Tony Higgins

  • North Carolina –
    • mid-1980s-?-1994-? – Senior Deputy Commissioner
  • Boyd A. ‘Tony’ Higgins
    • – Jan. 2, 2024
  • 1993-4, NAIC Proceedings – Tony Higgins (NC) agreed that there was a problem with lack of education of the agents.
  • 2. Standardized Assumptions
    • Tony Higgins (N.C.) asked the working group to consider projections into the future for only a few years of the non-guaranteed elements, and then projections further into the future of standardized assumptions or guarantees.
    • Bob Wright said this allows a company to show how its policy works without the problem of projections of non-guaranteed elements far into the future.
    • Lester Dunlap (La.) also expressed interest in the idea of standardized assumptions to show how the policy works.
      • He said projections far into the future can border on misrepresentation.

1994-3, NAIC Proc. 

  • 1996-1 NAC Proceedings – 6. Discuss Amendments to Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide
    • Mr. Dunlap said that a small group consisting of Tony Higgins [North Caroline – Senior Deputy Commissioner], Brenda Cude (University of Illinois Cooperative Extension Service), and Chris Kite (FIPSCO) and himself had rewritten the buyer’s guide (Attachment One-C).
    • 1996 – NAIC Draft redlined Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – Draft 1996-3B 931 – 6p 

LIBG – Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide

  • 1981-12 – Journal – American Academy of Actuaries – Statement to NAIC,  RE: Dividends, Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – 12p
    • EXHIBIT C:  POSSIBLE CHANGES IN SOME SECTIONS OF THE LIFE INSURANCE BUYER’S GUIDE – p151-153
  • 1981-2 NAIC Proc. – POSSIBLE CHANGES IN SOME SECTIONS OF THE LIFE INSURANCE BUYER’S GUIDE
    • The suggested changes to the buyer’s guide (Attachment One-B2) incorporate several new ideas. 
    • Since that time, the Academy committee has been developing improved versions of its suggestions to the NAIC.  ATTACHMENT ONE-B2 
  • 1982-2, NAIC Proc. – A new exposure draft of a revised model regulation has been prepared by the staff of the American Council of Life Insurance [ACLI]
    • The following are among the principal features incorporated in the revised draft:
      • The introduction of the concept of a nonguaranteed element to measure the extent to which policy costs can be affected by premiums, benefits, or other items that are subject to change by the company without the consent of the policyholder.
      •  A special plans section to accommodate the unique features of nontraditional plans such as universal life insurance.
  • 1988-2, NAIC Proceedings
    • 6. Reaffirmation of Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide
      • Commissioner Yancey reported on the Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide which is attached as Appendix A to the Life Insurance Disclosure Model Regulation.
      • He said a review of the NAIC Proceedings had  determined that the amendments to the Buyer’s Guide adopted in 1984 were inadvertently omitted, so there is no permanent record of the current correct version.
      • He further commented that many insurance companies may be using the incorrect version from the model laws.
  • 1996-1 NAC Proceedings – 6. Discuss Amendments to Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide
    • Mr. Dunlap said that a small group consisting of Tony Higgins [North Caroline – Senior Deputy Commissioner], Brenda Cude (University of Illinois Cooperative Extension Service), and Chris Kite (FIPSCO) and himself had rewritten the buyer’s guide (Attachment One-C).
    • 1996 – NAIC Draft redlined Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – Draft 1996-3B 931 – 6p 
  • 1996-3, NAIC Proceedings – Mr. Dunlap said, with this last change, the Buyer’s Guide Subgroup considers its task to be complete.
    • He said the primary reason for revision of the Buyer’s Guide was to make changes required by the illustrations regulation.
    • In addition, the subgroup took the opportunity to improve the wording of the Buyer’s Guide to make it more readable.
    • Upon motion duly made and seconded the Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide was adopted (Attachment Three-B1a).
  • Actuarial
  • 1976, COST COMPARISONS AND POLICY LANGUAGE, Society of Actuaries
  • 1979, Cost Disclosure, Society of Actuaries
  • 1981 – Academy Journal – STATEMENT 1981-12 – EXHIBIT C – POSSIBLE CHANGES IN SOME SECTIONS OF THE LIFE INSURANCE BUYER ‘ S GUIDE – (p151)
  • (p43) – Dan Andersen, NAIC / Iowa:  ….so we developed a buyer’s guide concept where we want to explain how you use the index.
    • Well, if you explain how to use the index, you ought to explain what the policy is and what choices a buyer has,
    • … and we became convinced that the worst decisions that were made weren’t necessary because the buyer bought a high cost policy but that he bought an inappropriate policy for his needs and for his budget.
  • Senator Stone (D-FL).  In other words, what we’re looking for is not relative cost so much as relevance.
  • Dan Andersen.  Right, relevance to the buyer’s needs and abilities to pay.

—  Dan Andersen, director of the Life and Health Insurance Division and chief actuary of the Iowa Insurance Department and chairman of the Cost Disclosure Task Force of the NAIC

1975 1203 and 1204 – GOV (Senate) – Veterans Insurance Information Disclosure, Richard Stone (D-FL)  —  [BonkNote]  —  [PDF-989p-GooglePlay] 

NAIC (Draft and Final)

2018 – NAIC Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – 8p

2007 – NAIC Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide  – 10p

2000 – NAIC Draft Life Insurance Buyers Guide  – PROC-2000-4Q_1 – 4p 

1996 – NAIC Draft redlined Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide  – Draft 1996-3B 931 – 6p 

1993 – NAIC Life Insurance Buyers Guide – 5p 

1983 – ACLI Revised Draft Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide only  – 1983-1 595 – 10p

1983 – ACLI Revised Draft Life Insurance Buyers Guide, letter and Disclosure Model Regulation  – 1983-1 523 – 27p 

1976 – NAIC Life Insurance Buyers Guide 1976-2 549 – 5p 

1973 – Interim NAIC Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – WishList

  • Other Versions
  • <WishList> – 1973 Interim Version of the NAIC Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide
  • 1978 – Federal Trade Commission (FTC) – Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – 12p
  • 1993 – Wisconsin – Life Insurance Buyer’s Guide – 10p “Adapted from the 1983 Life  Insurance Buyer’s Guide prepared by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners” 
  • <Wishlist> – 1983 Life  Insurance Buyer’s Guide prepared by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners

Doug Andrew – Media

1980s

  • ?-1982-? – Investors Life Insurance Company (Nebraska)
    • 1982 0908 – The Daily Spectrum – Judge schedules hearing for insurance – [link-newspapers.com]
      • Federal Judge Aldon Anderson has scheduled a Sept. 13 hearing on his order temporarily restraining a Utah firm from attempting to take agents and policy holders away from a Nebraska insurance company. Investors Life Insurance Co. of Nebraska last week filed a $1.5 million suit against three of its former general agents, claiming breach of contract and that the defendants had set up a company with a “similar” name in an effort to deceive holders of Investors Life policies.
      • The defendants are Douglas R. Andrew and…

1990s

  • 1999 0724 – The Salt Lake Tribune – MDRT – Utah – p7
  • 1999 1102 – The Salt Lake Tribune – Seed / Harvest – p46

2000s

  • 2005-2007 – Scott Burns – re: Doug Andrew  —  [BonkNote]
    • 2002 – Book – Missed Fortune
    • 2005 – Book – Missed Fortune 101
    • 2007 – Book – The Last Chance Millionaire: It’s Not Too Late to Become Wealthy  
  • 2008 1205 – Missed Fortune on Fox Business Channel | Doug, Emron, and Aaron Andrew – [VIDEO-YouTube-03:33]
    • 2008 – Book – Millionaire by Thirty: The Quickest Path to Early Financial Independence, by Douglas R. Andrew, Emron Andrew, and Aaron Andrew
    • Doug – People don’t know what they don’t know
    • Emron – Real Estate is one part, Soft Market
    • Host – Real Estate and Stocks seem to be the 
    • Doug – That’s Correct. We teach. How to take your serious money  … How to participate in the Stock Market when it goes up and how not to lose when it goes down.

2010s

  • 2017 – US News – Stress Test Your Portfolio With This Checklist – [link]
  • 2017 – Huffpost – huffpost.com/entry/yes-i-am-entitled_b_599b4d20e4b0ac90f2cba940
  • 2017 0821 – US News – How to Manage Life Insurance as an Investment: Investing within a policy may involve locking into a strategy that’s hard to change – [Doug Andrew], By Jeff Brown – [link]
    • “When I started my career as a financial strategist in 1974, I was a buy-term-invest-the-difference proponent – that is, until 1980 when E.F. Hutton introduced a new take on universal life insurance,” says financial advisor Doug Andrew, founder of Live Abundant and author of “Last Chance Millionaire.”
    • “Over the past 40 years, I’ve helped thousands of Americans benefit from what is now known as indexed universal life,” he says. “It’s like ‘buy term and invest the difference’ on steroids.”
    • “Do you have to repay the loans? No,” Andrew says. “The insurance company will apply any loans against the tax-free death benefit upon your passing. Or, you can choose to repay the loan, and your repayments become newly protected principal that can go on to accumulate tax-deferred interest.”
  • 2017 0922 – HBR – Prioritize Your Opportunities with This Checklist, by Doug Andrew, Harvard Business Review – [link]

2013 0704 – LC – Eddie Cressy v. FG Life, OM Financial, Doug Andrew, Paramount – Complaint for Damages and Equitable Relief – 11-05871 – 39p

  • 2013 0704 – LC – Eddie Cressy v. FG Life, OM Financial, Doug Andrew, Paramount – Complaint for Damages and Equitable Relief – 11-cv-05871 – 39p  —  [BonkNote]
  • 2011 – LC – Eddie L. Cressy v. OM Financial Life Insurance Company – Doug Andrew – 11-05871  —  [BonkNote]
    • 2:11-cv-05871 – California, District Court 
    • [Bonk] – 16 – 270p – Complete 
  • (p1) – 1. Unlawful, Unfair and Fraudulent Business 17200 et seg.);
    • 2. Unfair, Deceptive, and Misleading Advertising (Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code et seg.);
    • 3. Breach of Fiduciary Duty;
    • 4. Fraud
    • Plaintiff Demands Trial by Jury
  • (p6) – 17. There is no question that a characterization of life insurance as an investment is a misrepresentation and an unfair and deceptive trade practice.
    • OM Financial/FG Life’s own Market Conduct Guide provides that use of terms such as “investment,” “investment plan,” or “savings plan,” when used to describe the features, conditions or benefits of a life insurance policy “…has the tendency to mislead a purchaser….” Also, according to the company’s Market Conduct Guide, the policies and procedures in it “…encompass regulatory requirements and best practices governing sales and marketing material, most notably NAIC Model Advertising Rules adopted by most states ….” To that end, all states insurance regulations (including California’s) prohibit misrepresentation and omissions in the sale of life insurance. 780, 709, et seq. and 10 CCR.
  • (p10) – b. Missed Fortune Marketing and Sales Tools
  • (p16) – 40. The Missed Fortune Software created and provided by Andrew and Paramount Financial, and approved by OM Financial/FG Life, was used to generate the “reports” for the “Strategic Design.”
    • The Strategic Design reports are deceptive primarily because they misrepresent OM Financial/FG Life’s equity indexed universal life insurance as an investment, and moreover, as a suitable investment  if funded with home equity funds.
    • It also uniformly generated deceptive illustrations of investment performance that were unrealistic and based on inflated “investment yields.
  • (p18) – 46. The uniform and deceptive message delivered through. the Missed Fortune marketing materials and each step of the True Wealth transformation process was two-fold.
    • First, and consistent with their TEAM training, the Missed Fortune Producers falsely touted themselves and Douglas Andrew as expert financial advisors and highly trained investment professionals, working for the clients’ best interests when in fact they were operating for the sole purpose of selling life insurance.
    • Secondly, that by following the Missed Fortune Producers’ expert advice and purchasing the policies in question the clients would obtain safe, liquid, “investment grade” policies using home equity funds and other capital that would create greater wealth and security than other investments, when in fact the life insurance policies were not appropriate investment vehicles.
    • (p19) – The Conspiracy
      • 47. OM Financial/FG Life, Andrew and Paramount Financial conspired together and with others to perpetrate the fraudulent Missed Fortune scheme.
    • (p21) – The Uniform Misrepresentations, Half-Truths, and Omissions Defendants-Made To Plaintiff and Each Member of the Putative Class
      • These misrepresentations all conveyed exactly the same message to Plaintiff and members of the putative -class: that the OM Financial/FG Life equity indexed universal life policies were, safe, effectively liquid investments and would increase financial security.
      • Missed Fortune Producers, Paramount Financial, Andrew, and OM Financial/FG Life withheld material facts including that the policies were worth less than represented, and fundamentally inferior to other investments. Missed Fortune Producers, Paramount Financial, Andrew, and OM Financial/FG Life falsely represented that by investing their money in the policies, Plaintiff and putative class members would “optimize” their assets.
    • (p24) – Causation
      • No rational member of the putative class would have purchased the policies in question but for Defendants’ misrepresentations and omissions.
        • The only logical explanation for Plaintiff and each class members’ conduct is that they relied upon Defendants’ misrepresentations and omissions.
    • (p24-25) – Proposed Class Representative Mr. Cressy’s Transactions
      • In his experience, Mr. Cressy dealt with Missed Fortune Producers named Michael Voogd and Kenneth Ogan, Jr.
        • Both had received TEAM Training from Andrew and Paramount Financial, and both were appointed producers of OM Financial / FG Life.
        • 58. Around November 2006, Mr. Cressy read an advertisement for a seminar to be put on by Ogan Financial and Capital Line Financial claiming to help people achieve greater wealth with tax-free retirement plans. This advertisement was published in a newspaper by Mr. Voogd and Mr. Ogan, as Missed Fortune Producers and OM Financial/FG Life appointed agents. At the seminar attended by Mr. Cressy, Mr. Voogd and Mr, Ogan urged Mr. Cressy and the other attendees to “harvest” their home equity and invest it in an “Equity Indexed Universal Life” insurance policy, thereby achieving more wealth than with IRA’s, 401(K)’s, Mutual Funds, Stocks; Bonds and Real Estate. This would be achieved by utilizing his home’s equity, the purported tax savings Mr. Cressy would realize by maintaining a high mortgage balance, the purported tax-deferred treatment of the Life insurance accumulation value, and “borrowing” from his life insurance cash value in his later years, as a retirement strategy. It was represented to Mr. Cressy by Mr. Voogd that the life insurance policy was a safe,. liquid, and suitable investment that would earn a good rate of return.
          • Additionally, Mr. Cressy was provided with Missed Fortune marketing materials which provided the same false message as was provided to all other members of the putative class, that being that OM Financial/FG Life Equity indexed universal life policies were investments.
        • 59. Soon thereafter, Mr. Cressy had a meeting with Mr. Michael Voogd of Ogan Financial.
    • (p31-32) – 82. OM Financial/FG Life, Paramount Financial, and Andrew’s, as well as their agents’, acts of unfair competition and unlawful business practices include violations of the Civil RICO statute, California Civil Code §§1572, 1573, 1709, 1711, 1770, California Insurance Code §§ 330, 331, 332, other portions of the California Insurance Code and related regulations and rules, including 10 CCR §.?547.4, and the common law. Such acts include, but are not limited to,
      • a. misrepresenting the life insurance policies as investments;
      • b. selling Plaintiff and members of the public equity-indexed universal life insurance policies that were unsuitable for their investment, estate planning, insurance, and/or financial needs;
      • c. misrepresenting and inflating the returns and results Plaintiffs and members of the putative class could achieve by purchasing equity-indexed universal H& insurance policies;
      • d. misrepresenting to Plaintiff and members of the public that OM Financial/FG Life equity-indexed universal life insurance policies are “investment grade”;
      • e. misrepresenting to the Plaintiff and members of the public that OM Financial/FG Life equity-indexed universal life insurance policies were comparable to investments such as securities, 401(k) plans, and other investments
      • f. misrepresenting Plaintiff and members of the public that withdrawing 100% of one’s home equity and investing the proceeds in an policy was “safe”; and/or
      • g. failing to adequately disclose the true nature of equity-indexed universal life insurance policies.
    • (p33) – SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION – UNFAIR, DECEPTIVE AND MISLEADING ADVERSTISING (Cal. Bus. & ProL § 17500, et seq.)
    • (p35) – THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION – BREACH OF FIDUCIARY DUTIES
    • (p34) – FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION – FRAUD
    • (p37-38) – REQUEST FOR JUDGMENT 
      • Plaintiff asks for judgment against Defendants and each of them, in its and the putative class’s favor as follows:
        • 1. For an order certifying this action as a class action;
        • 2. For actual and compensatory damages in such amount as the Court or jury deems just and proper;
        • 3. For attorney’s fees and costs for all causes of action alleged herein for which such amounts are permissible under applicable law, including California Code of Civil Procedure§ 1021.5, in such amount as the Court or jury deems just and proper;
        • 4. For prejudgment interest;
        • 5. For an order,requiring Defendants to provide notice to the ~lass and to pay for such notice;
        • 6. For imposition of a constructive trust, recessionary relief, injunctive relief, including prohibition of Defendants’ unfair, illegal and fraudulent business practices set forth herein, and including restitution and disgorgement of ill-gotten profits; and
        • 7. All other relief which the Court and/or jury deems equitable and just.
    • (p38) – DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
      • Plaintiff on his own behalf and on behalf of the putative class, demands a jury trial in the above captioned matter.

Investment Grade Policies

  • (p77) - Q And what would be in the private retirement account?
  • A At the time he called it an IGLI, investment grade life insurance policy. 

2014 0415 - DOC 808 - Trial Transcript - Day 5 - Walker v LSW - 229p  ---  [BonkNote]

  • The SPI product may be marketed as a superior, hybrid SPDA: "an investment grade single premium product," according to one brochure. Alternatively, the SPI may be sold with high premiums as an estate planning vehicle for the wealthy individual.
  • Currently, this second alternative would be unusual, but agents may find such a market niche at the expense of the insurer with casual underwriting.
  • The wealthy individual who is slightly substandard would be an ideal prospect from the agent perspective.

1985 - SOA - Single Premium Deferred Annuities and Single Premium Whole Life Products, Society of Actuaries - 24p

  • (p18) - 46. The uniform and deceptive message delivered through. the Missed Fortune marketing materials and each step of the True Wealth transformation process was two-fold.
    • First, and consistent with their TEAM training, the Missed Fortune Producers falsely touted themselves and Douglas Andrew as expert financial advisors and highly trained investment professionals, working for the clients' best interests when in fact they were operating for the sole purpose of selling life insurance.
    • Secondly, that by following the Missed Fortune Producers' expert advice and purchasing the policies in question the clients would obtain safe, liquid, "investment grade" policies using home equity funds and other capital that would create greater wealth and security than other investments, when in fact the life insurance policies were not appropriate investment vehicles.
  • (p19) - The Conspiracy
    • 47. OM Financial/FG Life, Andrew and Paramount Financial conspired together and with others to perpetrate the fraudulent Missed Fortune scheme.

2013 0704 - LC - Cressy vs FG Life, OM Financial, Doug Andrew, Paramount - Complaint for Damages and Equitable Relief - 39p  ---  [BonkNote]

23 Sep 1985, Mon Roanoke-Chowan News-Herald (Ahoskie, North Carolina) Newspapers.com

14 Jul 1993, Wed The Times (Streator, Illinois) Newspapers.com

02 Jun 1992, Tue The Orlando Sentinel (Orlando, Florida) Newspapers.com

11 Mar 1998, Wed Boca Raton News (Boca Raton, Florida) Newspapers.com

06 Dec 2002, Fri The Miami Herald (Miami, Florida) Newspapers.com

Equity Index Insurance Products

  • 1981 – SOA – Indexed Coverages for Individual Contracts, Society of Actuaries – 26p
  • 2004 – GAO – Better Information Sharing Among Financial Services Regulators Could Improve Protections for Consumers – gao.gov/assets/gao-04-882r.pdf
    • Oversight of Hybrid Products and the Regulatory Systems Used to Track Complaints Vary
      • 4 Figure 1 highlights differences in how these three types of hybrid products are generally regulated.
  • 2008 – SEC – File Number S7-14-08-Comments on the SEC’s Proposed Rule That Would Subject Certain Equity-Indexed Annuities to Regulation Under the Federal Securities Laws
  • 1999 – SOA – The Next Generation Universal Life, Society of Actuaries  —  [BonkNote]   —  30p
    • Deanne Osgood:  I would be remiss if I didn’t mention equity-indexed universal life insurance (EIUL), because this is a fairly recent innovation that has focused on providing a more attractive accumulation vehicle.
    • Whereas, the secondary guarantee period and the maturity age extension have really focused on the guarantees and some of the difficulties in providing an attractive accumulation vehicle in the fixed interest rate environment that we’re currently in.
    • EIUL does somewhat attack the issue of how we can make this an attractive accumulation vehicle.
    • EIUL products have been available for about two-and-a-half years and have been quite successful for a few companies.
    • However, the volatility of the equity markets combined with the low-interest-rate environment that we’re in has made it difficult to price, market, and sell these products for most companies.
    • There are about eight companies that have introduced 10 products into the marketplace and, typically, the base policy designed for EIUL tends to mirror their traditional fixed counterparts with the exception of the method used to determine the excess interest for the contract.
    • Riders that exist on traditional UL typically are available on EIUL as well. The policy mechanics are virtually identical for a company that offers both types of products. It’s just in how that excess interest is determined that differs.
  • (p77) – Ron Panneton (National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors-NAIFA) said this discussion reminded him of a similar discussion the Life Disclosure Working Group had on equity indexed products.
    • In response to that problem, a checklist was created to help regulators to become convinced that people are adequately prepared to describe the complexities of the product.
    • <WishList – NAIC Checklist>

2000-1, NAIC Proceedings

 

151A - SEC - Securities and Exchange Commission

  • 2008 - SEC - sec.gov/comments/s7-14-08/s71408-1875.pdf
    • 2008 0919 - Letter - ACLI to SEC - re: Proposed Rule 151A and Proposed Rule 12h-7 - s71408 - 112p
  • 2008 1022 - CRS - Annuities and the Securities and Exchange Commission Proposed Rule 151A, RS22974
  • 2010 0729 (Updated) - CRS - Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 151A and Annuities: Issues and Legislation, Congressional Research Service - 15p
  • 2010 - SEC - sec.gov/files/rules/final/2010/33-9152.pdf
    • SUMMARY: We are withdrawing rule 151A under the Securities Act of 1933, which defines the terms "annuity contract" and "optional annuity contract" under the Act. On July 12, 2010, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued an order vacating the rule.
    • EFFECTIVE DATE: Rule 151A, published at 74 FR 3175 (January 16, 2009) and effective on January 12, 2011, is withdrawn as of [INSERT DATE OF PUBLICATION IN FEDERAL REGISTER].
    • 2008 0910 - Letter - NASAA to SEC - Re: File Number S7-14-08-Comments on the SEC's Proposed Rule That Would Subject - 53p
      • Re: File Number S7-14-08-Comments on the SEC's Proposed Rule That Would Subject
        Certain Equity-Indexed Annuities to Regulation Under the Federal Securities Laws 
      • Contrary to insurance industry claims, EIAs impose significant risks upon investors, including fluctuations in the applicable equity index and potential loss of principal. In addition, issuers and agents routinely market EIAs as investments, not insurance products.

ALIC – Association of Life Insurance Counsel

  • 2008 0518-20 – Seminar – ACLI to ALIC – Association of Life Insurance Counsel Regional Meeting – The Status of Broker-Dealers Engaged in Investment Advisory Functions: Muddy Waters Slowly Clearing, Carl B. Wilkerson – 74p
  • 2019 0924 – Seminar – ACLI to ALIC – Association of Life Insurance Counsel – Regional Meeting, Carl B. Wilkerson  – 14p
  • 2017 0731 – Letter – CFA to NAIC (Annuity Suitability Working Group) – re: Regarding “Best Interest” Amendments to the NAIC Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation – 5p
    • 1. The standard of care for consumers should be a fiduciary standard that obliges the insurer or producer to act in the best interest of the consumer.
    • 2. The best interest standard provisions must be stronger than the current suitability standard. Relabeling “suitability” as “best interest” would be a sham.
    • 5. The application of the enhanced model should be broadened to investment-type life insurance products. The same standard of care – best interest of the consumer – is clearly as appropriate for investment-type life insurance – for example, indexed universal life – as it is for annuity products. A uniform standard of care across all types of investment products means both consistent consumer protection and a level regulatory framework preventing one type of investment product from regulatory arbitrage.
  • 2018 0122 – Letter – CFA to NAIC – re: “Suitability and Best Interest Standard of Conduct in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation.” – 11p
    • The scope of the proposal is too narrow.
      • Another flaw of the NAIC proposal is its too narrow scope. NAIC’s proposed “best interest”
        standard applies only to annuities and applies only at the point of sale.
    • As you know, life insurance companies routinely sell certain types of insurance products, such as variable and indexed universal life insurance, based at least in part on their value as investment and savings vehicles. The following are just a few examples we found through a quick Google search:
    • We are not suggesting that these descriptions are misleading or deceptive. On the contrary, our point here is that these life insurance policies are marketed based on features that are virtually indistinguishable from the features of annuities.
    • Given these similarities, it makes no sense to adopt a best interest standard for one type of insurance investment, annuities, and exempt other types of insurance investments, variable and indexed universal life insurance, from that standard.
    • That is why, when we and others wrote to the NAIC last July, we urged the NAIC to include all insurance products sold as investments in any standard it adopts. As we wrote at the time, “The same standard of care – best interest of the consumer – is clearly as appropriate for investment-type life insurance – for example, indexed universal life – as it is for annuity products.”
      • 2017 0808 – ThinkAdvisor.com – Annuity Rules Should Apply to Investment-Type Life Products: Consumer Reps, By Allison Bell – [link]

Retirement Income Strategy

  • Life insurance, converted into an annuity, may further augment retirement income.

Geronomics:  Some notes on a brand new social science – the economics of financial serenity in the Golden Years, By IRA U. COBLEIGII, Enterprise Economist

1957 0404 – Commercial and Financial Chronicle – https://fraser.stlouisfed.org/title/commercial-financial-chronicle-1339/april-4-1957-556255?page=11