims Line 02.15 but are excluded from AHPEE Summary Part 4 so the validation will also have a difference related to rate credits.
The following validations will not always fail due to the reporting of rate credits but can cause issues if Other Adjustments are entered:
_XAAU900389 validates SHCEPT2 – GT Line 01.16 net premiums earned, which includes rate credits in the calculation, to AHPEE Summary Part 4.
_XAAU900391 validates SHCEPT2 – GT Line 02.20 net incurred claims, which back out rate credits in its calculation, to AHPEE Summary Part 4.
For this year end I would recommend providing an explanation that required rate credit reporting on SHCE and AHPEE does not match if these validations fail in your filing and you are reporting rate credits.
RE:MLR and RBC
Tammie,
The following NAIC validation on the LAH RBC Premium Stabilization Reserves schedule Page LR026, LYARN000194, includes MLR rebates unpaid:
• RBCPSR Line 02 Provision for Experience Rating funds less than or equal to Annual Statement LIAB Line 09.2
LIAB Line 09.2 is the Provision for Experience Rating Funds which includes the MLR rebate unpaid as reported on the second Inset 09.2 and on new Note 24D12 Column 5. The value appears to flow from Note 24D to LIAB Line 09.2 and then to RBC PSR Line 02.
Another RBC question related to securities lending
AVR instructions were updated to include sec lending securities in the AVR Bonds (P2, L1, C3 + Sch DL Bonds). These amounts pull into RBC. RBC instructions have not been updated to include sec lending securities and state that RBC bonds should equal P2, L1, C3 minus hybrids (D1A, C6, L7). Cross check errors result from removing sec lending from RBC. Cross check errors result from leaving it in RBC.
Thanks for the quick feedback. Love the blog.
RE:Another RBC question related to securities lending
Tammie, See the article posted Feb 3, "Feb 2012 - NAIC Reports Corrections..". In the last paragraph I point out 2 NAIC validations on LR002 Bonds that are incorrect. These validations fail for the reasons you noted and should be reported or "explained" as invalid NAIC validaitons.






Thank you!
Thank you for this very helpful information Randy!