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 (21,225)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (420)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (803)
  • 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
  • NAFA asks D.C. Circuit to delay DOL rule deadline

    November 30, 2016 by Nick Thornton

    In the latest legal gambit in what is becoming an uphill battle for opponents of the U.S. Department of Labor’s fiduciary rule, the National Association of Fixed Annuitiesis asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to delay implementation of the fiduciary rule by at least 10 months.

    The first so-called applicability date for compliance with the rule is April 10, 2017, at which point NAFA members — insurance carriers, insurance agents and independent marketing organizations — will have to act as fiduciaries when selling fixed indexed annuities to IRAs.

    In its emergency motion to delay the rule’s applicability, or implementation date, attorneys for NAFA argue the fast-approaching deadline has forced organization members to reorganize a massive product distribution system that has been in place for decades.

    NAFA’s argument centers on the fact that an ultimate legal ruling for or against the rule, at the Circuit Court level, or potentially the Supreme Court, will not be determined before the April 10 implementation date.

    A coalition that includes the AFL-CIO, the Consumer Federation of America and the Pension Rights Center is asking Trump to…

    “NAFA members face extraordinary challenges to comply with this flawed rule, which was adopted improperly by DOL and foisted on the fixed annuity industry with a short time to comply,” wrote NAFA attorneys in the emergency motion for an injunction pending the appeal of the case.

    The “chaos” in the fixed indexed annuity industry resulting from the rule has been exacerbated by the Labor Department, which has “dragged its feet” on writing an exemption that would allow independent marketing organizations, which provide the primary marketing channel for fixed indexed annuities to independent insurance agents, to apply the rule’s Best Interest Contract Exemption that will be necessary to sell the guaranteed income products to IRAs.

    Recent decisions at the district court level in the District of Columbia and Kansasupheld the Labor Department fiduciary rule.

    Notably, in both rulings, the judges based their decisions, in part, on the fact that Labor Department’s rule considers giving independent marketing organizations relief by granting them individual exemptions that would assure they could continue to market fixed indexed annuities.

    Threat to independent marking organizations

    In a recent FAQ issued by the Labor Department, regulators said they are considering issuing a class-wide exemption for independent marketing organizations. But the Labor Department did not give a timeframe for when that exemption would be issued, or assurance that it ever will.

    Absent that exemption, the independent marketing organization distribution model may go extinct under the fiduciary rule.

    Some insurance carriers are already considering moving fixed indexed annuities from independent market organization channels to broker-dealers and other financial institutions the that Labor Department rule says can use the Best Interest Contract Exemption, according to an affidavit submitted to the appellate court.

    And independent marketing organizations are expecting massive layoffs resulting from the rule, beginning early in 2017. Some firms are expected to close altogether, according to court documents.

    Beyond the Labor Department’s delay in issuing an exemption, the election of Donald Trump as president has added to the fixed indexed annuity industry’s plight, argue NAFA’s attorneys in requesting the delay, as the new administration may consider delay or repeal of the rule.

    NAFA wants the court to delay the implementation period for a minimum of 10 months and up to two years after the lawsuit is ultimately resolved.

    Delay the rule instead of rushing a review

    On Nov. 4, the lower court in the D.C. Circuit denied NAFA’s motions for preliminary injunction and summary judgment, ruling that the Labor Department acted within its statutory authority to promulgate the fiduciary rule.

    Last week, U.S. District Judge Randolph Moss, who authored the opinion that upheld the Labor Department rule in the District Court, denied NAFA’s request to delay the rule pending the outcome of the appeal.

    The request to do the same that is now before the appellate court was expected by legal experts. Emergency motions are assigned to the circuit court’s special panel for review, and not the panel of judges that will hear the full appeal of the case, according to Erin Sweeney, an Employee Retirement Income Security Act attorney with Miller & Chevaliar in Washington.

    NAFA is not asking the appellate court to hear the case on expedited review, because absent an injunction to delay the rule’s first deadline, even the court’s rushed ruling would be too late for NAFA members, according to attorneys’ arguments.

    The Labor Department’s response to the emergency motion is due by Dec. 9. Sweeney said a decision to delay the rule by the Special Panel could come as soon as next month.

    Originally Posted at BenefitsPro on November 30, 2016 by Nick Thornton.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency