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
  • Insurance Commissioners Are Crafting Their Own Best Interest Standard

    February 12, 2018 by Rita Raagas De Ramos

    The National Association of Insurance Commissioners has produced its own proposal for a best interest standard for annuities, while uncertainty remains over the final content of the Department of Labor’s fiduciary rule and whether the SEC will come up with a rule with a wider reach in terms of the types of advisors and products addressed.

    The comment period for the NAIC’s proposal ended January 22, and law firm Eversheds Sutherland expects the association to produce a revised draft after reviewing around 20 comments received from various parties, including the American Council of Life Insurersand the Consumer Federation of America.

    Lawyers, trade groups and consumer advocates have reasoned that having a comprehensive fiduciary rule for all types of advisors and all types of products is a challenge because of their various governing bodies.

    In terms of oversight, the DOL’s Erisa standard is for qualified retirement accounts. Finra — which answers to the SEC — self-regulates its broker-dealer member firms, while the SEC relies on securities laws to watch over registered investment advisors.

    In terms of products, securities and variable annuities are regulated by the SEC, whereas fixed annuities are regulated by state insurance commissioners through the NAIC.

    Until the DOL rule is fully implemented on July 1, 2019 — barring any changes to that date following an ongoing review — retirement advisors are working on compliance requirements for the transition period. The expansion of the fiduciary standard requirement to broker-dealers and insurance agents serving retirement accounts is already in effect, but the Best Interest Contract Exemption requirement is on hold.

    During the transition period, retirement advisors who expect to make use of the BICE are required to comply only with so-called Impartial Conduct Standards, which state that BICE users must “adhere to basic fiduciary norms and standards of fair dealing.” Specifically, advisors must charge no more than reasonable compensation, avoid making materially misleading statements, and provide advice that is in the investor’s best interest.

    The NAIC has proposed revising its own suitability standards to include best interest standards. The working proposal is currently called “Suitability and Best Interest Standard of Conduct in Annuity Transactions Model Regulation.” The proposal applies to “any solicitation, negotiation or sale” of annuities.

    The proposal says compliance with the best interest standard means that at the time an annuity is issued, “reasonable diligence, care, skill and prudence” are exercised “in a manner that puts the interest of the consumer first and foremost.”

    The proposal spells out what the NAIC believes best interest does not mean. First, it says a recommendation need not be the least expensive annuity product, or the annuity product with the highest stated interest rate or income payout rate at the time of the transaction. Second, it says the recommendation need not be the single “best” annuity product available in the marketplace at the time of the transaction, noting that it is enough that the insurance agent believes he or she acted with reasonable diligence, care, skill and prudence and believes the recommendation is in the best interest of the consumer.

    The proposal also touches on compensation, saying that the insurance agent “must receive no more than reasonable cash compensation” when making a recommendation, further defining reasonable to reflect the time invested in and the complexity of the advice.

    In its comment letter, the CFA is urging the NAIC to withdraw and “extensively revise” its proposal “to address its shortcomings.” The consumer advocate group says the proposal offers only limited improvements over existing regulations governing annuities transactions and doesn’t adequately protect consumers from the harmful impact of conflicts of interest.

    In a legal alert, Eversheds Sutherland says the sections about compensation “are clearly taken from the impartial conduct standards included in the DOL exemptions, and do not appear to have a historical basis in insurance regulation.” Thus, the law firm believes the proposal “is likely to be viewed as introducing new standards into the insurance industry for producer compensation.”

    CFA says the NAIC proposal is “weaker” than the DOL rule because it “does nothing to rein in conflicts of interest” and “it cannot provide the basis for a uniform standard” across retirement and non-retirement accounts.

    “It has become increasingly common over the past few decades for insurance producers, like broker-dealers, to recast themselves as financial advisors or retirement planners in order to attract clients seeking objective, professional advice about their retirement and other investments,” the CFA says. “Doing so involves downplaying the sales-driven nature of the relationship and characterizing it instead as one of trust and reliance in which the interests of the customer always come first.”

    FA-IQ reached out to the NAIC for this article, but the association said it can only comment through the committee process involved in the proposal.

    Meanwhile, the ACLI welcomes the NAIC proposal for a best interest standard, while adding that it expects the proposal to evolve as “NAIC coordinates its work with federal agencies.” The trade group believes consumers will benefit from a “harmonized” best interest standard for annuities, which “can be achieved only through a coordinated effort” among state insurance regulators, the SEC, Finra and the DOL.

    The ACLI expressed some concerns, however. It believes the proposal should stick to a best interest standard but eliminate the suitability standard. It believes the best interest standard should only be applied to recommendations, not negotiations, and that recommendations should be based on a customer’s insurance needs and financial objectives. It also wants to include that the mere receipt of any cash or compensation related to a recommendation as well as the recommendation of a proprietary or limited range of products are not inconsistent with best interest requirements.

    Barbara Roper, director of investor protection at the CFA, tells FA-IQ that the ACLI’s suggested changes would “weaken an already weak standard.” She says the ACLI only supports a harmonized standard “in the sense that they support a race to the bottom, where all types of accounts are subject to a best interest standard in name only and industry practices that encourage and reward advice that is not in customers’ best interest continue unabated.”

    She notes that the ACLI wants to further restrict the scope of the NAIC’s proposed best interest standard, which — as it stands — “generally” only applies to the point of sale. She adds that the ACLI also wants to “hammer home the notion” that there is “no continuing duty of care after the transaction.”

    FA-IQ reached out to ACLI for this article but did not get a reply as of this writing.

    Originally Posted at Financial Advisor on February 12, 2018 by Rita Raagas De Ramos.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency