We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • NAIC Panel Seeks to End Industry Divide Over Indexed Universal Life Illustration Standards

    November 18, 2014 by Thomas Harman

    WASHINGTON – A National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ panel is offering a compromise to end an industry divide on how companies should present indexed universal life insurance products to consumers.

    The NAIC life actuarial task force has been the site of debate about how to provide information about IULs to consumers through illustrations as the American Council of Life Insurers and a coalition of individual major life insurers have battled over different approaches (Best’s News Service, Sept. 22, 2014).

    Any changes ultimately would be part of the Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation, whose passage by the NAIC predates IUL products. The model regulation currently provides actuaries with guidance on how general account life insurance products should be illustrated, but does not provide them with any guidance for IULs because they have a non-guaranteed index.

    During the task force’s meeting at the NAIC’s Fall National Meeting in Washington, Frederick Andersen, a life actuary at the Minnesota Department of Commerce, issued a seven-point compromise IUL illustration standard proposal that he said should blend aspects of the ACLI and coalition methods, as well as those offered by regulators.

    One of the features of Andersen’s plan is that it should result in maximum IUL credited rates that would be 1.25%-2.25% higher than traditional universal life credited rates. Andersen’s recent memorandum on the subject said it would be possible to use either the historical-based method backed by ACLI or the option-based approach supported by the coalition to meet the concept criteria.

    Andersen is also looking to create a side-by-side midpoint illustration showing credited rates that are lower than traditional universal life policies. He wants to minimize the chances of loopholes or other undesirable consequences; cap the illustrated credit rate on policy loans to the rate being charged on loans as shown on the illustration; and strengthen the actuary’s role in establishing the method for IUL illustrations.

    IULs have come to the fore in part because they are among the life insurance industry’s fastest-growing products. The ACLI led the initial charge to develop an illustration plan, but several companies that are not selling the IUL products — MetLife, New York Life, Northwestern Mutual and OneAmerica — later broke from those talks and submitted an alternative plan.

    Part of the difficulties between the ACLI and the proposal were over interest rates that the ACLI proposed. The ACLI sought to illustrate policy levels at two rates — a user-selected illustration interest rate and a second rate that displays a guaranteed interest rate and a guaranteed minimum. The ACLI rate would have been capped the lowest of three levels — a 25-year average look-back interest rate under current index parameters, a 10% annual index rate, or what is justifiable actuarially.

    Robert Samuelson of MetLife told Best’s News Service the ACLI plan projected very high rates of return that would be misleading to consumers. During panel discussions, he was critical of the 25-year look-back that was part of the ACLI’s method, calling it “hypothetical historical look-backs.”

    The coalition’s plan was modeled on investing general account assets and using the profit to buy hedges that transfer indexed credit risk to third parties. They argued that carriers could use profits to provide indexed credits, a departure from traditional universal life policies that used a crediting rate to pass earnings to policyholders.

    The ACLI offered no comment about Andersen’s plan after the meeting, which featured advocates of the ACLI and coalition plans fending against critiques of their prior efforts.

    Originally Posted at A.M. Best on November 17, 2014 by Thomas Harman.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency