Any Feedback On The Nationwide Insurance IUL?

[ATM]

If that is the case, why are they even optional? I have my default set to include it on every illustration.

I think you might be kidding yourself if you don't think upline/IMO & even carrier help desk don't suggest to the agent to exclude the costs supplemental output.........better for client to have to use a calculator to figure out something must be happening in the sausage making cause the calculator isnt showing 5.6% growth in cash value like the column heading states

I have never had an upline tell me not to include the expense report. I always request it and the IRR report as well.

If anyone has an upline do that I would suggest running for the hills.

 

[ATM]

All they have to show is that the increase in expenses is not for the purpose of increasing carrier profits. That is the only real benchmark. Which means they can easily increase expenses on most any policy... especially in an inverted interest rate environment.

Plenty of IULs have seen increases in expenses and COI over the past decade.

But not to the maximum charges. No state is ever going to allow that unless the carrier is KAPUT.

 

[Allen Trent]

But not to the maximum charges. No state is ever going to allow that unless the carrier is KAPUT.

States allowed Transamerica alone to raise COI alone 40%. It took a class action lawsuit to get settled for policyholders to get part of the settlement....
..but pretty sure Transamerica didn't lower their COI. If I recall, Transamerica & many otter carriers justified the COI increases because of the low interest rate environment even though they were experiencing better than originally priced mortality. States should have denied the COI charges as having too high of guaranteed interest rates & not predicting the interest rate marketplace isn't a valid reason to raise an unrelated lever in the policy that you have have room to change. I bet that 40% increase in COI had to be darn near max charges

 

[scagnt83]

But not to the maximum charges. No state is ever going to allow that unless the carrier is KAPUT.

History says otherwise. Many times over. Ive seen the inforce illustrations. Unless you think Jackson National, Lincoln National, Transamerica, State Farm, Met Life, are carriers that are kaput...

 

[scagnt83]

I bet that 40% increase in COI had to be darn near max charges

No telling, but some IULs allow up to a 100%-200% increase in expenses.

 

[ATM]

States allowed Transamerica alone to raise COI alone 40%. It took a class action lawsuit to get settled for policyholders to get part of the settlement....
..but pretty sure Transamerica didn't lower their COI. If I recall, Transamerica & many otter carriers justified the COI increases because of the low interest rate environment even though they were experiencing better than originally priced mortality. States should have denied the COI charges as having too high of guaranteed interest rates & not predicting the interest rate marketplace isn't a valid reason to raise an unrelated lever in the policy that you have have room to change. I bet that 40% increase in COI had to be darn near max charges

Allowed to increase but not to the max.

And interest rate pressure is the same as mortality rate pressure or overhead expense pressure. All can lead an insurers to bankruptcy court.

And a 40% increase is not even close to the max. Depends on age but for a person in their late 70s or 80s the max charges are often 300-500% higher than current COIs.

It's why UL policy guaranteed values almost always have 0s in the later years. You cannot put enough money into the policy (corridor limits) to overcome the maximum COI expenses without losing life insurance classification.

 

[ATM]

History says otherwise. Many times over. Ive seen the inforce illustrations. Unless you think Jackson National, Lincoln National, Transamerica, State Farm, Met Life, are carriers that are kaput...

To the "Maximum". the only cases I have ever seen maximum COI rates/expenses be allowed is when the carrier is in receivership. if you have examples I'd love to see them. But in 35+ years never seen it.

And I have seen all the increased expenses that you mentioned and others. But the only time I have ever seen the contract maximums enforced is when companies are dead.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

To the "Maximum". the only cases I have ever seen maximum COI rates/expenses be allowed is when the carrier is in receivership. if you have examples I'd love to see them. But in 35+ years never seen it.

And I have seen all the increased expenses that you mentioned and others. But the only time I have ever seen the contract maximums enforced is when companies are dead.

I'm pretty sure that Trans tried to on an old UL block and got sued over it (and lost).

 

[Lloyds of Lubbock]

"It is my personal opinion, as someone who aids the NAIC, that New York caters to mutual insurers that sell par whole life, and are patently opposed to indexed life. "
That is an interesting take:
It really makes me curious as to why Guardian cannot get their indexed rider on a whole life approved.
I have attached a Guardian illustration with the di rider for those interested....only one page.

 

[scagnt83]

I know for a fact that MetLife raised them to the max. Got sued. Settled.

Their exact words from the litigation if I remember correctly "our contract allows us to raise expenses at will, so long as it does not create an increase in profits"