Literatura académica sobre el tema "Ontario Mutual Life Assurance Company"

Traditionally the interest of actuaries and many other life assurance specialists in the ‘corporate structure’ of life offices has largely been limited to questions surrounding the distinctions between mutual and proprietary companies. More recently, attention has also been paid to composite insurance companies—principally to protect the interests of the long term business policyholders.Developments over the past ten years or so have led many life offices to reappraise their corporate structure. A number of companies have decided to set up a (non-insurance) group holding company, the principal subsidiary of which would be the established life assurance company. This paper will consider some of the pressures which have resulted in these reorganizations, in particular:(a) the impact of Section 16 of the Insurance Companies Act 1982 which restricts insurance companies to only conducting activities in connection with insurance;(b) the various provisions in the Insurance Companies Regulations 1981 which limit the admissibility of particular assets and specify minimum accounting standards which must be adopted when writing down certain fixed assets;(c) the additional flexibility with regard to marketing and the financing of marketing costs which a revised structure will allow;(d) the purchase of companies for sums substantially in excess of their net asset value which may give rise to difficulties in accounting for the ‘goodwill element’ in the purchase price;(e) the potential tax advantages (and, in some cases, disadvantages) which may result from the creation of a non-insurance holding company.

Sharia Insurance according to a binding ruling in religious matters (fatwa) of the National Shari'ah Board of the Indonesian Ulama Council no: 21 /DSN-MUI/ X / 2001 is a mutual effort to help among a number of people/parties through investment in assets or tabarru' which provides a pattern of return to face certain risks through engagement in accordance with the sharia. PRUlink sharia is an insurance product associated with sharia-based investment. PRUlink Syariah is designed to meet the society's need for future financial designs in accordance with Islamic principles of sharia. There are two types of product of PRUlink Syariah insurance, namely PRUlink Syariah Investor Account and PRUlink Syariah Assurance Account. Kind of Product in PRUlink Syariah is contract between policy holders using contract of tabarru which is called hibah and the owner of the policy/participant premises sharia insurance company using contract of tijarah called wakalah bin ujrah. In sharia insurance there is a surplus sharing that will be distributed to customers calculated at the end of the calendar year. This can be obtained if there are more funds than tabarru' accounts that have been reduced by claims and debt to the company if any. How is PRUlinksyariah managed in Prudential? The result of the research shows that PRUsyariah premium management in Prudential is separated by two accounts, namely tabarru' account and investment account. The own fund is managed by Eastpring Investment, that is manager company from Asia prudential, while allocation of fund is invested in stocks and obligation which is in accordance with sharia principles contained in the Jakarta Stock Exchange. For the choice of investment in PRUsariah, there are three options of investment, namely Sharia-Rupiah Equity Fund, Sharia-Rupiah Managed Fund or Sharia-Rupiah fixed Income fund, in accordance with the choice of the next participant. From the investment result the participant agrees to pay tabarru’ contribution directly input into tabarru' account. Tabarru’ funds are fully owned by participants and used to pay claims participants claim at any time, but if there is tabaaru’ funds excess with claims total in one year as of 31 December paid, then tabarru’ surplus or that is called surplus will be distributed participants that meet the requirements to get the surplus.

From the late 1960s to the mid-1980s, the Australian city transitioned from modern to postmodern skyscraper urbanism. This article examines three Australian skyscrapers spanning this transition: the Mutual Life & Citizens Assurance Company (MLC) Centre in Sydney (1977), the Rialto Towers in Melbourne (1986), and the Bond Tower in Perth (1988). Despite a backlash against skyscrapers, in part brought about by heritage activists, these prominent and sizable towers were realized in historic environments. With the authorization of heritage regulators and consultants, tower builders made architectural and functional compromises for preservation, to the dissatisfaction of activists. Local and transnational forces coalesced to bring about this mode of skyscraper development, including improved construction technologies, the continued association of towers with boosterism, an intensification of economic processes, and advancements in participatory urbanism. These Australian developments exemplify the changing relationship between postmodern skyscrapers, heritage conservation, and urban planning and design.

Sharia Insurance according to a binding ruling in religious matters (fatwa) of the National Shari'ah Board of the Indonesian Ulama Council no: 21 /DSN-MUI/ X / 2001 is a mutual effort to help among a number of people/parties through investment in assets or tabarru' which provides a pattern of return to face certain risks through engagement in accordance with the sharia. PRUlink sharia is an insurance product associated with sharia-based investment. PRUlink Syariah is designed to meet the society's need for future financial designs in accordance with Islamic principles of sharia. There are two types of product of PRUlink Syariah insurance, namely PRUlink Syariah Investor Account and PRUlink Syariah Assurance Account. Kind of Product in PRUlink Syariah is contract between policy holders using contract of tabarru which is called hibah and the owner of the policy/participant premises sharia insurance company using contract of tijarah called wakalah bin ujrah. In sharia insurance there is a surplus sharing that will be distributed to customers calculated at the end of the calendar year. This can be obtained if there are more funds than tabarru' accounts that have been reduced by claims and debt to the company if any. How is PRUlinksyariah managed in Prudential? The result of the research shows that PRUsyariah premium management in Prudential is separated by two accounts, namely tabarru' account and investment account. The own fund is managed by Eastpring Investment, that is manager company from Asia prudential, while allocation of fund is invested in stocks and obligation which is in accordance with sharia principles contained in the Jakarta Stock Exchange. For the choice of investment in PRUsariah, there are three options of investment, namely Sharia-Rupiah Equity Fund, Sharia-Rupiah Managed Fund or Sharia-Rupiah fixed Income fund, in accordance with the choice of the next participant. From the investment result the participant agrees to pay tabarru’ contribution directly input into tabarru' account. Tabarru’ funds are fully owned by participants and used to pay claims participants claim at any time, but if there is tabaaru’ funds excess with claims total in one year as of 31 December paid, then tabarru’ surplus or that is called surplus will be distributed participants that meet the requirements to get the surplus. Keywords: Tabarru’ Fund Management, Sharia Insurance, Prudential Life

Chapter 5 builds on the two preceding chapters and examines how many of the questions about financial risk and actuarial discretion continued to surface throughout the 1980s and ’90s. The chapter first describes how the continuous decline of interest rates put pressure on the capital base of insurance firms. One company in particular ended up with serious difficulties: the Equitable Life Assurance Society, a mutual company whose practices exemplified in extremis the problems in British life insurance more generally. I suggest in this chapter that the dramatic collapse of Equitable Life in 2000 gave rise to the perception that actuarial expertise had failed to keep up with the realities of financial capitalism. The chapter ends by describing how this crisis of actuarial expertise in turn provided a window of opportunity for proponents of modern finance theory to push for reforms in the calculative machinery of life insurance, drawing on the core models of modern finance theory and the derivatives departments of investment banks. The downfall of Equitable Life prepared the way for life insurers’ evaluation machinery to be overhauled more generally