Generally no, because they typically address technical and compliance issues, rather than professionalism, which means they may count toward the general 30 CE hours as relevant CE but may not count as professionalism (Section 2.2.7). In some cases, however, they could be considered professionalism.
 
The actuary will need to make case-by-case judgment based on the content of the specific material.

Last updated December 2014

Probably not. Lunch with a colleague from another firm where actuarial matters are briefly discussed would not count as organized activity even if the subject matter provided both parties relevant continuing education (CE). However, there is no prohibition against a study group meeting over lunch to provide CE and counting that as CE.
 

No. In receiving relevant continuing education, it is important that actuaries be exposed to information from various sources in order to broaden their understanding of the subject matter. Points of view from within the same organization, even if multinational, do not provide the required broad perspective (Section 2.2.7).

Last updated December 2014

For in-house meeting time to count as an “organized activity,” an outside participant (from a different organization, not just an affiliate of your organization) must actively participate and be available for questions throughout the event (Section 2.2.7).

Last updated December 2014

As noted in Section 2.2.7 of the USQS, it is ultimately up to the individual actuary to determine on a good-faith basis what CE opportunities meet the definition of relevant CE. However, the Committee on Qualifications has provided the following advice at various webcasts and seminars: Activities (whether organized or other) may constitute relevant CE if the actuary learned something, intended to learn something, or confirmed his or her existing understanding of materials related to his or her current or future actuarial work.

The decision whether an activity is “relevant” depends on each actuary specifically and must be made on a case-by-case basis (Section 2.2.7). If the Canadian CE is relevant to the actuary's U.S. practice, it may be appropriate to include it as U.S. CE as well. Note that it is possible for such time to be used to meet both the Canadian Institute of Actuaries’ CE requirement and the U.S. CE requirement, as long as all of the conditions in the USQS are met.

Each actuary must make a “reasonable, good-faith determination” of what CE opportunities will enhance the actuary’s ability to practice in a desired field. Examples are given in the U.S. Qualification Standards (USQS) but do not specifically address CPCU and CFA (Section 2.2.7).

The USQS states that CE must be “relevant.” This requirement is satisfied if the continuing education

Under the U.S. Qualification Standards (USQS), an actuary may count all of the actual time spent studying for actuarial exams toward his or her annual CE requirements (using a 50 minute = 1 CE hour calculation), typically under the “other activities” component. Please keep in mind that excess CE hours may be rolled over for only one year and that at least 6 CE hours from “organized activities” and 3 CE hours on professionalism topics must be earned annually.

Although most actuarial volunteer committees and activities involve a component of time that is administrative in nature, many contain elements of CE as well. Actuaries may count the portion of their committee work that is “directly relevant to the area of practice of the subject of the Statement of Actuarial Opinion” as CE (Section 2.2.7). An actuary should not count administrative time as CE. If a particular meeting or phone call is partially CE and partially administrative, the actuary should make a good-faith effort to determine the portion of the time that is CE.