- 7,790
Sounds like treading on thin ice.
- 2,455
Could be a good chance for some spelling errors too. Better make sure all your i's are dotted and t's are crossed (unless your i is a capital i like this 'I').
- 428
can some one give me an example as I'm not sure what you mean by mistake ads????
- 1,641
I think a mistake ad suggests there may be a problem with their annuity. Such as....
Did you still have an annuity that you purchased before 2003? If so, your beneficiaries may have to wait 5 years to receive their full inheritance.
Call to for a free review and peace of mind.
Did you still have an annuity that you purchased before 2003? If so, your beneficiaries may have to wait 5 years to receive their full inheritance.
Call to for a free review and peace of mind.
- 2,452
What's wrong with the bennies taking payout over 5 yrs? Uncle Sam will likely take less that way. I get your point but the forced distribution over 5 yrs is not necessarily a bad thing.
- 1,641
It's better when the children have a choice. In many cases there is no tax due, except on interest earned while the inheritance is being held hostage by the carrier.
Mrs. Smith, did you really mean to make your children wait another 5 years after you pass? Would you like me to fix that for you?
Mrs. Smith, did you really mean to make your children wait another 5 years after you pass? Would you like me to fix that for you?
- 924
It is really hard to find a replacement for the usual annuity product that gives benes a choice of small bucket now or big bucket spread over 5 years.
I guess from a suitability standpoint, some of the new death benefit riders (4% BAA or 5% North American) might be a fit if the person is really concerned about about spreading money over 5 years.
But I have never really run into anyone who thought spreading money over 5 years for the kids was a bad thing. After all, they do have a choice on how to take the money. I tell people "They can do the smart thing or not. It will be their option." That seems to satisfy everyone.
Anyway, the real issue here is the "mistake ad" and the purpose is not to get someone in to have an intelligent discussion of income rider versus death benefit rider. The purpose is to scare them into coming in so you can try and get them into something, anything, else. Risky.
I guess from a suitability standpoint, some of the new death benefit riders (4% BAA or 5% North American) might be a fit if the person is really concerned about about spreading money over 5 years.
But I have never really run into anyone who thought spreading money over 5 years for the kids was a bad thing. After all, they do have a choice on how to take the money. I tell people "They can do the smart thing or not. It will be their option." That seems to satisfy everyone.
Anyway, the real issue here is the "mistake ad" and the purpose is not to get someone in to have an intelligent discussion of income rider versus death benefit rider. The purpose is to scare them into coming in so you can try and get them into something, anything, else. Risky.
