B
blowfish
Member
Hi there
Could somebody explain this statement from SmartRevise please?
"A trend of negative regulatory surpluses over time could indicate insufficient prudence in the valuation assumptions, which should be revised."
I thought negative regulatory surpluses mean consistently high liabilities/low assets which could be a result of being overly prudent. So this does not make sense to me.
thanks.
Could somebody explain this statement from SmartRevise please?
"A trend of negative regulatory surpluses over time could indicate insufficient prudence in the valuation assumptions, which should be revised."
I thought negative regulatory surpluses mean consistently high liabilities/low assets which could be a result of being overly prudent. So this does not make sense to me.
thanks.