This paper sets out the working party’s view that for a defined benefit pension scheme’s commutation rate the appropriate starting point should be to set it in line with the scheme’s cash equivalent transfer value basis. We recognise that there may be several reasons why an actuary in their advice may deviate from that starting point and we explore these in detail, giving our views on when deviation is and is not justified, noting that many common reasons used such as selection risk are often used without (in our view) adequate justification. We also cover frequency of review – our view is that commutation rates should be reviewed at least every 3 years and actuaries should consider performing a high-level review of commutation rates annually. We suggest that actuaries should consider proposing market-related commutation rates especially in periods of volatile market conditions. In terms of timing, there are good arguments to review commutation terms either following or during a valuation. Finally, we set out some considerations on how actuaries should present their advice, such as clearly setting out all the information required to take key decisions, following up with any actuarial certification in writing (if necessary) and illustrating the impact on members for changing commutation rates.

In Britain around 1900, established financial institutions for long-term savings such as life assurers, and pension funds which were just in their formative phase, did not make material allocations to publicly quoted equity markets or ordinary shares; long-established life assurers, for example, had less than 3 per cent allocated to the asset class (Baker and Collins 2003). Over the following 100 years, this picture radically changed, with equities emerging as the central asset class for many institutional investors and the term ‘the cult of (the) equity’ was coined (Scott 2002; Avrahampour 2015). As the century progressed, institutional investors superseded private individuals and became the dominant holders of British publicly quoted companies (Cheffins 2010). Despite the attractions of the asset class and their generally high returns, within a relatively short period by the end of the century, institutional equity exposure had peaked and was in decline both at life assurers and within pension funds. Here we highlight, and link together, the key actuarial (Turnbull 2017) and investing (Morecroft 2017) ideas that were influential in these developments. We also identify the main individuals who were instrumental in the application of equity investing to institutional portfolios. The article has an emphasis towards years from 1920 to 1960 when most of the changes to investment practice and actuarial theory occurred.

This paper explores an approach to assessing the adequacy of capital resources for non-life insurance companies. It examines the range of risks faced by these companies and the factors that influence the analysis of their impact on an organisation's financial condition. The paper considers how the actuarial profession may contribute to this process, with particular reference to the regulatory regime envisaged in the United Kingdom.

Actuarial practice has been changing rapidly over recent decades, and this speed of change is likely to continue. The actuary of the future will face challenges from many quarters, including the need to communicate with multi-disciplinary teams of competing professionals, and to live in an increasingly multi-national and cross-border environment. The discussion paper reviews such trends and challenges, both national and international, and seeks to stimulate a discussion of key issues, including supply and demand, expanding the scope of actuarial work, the role of the consultant, training implications and the development of a more international profession.