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 (21,244)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (422)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (804)
  • Wink's Articles (354)
  • Wink's Inside Story (275)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • April 2024
  • 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
  • Variable Annuities Face New Test From the Government

    February 9, 2016 by Anna Prior, anna.prior@wsj.com

    Variable annuities—which are controversial but widely used for retirement saving—are about to face one of their stiffest tests thanks to a Labor Department proposal.

    The proposed rule, expected to be finalized as soon as next month, would hold advisers working with retirement savings to a “fiduciary” standard. That approach means an adviser must work in the best interest of a client, and it generally requires advisers and firms to avoid conflicts of interest, which could include commissions and other sales-based compensation.

    If the rule becomes final with minimal changes from the most recent published proposal, industry watchers and analysts say variable-annuity issuers might need to shift from paying sellers upfront commissions—which average around 8% according to a 2014 estimate from Conning Inc.—to a business model based on investors paying lower, ongoing fees.

    Among the insurers that issue these complex retirement-savings vehicles are Lincoln National Corp., MetLife Inc., Prudential Financial Inc. and Prudential PLC’s Jackson National Life Insurance Co. The rule also will affect the brokerages and individual financial advisers that sell variable annuities.

    “We think it’ll throw a wet blanket over the entire industry, certainly for the first year,” said Jules Gaudreau, an independent insurance adviser and president of the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, a trade group.

    With a variable annuity, a buyer gets a retirement nest egg invested in mutual-fund-like accounts with a lifetime income feature. The annuities often are purchased with an add-on “rider” that guarantees a minimum paycheck for life with protection against stock-market losses.

    Fans of these annuities describe the product as being like a personal pension plan.

    Variable-annuity sales totaled nearly $98 billion in the first nine months of 2015, according to researcher Morningstar Inc., roughly in line with their average over the last five years.

    More than half of that involves retirement accounts and so would potentially be affected by the rule. It is possible that insurers and brokerages also would choose to apply new compensation arrangements to annuities sold outside of retirement accounts.

    Despite this popularity, variable-annuity critics have railed against their complexities and annual fees that can top 3%. Critics also note that consumers pay the seller’s commissions indirectly through the ongoing charges and through surrender charges due if they drop a contract within several years of purchase.
    Variable annuities with guaranteed lifetime benefits “are extremely complicated products already and are, frankly, oversold,” said Scott Witt, a New Berlin, Wis., insurance adviser who is unusual in charging fees to investors and not accepting commissions.

    Some say the high commissions lead advisers and insurance agents to sell to some people who may not be best served by such an investment, and regulators have issued consumer advisories.

    The near-term earnings impact on insurers isn’t expected to be huge. A scenario involving a 25% drop in variable-annuity sales would result in a 2% annual per-share earnings hit at Lincoln Financial Group, estimates Keefe, Bruyette & Woods analyst Ryan Krueger. He puts the impact at about 1% annually for Prudential and MetLife.

    Speaking to analysts last week, Lincoln Financial Group President and Chief Executive Dennis Glass said that roughly 30% of the company’s sales in the fourth quarter came from products that would be affected by the Labor Department’s rule, assuming no changes are made to the proposal. He said the firm has been working to curb its reliance on sales of variable annuities.

    If sales are disrupted, Mr. Glass said Lincoln will be able to use share buybacks “to blunt much of the [earnings-per-share] impact over the next several years.”

    Prudential has said that it benefits from a diversified business model; MetLife is divesting operations including its U.S. variable-annuity business. Jackson National, meanwhile, has “multiple contingency plans in place” depending on the rule and various interpretations of the rule from brokerages, said Alison Reed, executive vice president of operations for the firm’s distribution arm.

    There likely also is to be a legal challenge from the financial-services industry once the final rule is in place.

    Even so, the fiduciary-duty rule is a “huge” deal for the annuity industry, in part because some individual sellers might avoid these products rather than accept a combination of lower upfront compensation and greater responsibility, said Joseph Belth, professor emeritus of insurance at Indiana University.

    “It would revolutionize the annuity business,” with investors benefiting from higher standards for advisers, he said.

    Commissions had long been the norm in the insurance industry because most of the adviser’s work is done upfront in the sales process. Annuities are intended as long-term investments and because of the product guarantees, buyers typically require less ongoing advice, said Jackson National’s Ms. Reed.

    While the Labor Department’s latest proposal would technically allow advisers to continue to collect commissions, the insurance and brokerage industries have generally said that the requirements to do so are ambiguous and unworkable. Before any sales discussion, for instance, an investor would have to be given detailed information about the seller’s compensation and would have to sign a contract spelling out the adviser’s obligation. Trade groups including the American Council of Life Insurers have lobbied for variable annuities to be subject to what they see as more workable rules for other annuities without mutual-fund-like investments.

    Spencer, Wis.-based independent adviser Juli McNeely said she’ll be in a bind if the Labor Department makes it unworkable for her to sell variable annuities with commissions, given that vast majority of the products today are commission-based. She might turn to other types of annuities as alternatives, she said, while waiting to see if insurers roll out more variable annuities with the commissions stripped out.

    Says Conning insurance analyst Scott Hawkins: “Eventually, the insurers will find ways to be innovative and alter their products and services for the new environment.”

    Originally Posted at The Wall Street Journal on February 8, 2016 by Anna Prior, anna.prior@wsj.com.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency