Professionalism Counts, February 2026
When the Academy was founded in 1965, there were no qualification standards for the actuarial profession. As the New York State Insurance Superintendent said at the time, “Our laws today demand no more proof of the actuary’s competence than did the laws of ancient Rome.”[1]
One of the reasons the Academy was founded was to establish standards for the profession so that those hiring actuaries and the public could be confident that they were receiving the services of a competent actuary. In the 60 years since then, qualification requirements developed gradually and, for many years, applied only to certain regulatory opinions.
Since the adoption of the 2001 Code of Professional Conduct, Precept 2 has fleshed out the Precept 1 requirements of competence and skill, stating:
“An Actuary shall perform Actuarial Services only when the Actuary is qualified to do so on the basis of basic and continuing education and experience, and only when the Actuary satisfies applicable qualification standards.”
With the adoption of the 2001 Code came the realization that qualification standards should be established for most actuarial services. At the time, the Qualifications Standards for Prescribed Actuarial Opinions applied only to a prescribed statement of actuarial opinion (SAO), defined as “a statement of actuarial opinion or actuarial communication issued for purposes of compliance with … laws or regulations, actuarial requirements, or accounting requirements.”
The 2008 standard represented a sea change and greatly expanded the scope of the standard. The 2008 Qualification Standards for Actuaries Issuing Statements of Actuarial Opinion in the Unted States applied to any actuary issuing an SAO and defined an SAO very broadly: “an opinion expressed by an actuary in the course of performing Actuarial Services and intended by that actuary to be relied upon by the person or organization to which the opinion is addressed.” Suddenly, instead of applying only to actuaries who signed certain formal opinions, the qualification standards applied to just about any actuary working in the U.S.
Why was this change necessary? Because of the Code.
Because the Code requires actuaries to practice with competence and skill, the profession needed to set minimum qualification standards, which would help ensure that actuaries were, in fact, practicing with competence and skill. This requirement goes back to the most basic purpose of actuarial professionalism—to support the profession in fulfilling its responsibility to the public, thereby maintaining the public’s trust.
The annotations of Precept 2 underline the need for actuaries to be qualified for all actuarial services they provide. Annotation 2-1 requires actuaries to meet the qualification standards for the jurisdictions in which the actuary is practicing, whether the US or another jurisdiction. Annotation 2-2 requires actuaries to be qualified even when no applicable qualification standards exist for a particular assignment or jurisdiction.
Looking Into the Mirror
Like the rest of actuarial professionalism, determining whether you are qualified requires integrity. There is not a checklist of requirements for every type of SAO—that would be impossible. Instead, it is up to you to determine whether you are qualified for each assignment, by asking yourself whether you have the education and experience to provide the actuarial services in question with competence, skill, and care. Continuing education is a vital component of this self-examination. Actuarial services and the tools and techniques used to provide them are changing rapidly. Even if you were up to speed a few years ago, you cannot assume you are still qualified today.
Principals, the public, and the profession all rely on you to determine whether you have the education and experience necessary to perform actuarial services with competence and skill—regardless of the location, type of assignment, or existence of standards. A thorough and honest look in the mirror is required.
[1] “Address by Henry Root Stern, Jr.”; Transactions of the Society of Actuaries; 1965, Vol. 17, Pt. 1, No. 47AB (p.74).