The ticking time bomb of forced drawdowns on variable annuities

Fine print on older contracts leaves elderly clients in position of losing death benefits

Jan 7, 2014 @ 9:36 am

By Darla Mercado

+ Zoom

Advisers' elderly clients who hold older variable annuities have a ticking time bomb on their hands: potential forced annuitization that will deactivate their accrued death benefits.

Buried within the fine print of variable annuity prospectuses, insurers detail the conditions under which they will distribute a client's annuity in the form of a stream of payments. When signing up for a contract, clients can choose an annuity commencement date — the date on which they will begin receiving income payouts — but insurers usually set an upper limit on the age by which clients must start receiving payouts. Typically, this ranges anywhere between the mid-80s to as late as 95 or 100, depending on the carrier and the terms of the contract.

Advisers are finding, however, that though some insurers used to be willing to extend the annuitization date on a case-by-case basis, they are now pushing to begin disbursement of the account as soon as possible. This has been particularly debilitating for clients who have death benefits that are significantly larger than their account values. What's worse, is that there's no way out of the contractual agreement.

Those most affected by it are clients with dollar-for-dollar death benefits, where the value of the death benefit is reduced by the exact dollar value of any withdrawals made from the account value. These features were customary with older annuity contracts. In the past, advisers would recommend that clients “strip” the account value by making a withdrawal, investing the money elsewhere and allowing the contract to continue with a small account value and a large death benefit.

Such was the case for Thomas B. Hamlin, founder of Somerset Wealth Strategies Inc. He has a 92-year-old client with an $81,000 death benefit and an account value of about $10,000. “For the last couple of years, he's been allowed to extend the annuity commencement date, and now the company wants to force him to annuitize, liquidate or exchange the contract,” Mr. Hamlin said. “He would lose the death benefit, which is a massive loss for his estate.”

In other scenarios, required minimum distributions from a variable annuity could also lead to the loss of the death benefit.

Scott Stolz, president of Raymond James Insurance Group, offered an example: A client has $70,000 in the account value and a dollar-for-dollar death benefit worth $130,000. The client pulls $65,000 from the account. His death benefit is reduced by the same amount, falling to a death benefit of $65,000 on an account value of $5,000. However, required minimum distributions from the account value will lead to a zero balance in a short period of time.

RMD calculations on variable annuities with dollar-for-dollar death benefits become problematic because they are based on the sum of the account value and the actuarial present value of the death benefit that's over the account value, according to Mr. Stolz. The problem here is that the RMDs calculated this way will quickly deplete the account value.

“The rate at which they liquidate the account, the client will have all of the money out of the policy in about six or seven years, and at this point, the death benefit will go away: The account value hits zero and the death benefit hits zero,” Mr. Stolz said. The alternatives are limited in this case, but there's the possibility of taking an RMD from another source.

Generally, there are few ways out of a forced annuitization. Clients and advisers haven't been fully aware of its perils, and wholesalers historically haven't discussed the issue much.

“The information is in the fine print, and wholesalers will say that their companies don't do that, but they can,” said Carrie Turcotte, president of Crest Financial Strategies. “So you have to ask, 'At what age can the company force it?'”

Nevertheless, the forced annuitization age is a detail that's buried within the prospectus, so there's a cautionary tale for advisers.

“It's never as easy as the product reps or wholesalers make it sound, and it's our job to dig as deep as we can in the comprehension of these contracts,” said Ms. Turcotte.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Sponsored financial news

RIA Data Center

Use InvestmentNews' RIA Data Center to filter and find key information on over 1,400 fee-only registered investment advisory firms.

Rank RIAs by

Upcoming Event

Jun 27

Webcast

Emerging Market Debt: 5 Forces at Work

When it comes to emerging market debt, there are a series of forces that help you drive better results for your clients. In today's continually changing market environment, it is critical to know the forces at play to help keep your investment... Learn more

Accepted for 1 CE Credit from the CFP Board. Approved by IMCA for 1 CIMA®/CIMC®/CPWA® CE credit. Approved for 1 CFA Credit.

Featured video

Events

LiveOak's Carroll: Is it time to acquire?

With advisers aging, and economies of scale more critical than ever, advisory firms are consolidating at a rapid pace. So is it time to buy? Jason Carroll of LiveOak offers his thoughts.

Video Spotlight

Will It Last As Long As Your Clients Do?

Sponsored by Prudential

Video Spotlight

The Catalyst

Sponsored by Pershing

Latest news & opinion

Voya's win in 401(k) fee suit involving Financial Engines bodes well for other record keepers

Fidelity, Aon Hewitt and Xerox HR Solutions are currently defending against similar fiduciary-breach claims.

Collective investment trusts getting more attention from 401(k) advisers

The funds are catching on due largely to lower costs and more product availability, but come with some inherent drawbacks.

Vanguard rides robo-advice wave to $65B in assets

Personal Advisor Services, four times the size of its closest competitor, combines digital and human touch.

CFPs, including brokers, may have to adhere to a stricter fiduciary duty

CFP Board revises its standards and aims to beef up fiduciary requirements of certificants.

CFP Board's proposal to expand fiduciary duty draws praise, carries risks

Some question whether brokers will drop the CFP mark or if the CFP Board will strictly enforce its new standard.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print