Quantcast

Article

Is 151A gaining momentum? 

 
Print This Article
Return To Article
Normal Text
Large Text

In a petition filed in mid-April, MetLife Inc., the North American Securities Administrators Association and AARP argued index annuities should be regulated as securities rather than insurance products, DowJones reports.

Rule 151A, which requires index annuities issued on or after Jan. 12, 2011 to be registered with the commission and sold only by registered broker-dealers, met with much opposition after it was approved last December.

In January, a group of insurers and marketing companies, including American Equity Investment Life Insurance Co., BHC Marketing, Midland National Life Insurance Co., National Western Life Insurance Co., OM Financial Life Insurance Co. and Tucker Advisory Group Inc., challenged the rule, according to DowJones.

The parties involved, however, have conflicting interests, the news agency reports.

MetLife doesn’t sell index annuities, but does sell variable annuities. The insurer claims “there's no substantive reason for indexed annuities to be regulated differently than variable annuities under securities laws. Consumers could be harmed by deceptive indexed-annuity sales practices, and regulating indexed annuities under federal law, in addition to state insurance law, would subject them to stronger and more uniform standards.”

AARP has an affiliation with New York Life Insurance Co. and NASAA is a group of state regulators “seeking to expand its jurisdiction,” the agency quotes Wendy Carlson, president and CEO of AEL.

Richard Hisey, president of AARP Financial Inc., told DowJones the product it shares with NY Life is a fixed immediate annuity, not a variable annuity.

NASAA General Counsel Rex Staples said, “What we’re trying to do is ensure that something that is clearly a security under the law is, in fact, deemed to be a security.”
 



Comment on This Article

Name:
Email (will not be published):
Subject:
Comment:

    • 11/12/2009 1:02:55 PM
    • anonymous
    • Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • Is 151A gaining momentum In a petition filed in mid-April, MetLife Inc., the North American Securities Administrators Association and AARP argued index annuities should be regulated as securities rather than insurance products, DowJones reports.
    • 11/12/2009 1:04:40 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • It seems as if a few insurance companies just want to protect their own products & profits--didn't Met, Pru & NY Life have regulation troubles in the past?? As for AARP--their opinion should not even come into play since they are only concerned with receiving their royalty fees from sponsered companies (NY Life). Also, quite a few seniors do not like or trust AARP practices & that they have turned into a marketing organization instead of a senior advocate! The SEC has their own problems--can we say ' Bernie Madoff'--even after repeated complaints to them about irregularities--the SEC chose to 'look the other way'. Insurance Companies & individual states insurance departments have enough laws & enforcement powers. Leave Indexed Annuities alone!
    • 11/12/2009 1:05:18 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • The failure of AIG is the best argument against 151A. When AIG imploded, the parent company attempted to raid their insurance companies' reserves to maintain viability. This action was denied by the state insurance commissioners. As a result, those companies remain viable, while the SEC regulated AIG went under. We all know why AIG failed: the credit default swaps that originated in that company were unregulated insurance products. Since the facts refute that unfair practices are being foisted on seniors, the SEC has since changed its position to claim that risk is involved not because purchasers will lose any money, but rather they do not know exactly how much money they will make! Can it get more convoluted? This is a blatant attempt at a power grab by the SEC and the brokerage companies who are getting slammed by the most forward thinking product in financial services. The SEC should clean its own house and let successful regulation of insurance products stay in the hands of the state insurance commissioners.
    • 11/12/2009 1:06:07 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • Met-Life says "no substantive differences". So that tells us they don't understand the concepts of GENERAL ACCOUNT ASSETS (fixed indexed annuities) and SEPARATE ACCOUNT ASSETS (variable annuities). Any state approved CE course could explain to them that with variable annuities THE POLICY HOLDER bears the investment risk and with fixed indexed annuities THE INSURANCE COMPANY bears the investment risk. Look it up Met Life! Mike Rosaasen (303)669-8578
    • 11/12/2009 1:06:39 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • Aren't variable Annuities invested in the stock market, which has tremendous risk associated with it, therefore when the market goes down, customers lose money? Indexed annuities have zero risk due to stock market volatility and the suitablity forms offer everything up front regarding index annuities. This is a power grab by the SEC. Defeat 151A!!!
    • 11/12/2009 1:07:26 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • The SEC can't manage their existing resposibilities and they want to expand into the insurance industry. FIA's are not securities, they are insurance products and 151A must be defeated! My FIA clients haven't lost a cent in this down market. Can the Reg. Reps say the same about their Variable Annuity clients with all the fees that no-one talks about?
    • 11/12/2009 1:08:12 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • Metlife always has a problem with distinguishing the features and applications of products. Remember when they confused the marketing of life insurance with retirement plans sold to nurses and others. How can you expect them to get it right this time, and if you are in bed with Metlife what does that say about the other organizations (AARP, NASAA)?
    • 11/12/2009 1:08:57 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • FIXED INDEXED ANNUITIES SHOULD NOT BE SOMETHING THEY ARE NOT. SECURITIES HAVE RISK OF LOSS AND ALL THE INDEXED ANNUITIES THAT I HAVE SOLD SINCE 1995 HAVE NEVER/ I REPEAD NEVER LOST A DIME. INDEXED ANNUITIES HAVE BEEN A WONDERFUL PRODUCT FOR GROWTH AND SAFETY FOR MY CLIENTS AND THEY LOVE THEM MORE AND MORE BECAUSE OF MANY OF THE FEATHERS THEY POSSESS. I MADE THE DECISION OVER 30 YEARS AGO TO NOT BE SECURITIES LISCENSED AND HOPE REQULATORS AND A FEW NEW YORK BASED COMPANIES DON'T FORCE THIS ON US.
    • 11/12/2009 1:09:40 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • The real deal here is AARP who operates as a financial services company under the umbrella of a non-profit organization. This bunch of phonies should be taxed as profit organizatiion because they compete with those who do pay taxes. AARP should also be registered as a Broker/Dealer and a Rigistered Investment Advisor (RIA) because they constantly give financial advice and recommendations. Case Closed. Thanks. Deadbolt in Denver April 30 2009.
    • 11/12/2009 1:10:12 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • I have looked at both variable and fixed Indexed annuities. The VA has your money IN securities hence should be SEC regulated. FIA's NEVER place your money IN securities. I have ask my clients what they understand about each. The really rich think VA's have a place while the rest of my clients say they choose FIA's because they can NOT lose their principal in down economy times, but expect to gain more than the fixed interest rate in an up economy. Even the common man knows to stay away from the market/VA's in retirement. My clients thank me every year for showing them FIA's.
    • 11/12/2009 1:10:56 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • seminar hacks saying ' invest in the market' with non of the risk. Get a damned series 6. Crybabys. It's one stinking product. How were you cowards making a living before 1995? Idiots.
    • 11/12/2009 1:11:46 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • The overwhelming majority of FIA naysayers don't want to (publicly) acknowledge the 800 pound gorilla that is central to this issue: GREED. NASAA, FINRA, the SEC, carriers in the 'Big Blue' category, etc...and reps that cut their teeth under the B/D umbrella are all bent because they are not getting FEE REVENUE. End of sentence. The fact that FIA's guarantee growth, guarantee income, offer bonuses, etc...all come in at 2nd and 3rd place in their overall consideration. The hypocrisy of this argument erases any credibility from FINRA and the SEC's stance, and since Lincoln Ben and (the old) Keyport Life first came out with these products they envisioned an investment atmosphere like today's where they would lose billions of dollars to market conditions and the B.S. ONGOING, EXCESSIVE fees they charge (formerly) trusting purchasers. And the compensation issue isn't valid, either. Compare the total fee revenue on a VA to the average FIA over the term of the contracts. Hmmmmmm...... They think nothing of recommending to a 78 year old a 7 year VA that could - AND DOES - lose value, yet complain about a guaranteed product that won't? And the same VA may impose charges at the same time? Make no mistake about this: as FIA market share increased so too did the magnification intensity of the microscope that all of the above entities use. One of the things I find very interesting is why FIUL's were not included the ruling? Hmmmmmmm...... same premise, extra wrapping, but excluded from consideration. HUH? My guess would be not enough market share (yet) to warrant the expense chasing them. There is a place in portfolios for VA's, FIA's, CD's, insurance, bonds, etc..... Markets rise and fall. Just because market conditions are currently favorable to FIA's doesn't mean that some ginned-up set of cherry-picked rules need to be implemented, unless of course you covet your neighbor's new bike, which is what I'm seeing.
    • 11/12/2009 1:12:28 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • Let's see......the regulators over Bernie Madeoff want to regulate the indexed annuity business? Yeah.....they've done such a good job with their own industry especially with the sub prime morgages being sold as an investment. I wonder if there were any deceptive trade practices used there? What a crock of shit! Stay the hell out of my industry!
    • 11/12/2009 1:13:03 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • the Securities and exchange commision cant even regulate themselves. An indexed annuity is not a risk item and should not be regulated by the securities commision. If this is approved it is politcally motivated.
    • 11/12/2009 1:14:10 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • What does this statement say? 'Rule 151A, which requires index annuities issued on or after January 12, 2011 to be registered with the commission and sold only by registered broker-dealers'. Humm, What I see here is that the SEC wants licensed and registered insurance agents to pay license fees to the SEC to sell a non-security insurance product. It seems strange to me that a government agency that has had so much publicity revealing how inadequate they have been at over seeing their present responsibilities would or could hope to take on more? Are the license fees collect by tens of thousands of insurance agents going to fill their coffer to the point that the SEC can become so big and powerful that they will make everything all better and everyone can sleep peacefully at night? Get Real.... FIA's are not security products and are not at risk of loosing principal or past credit gains no matter what the market does. By law an insurance agent has to present and explain FIA's so that the perspective client understands stratagies, caps, participations rates and also that their money IS NOT invested in the S&P or stock market and therefore is not subject to market losses. Bottom line is that the government is supposed to pass laws and set up agencies that protect the people that they govern. And the Federal Government has given each state the responsibility of over seeing their state's insurance industry. It seems very strange to me for any insurance agent to think that they are better off trying to sell or pass off a FIA as a security. A secure investment, but again not a security investment. However, should that happen and a complaint of any type is filed it is acted upon in a timely and prudent mannor by the state's insurance commissioner's office. Maybe that's the trouble, the SEC doesn't understand the difference between secure and security. And we don't even have to consider AARP's motivation in this matter do we? So again why does our Federal Government think that the people are better off trying to fit a square peg (SEC) into a round hole (Insurance industry)? It doesn't make sense. Especially since the SEC can't even over see their present responsibilities. How many insurance agents have made off with $50 Billion Dollars from investors like Bernie Madoff did even after years of complaints and inquiries? How much is it going to cost the government and IRS (taxpayers) to settle with the thousands of people that paid taxes on money reportedly made through Mr. Madoff and they never actually made? Bernie Madoff is the biggest, but more and more have come into view lately. Where were our Federal Govenment agencies when the sub prime went out of control? When investment practices and Credit Defaults Swaps reached a point that the SEC and deregulation had a lot to do with putting the world into a global economic crisis? Greed, mismanagement and arrogance always allows history to repeat itself. And this is the perfect senario of how our lawmakers chose to look the other way while they gave the fox the keys to the hen house. Now with much vigor and ado they want Rule 151A to make everyting all snuggly and cozzy all over again. Don't get me wrong either. I'm not saying that having an Investment Advisor or Security License is wrong for an insurance agent to have. Just don't let the Federal Govenment tell me that I need a driver's license when all I'm doing is riding a bicycle.......
    • 11/12/2009 1:15:09 PM
    • anonymous
    • Re: Is 151A gaining momentum?
    • What will this mean for me? I am in the process of transferring my AIG annuities to National Western Life EIAs. Thank you.
    • 11/19/2009 3:54:06 PM
    • Scott Hoff
    • Where to go from here?
    • Brokers looking to to prepare for future regulations should consider affiliating with a <a href="http://www.joinfhc.com">Broker Dealer with a background in life insurance</a>. Marketers of fixed annuities might consider establishing a relationship with a <a href="http://www.CenterreCapital.com">wholesale broker dealer</a>.
    • 12/10/2009 11:58:34 AM
    • blacknblue2
    • 151A
    • I spent many, many years as a Securities 7 guy. What I find coonfusing is that FINRA can milead in ways that if I had done as an S7 guy, would have placed me in hot waters. What I am talking about is their website. On their website about EIA (yes they still call them EIA) they have misleading information. What they are reciting in their text is how the minimum guaranteed interest is paid. But the FINRA text misleads and makes it sound like the equation for gauranteeing principal. Surrender charges aside, how many insurance companies will not give you 100% of principal back after surrender charges? FINRA says "many". http://www.finra.org/Investors/ProtectYourself/InvestorAlerts/AnnuitiesAndInsurance/p010614 "Is it possible to lose money in an EIA? Yes. Many insurance companies only guarantee that you'll receive 90% of the premiums you paid, plus at least 3% interest. Therefore, if you don't receive any index-linked interest, you could lose money on your investment." Personally such misleading information from a regulatory organization, could be actionable. It is time to start becoming proactive and put them against the ropes.

eNewsletter

Sign-up for Senior Market Advisor’s free, weekly eNewsletter for even more best practices, selling tips, marketing ideas & industry trend information for insurance professionals.




www.summitbusinessmedia.com (c) Copyright Senior Market Advisor Magazine. A Summit Business Media publication. All Rights Reserved.