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 (22,062)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (3)
  • Moore on the Market (485)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (827)
  • Wink's Articles (373)
  • Wink's Inside Story (283)
  • Wink's Press Releases (127)
  • Blog Archives

  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • September 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • 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
  • The Society of Annuity Facts and Education (SAFE) responds to “Trump Could Cost Future Retirees Billions”

    May 7, 2019 by SAFE

    Dear Misters Schwartz and Whitehouse,
    We are longtime readers of Bloomberg, and are always interested in discussing the facts about annuities. That said, we found some errors in your article “Trump Could Cost Future Retirees Billions,” and would like to clarify some misconceptions.
    It is important to establish that annuities are insurance, not intended to perform favorably against investments. Insurance has a cost. For that reason, the performance of even variable annuities (which offer the greatest potential return of all annuity types) will not be similar to investments with no insurance component. Therefore, it is disingenuous to compare annuities to investments; these products are not intended to perform similarly. Further, it is reckless to suggest that a mix of 10-year Treasury bills and S&P 500 index funds be able to provide guaranteed income that the purchaser cannot outlive, a hallmark feature that only an annuity can provide.
    Some of the points we would like to make are as follows:

    • Indexed annuities guarantee that the purchaser will receive no less than 0.00% interest crediting each year. In addition, these products have a secondary guarantee, in the event that the index doesn’t perform, or the annuitant dies. These guarantees are not available in the investments your article suggests be used as alternatives to indexed annuities; your readers deserve to know as much.
    • Indexed annuities have no more or less “fine print” than any other type of annuity. All annuities are insurance contracts, and prospective purchasers should read them, along with their product disclosures, prior to purchase. These documents specify (in minimum font size, no less) the products’ features, including any surrender charges.
    • The suggestion that indexed annuities have “high commissions” should be taken into context. The commissions collected by insurance salespeople are a fraction of what those selling mutual funds are. On a ten-year annuity, the salesperson would receive an average commission of 6.23% at point-of-sale. This is less than 0.62% annually over the annuity’s term, yet mutual funds typically pay the seller 1.00% annually.
    • The suggestion that “insurance agents’ behavior suggests…these products” don’t “serve clients’ best interest” is disingenuous. The -7.24% decline in 2017 indexed annuity sales is attributable to insurance companies and distributors being consumed laying the administrative groundwork to comply with the Department of Labor’s Fiduciary Rule, and not having enough time to market their products.
    • New York’s best interest Regulation 187 is not set to take effect until August 1, 2019. As a result, the level of sales of indexed annuities in New York has absolutely nothing to do with New York’s best interest rule. Indexed annuities are sold less in the state of New York largely because of their stringent standard non-forfeiture laws, in addition to other regulation that impacts annuity pricing.
    • The Suitability in Annuity Transactions Model Act that has been enacted by the vast majority of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (NAIC) mirrors the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority’s Rule 2821. These regulations are used to ensure suitable annuity sales. However, it is preposterous to suggest that every unsuitable sale would be eradicated through the passage of a Fiduciary Rule. Interestingly, consumer complaints on indexed annuities were averaged less than two per company the last I pulled the statistics from the NAIC. I would hardly find that to be sufficient fodder to suggest that indexed annuities are not “in savers’ ‘best interest’ or that they are “questionable” purchases.

    You suggest that “some” indexed annuities “can be useful for tax and insurance planning.” This is precisely what indexed annuities are used for. These products are strategically-designed to address American’s concerns for outliving their income, while still providing preservation of principal. In addition, indexed annuities provide the purchaser the ability to potentially outpace fixed money instruments, such as Certificates of Deposit and fixed annuities, by 1.00% – 2.00%. This is the value proposition that has found appeal with so many, since indexed annuities’ debut in 1995.
    The #1 fear of Americans is running-out-of-money in retirement. Annuities are the only financial instrument that can guarantee the purchaser an income they cannot outlive. As a result, it would seem appropriate that annuities are strategically, and solely-positioned to properly address the concerns of our nation.
    While a mixture of stocks, bonds, and/or treasuries may be appropriate for some, this combination will not solve the purchasers’ needs for a guaranteed paycheck for the rest of their lives. SAFE supports that idea that it is best to listen to each individual consumer’s concerns, needs, goals, and objectives, before suggesting products as a solution. No solution is omitted for consideration prior to such a discussion. This method ensures that each client’s purchase is truly what is in their best interests.

    As with all financial products, we encourage consumers to do their research, understand all the terms and, based on their own circumstances, decide what is best for them. Whenever possible use a trusted financial adviser and understand their licenses, know their background and their experience.

    Sheryl J. Moore
    Chief Research Officer
    The Society for Annuity Facts & Education (SAFE)
    www.SAFEAnnuityEducation.org

    (800) 952-SAFE

     

    The Society for Annuity Facts and Education (SAFE) is a non-profit organization committed to educating consumers about annuities, and providing them with the information they need to consider whether an annuity is appropriate or not. For more information visit us at www.SAFEannuityeducation.org or call us at (800) 952-SAFE (7233).

    Originally Posted at SAFE on May 6, 2019 by SAFE.

    currency