A little over two months has now passed since the Financial Reporting Councils revised framework of Technical Actuarial Standards (TASs) came into force. For many of our members carrying out work within the scope of the standards, the transition has passed without much ado. In general, the simplification of the framework and the consolidation of the old, generic TASs into a single, high-level generic TAS (the TAS 100) have been welcomed
A little over two months has now passed since the Financial Reporting Council's revised framework of Technical Actuarial Standards (TASs) came into force. For many of our members carrying out work within the scope of the standards, the transition has passed without much ado. In general, the simplification of the framework and the consolidation of the old, generic TASs into a single, high-level generic TAS (the TAS 100) have been welcomed.
However, some members have received the new regime with less enthusiasm, and are even considering resigning their membership of the IFoA. They are concerned that the extended scope of the TAS 100 increases the regulatory burden placed on them, creating an uneven playing field for members working in wider fields who are competing for roles against non-actuaries. We are listening intently to this section of our community; the development of new markets is key to the future of the profession.
The new standards are not intended to place members at a disadvantage or to catch anyone out. The purpose of the TASs has always been to promote the reliability of actuarial work. In raising the TAS requirements to a higher level of principle, it makes sense at the same time to broaden their scope. It becomes difficult then to justify distinctions between different areas of 'actuarial' practice.
All our members subscribe to the Actuaries' Code - professionalism and standards are part of the DNA of the profession.
We don't yet have the full picture as to how the new standards have landed, or how they might best be interpreted in non-traditional environments. We are, however, working closely with the Financial Reporting Council in listening to feedback. From that received to date, many members have been reassured to find the TAS 100 requirements are not as burdensome as they feared and are, in fact, consistent with the procedures in place in their own organisations.
The new regime represents a positive step towards creating a more principles-based framework of standards. It is simpler and recognises the importance of actuaries exercising their professional judgment.
We know that any regulatory change can present challenges and we will support members through the transition as effectively as possible. On our website you will find guidance that we've published to complement TAS 100 - including case studies to help members with its practical application - and details of events offered as part of our ongoing programme of training and engagement.
We trust that, as the new standards bed in, members will find that their impact is not as threatening as they might initially have feared. Either way, we want to hear from you over the coming months about how you are finding it working with the standards.
We will continue to provide support wherever we can to help members get to grips with the new standards and to continue to reinforce our hard-earned collective reputation for the highest levels of quality and professionalism.
If you would like to share your views and experiences of TAS 100, please contact the regulatory team on [email protected]
Derek Cribb is the chief executive of the Institute and Faculty of Actuaries