[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[lmi-commits] [6395] Plan to regularize idioms to distinguish new busine
From: |
Greg Chicares |
Subject: |
[lmi-commits] [6395] Plan to regularize idioms to distinguish new business from inforce |
Date: |
Sat, 07 Nov 2015 13:46:20 +0000 |
Revision: 6395
http://svn.sv.gnu.org/viewvc/?view=rev&root=lmi&revision=6395
Author: chicares
Date: 2015-11-07 13:46:19 +0000 (Sat, 07 Nov 2015)
Log Message:
-----------
Plan to regularize idioms to distinguish new business from inforce
Modified Paths:
--------------
lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702.cpp
lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702a.cpp
Modified: lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702.cpp
===================================================================
--- lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702.cpp 2015-11-07 13:44:27 UTC (rev 6394)
+++ lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702.cpp 2015-11-07 13:46:19 UTC (rev 6395)
@@ -192,9 +192,8 @@
LMI_ASSERT(a_PresentSpecAmt <= a_PresentBftAmt );
LMI_ASSERT(a_LeastBftAmtEver <= a_PresentSpecAmt);
LMI_ASSERT(0.0 <= a_TargetPremium);
- // TODO ?? TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. See:
- // http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lmi/2015-09/msg00017.html
- // The same issue arises later in this file, and in other files.
+ // TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+ // reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
if(0 == InforceYear && 0 == InforceMonth)
{
LMI_ASSERT(0.0 == PresentGLP);
@@ -749,6 +748,8 @@
LeastBftAmtEver = PresentSpecAmt;
TargetPremium = a_TargetPremium;
+ // TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+ // reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
if(0 == InforceYear && 0 == InforceMonth)
{
PresentGLP = CalculateGLP
Modified: lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702a.cpp
===================================================================
--- lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702a.cpp 2015-11-07 13:44:27 UTC (rev 6394)
+++ lmi/trunk/ihs_irc7702a.cpp 2015-11-07 13:46:19 UTC (rev 6395)
@@ -444,6 +444,8 @@
else
{
// For illustrations, allow 1035 only at issue
+ // TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+ // reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
LMI_ASSERT(0 == PolicyYear && 0 == PolicyMonth);
Bfts[TestPeriodDur] = a_Bft;
@@ -1226,6 +1228,8 @@
// TODO ?? TAXATION !! expunge
// LMI_ASSERT
// ( a_TriggeredByBftDecrease
+// TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+// reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
// || (0 == PolicyYear && 0 == PolicyMonth)
// );
// When recalculating premium due to a death benefit decrease,
@@ -1233,6 +1237,8 @@
// Saved7PPRate, SavedAVBeforeMatChg, SavedNecPrem, and SavedNSP
// at the last material change. When initializing, those variables
// should have their proper initial values.
+ // TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+ // reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
if(0 == PolicyYear && 0 == PolicyMonth)
{
// LMI_ASSERT(0.0 == SavedAVBeforeMatChg);
@@ -1252,12 +1258,17 @@
LMI_ASSERT(materially_equal(NSPVec[0], SavedNSP));
}
/* TODO ?? TAXATION !! Expunge this perhaps. Not sure what we should do if
someone
-tries running an inforce case as of month 0, year 0.
+tries running an inforce case as of month 0, year 0. See:
+ http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/lmi/2015-09/msg00017.html
+and
+
http://svn.savannah.nongnu.org/viewvc/lmi/trunk/input_harmonization.cpp?root=lmi&r1=6354&r2=6391&diff_format=c
// In either of these two cases--initialization or Bfts reduction--the
// a_AVBeforeMatChg and a_NecPrem arguments are not used, so give a
// warning if they were nonzero.
// if
// ( a_TriggeredByBftDecrease
+// TAXATION !! Wrong for a contract in force one day. When this is
+// reimplemented, use 'effective date == inforce date' instead.
// || (0 == PolicyYear && 0 == PolicyMonth)
// )
// {
[Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- [lmi-commits] [6395] Plan to regularize idioms to distinguish new business from inforce,
Greg Chicares <=