Structured product annuities pose challenges for regulators

As Voya plans to be the fifth company offering these newfangled products, regulators still struggle to classify them

Jul 9, 2014 @ 4:30 pm

By Darla Mercado

annuities, fixed annuities, variable annuities, structured products, regulators, morningstar
+ Zoom

Structured product annuities are the latest retirement product but they are so new that regulators are struggling to figure out the best way to classify them.

These contracts, dubbed hybrid or buffered annuities, use structured products to absorb downside losses in client accounts and provide modest and steady account value growth that's linked to the performance of an index. It's a different world from the high accumulation potential in a traditional variable annuity.

(More: Check out this tutorial on structured product annuities)

So far, four companies offer structured product annuities: AXA Equitable Life Insurance Co., Allianz Life Insurance Co. of North America, CUNA Mutual Group and MetLife Inc.

Voya Financial, formerly ING U.S., is also getting into the game, judging by a May 30 filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Voya's new product is tentatively called the PotentialPlus Annuity. It has an eight-year surrender schedule, and it can buffer 10%, 20% or 30% of downside losses. PotentialPlus appears to offer a choice between four not-yet-specified indexes, plus a death benefit equal to the accumulation value in the contract.

What's interesting about these products is that while they're generating plenty of interest from brokers, they're still in a gray area as far as how regulators view them: are they fixed annuities or variable annuities?

Where these products land matters from a state insurance regulator's point of view.

“What reserves should apply to these products?” asked Jim Mumford, first deputy insurance commissioner in Iowa. He was a panelist at the Insured Retirement Institute's Government, Legislative and Regulatory conference in Washington last week.

For instance, reserve requirements tend to be lower on variable annuities than on fixed annuities, Mr. Mumford noted.

There's also the matter of the standard non-forfeiture rule, which requires that carriers have a minimum interest rate guarantee that they can credit to a fixed annuity contract. The minimum permitted in a state is determined by the insurance regulator in that jurisdiction, but it's generally no greater than 3%. These rules apply to deferred fixed annuities but not variable annuities. Structured product annuities don't offer minimum guaranteed rates the way deferred fixed annuities do.

Regulators at the National Association of Insurance Commissioners have found the issue perplexing enough that it created a Separate Account Risk Working Group, chaired by Minnesota insurance regulator and actuary Blaine Shepard, to determine whether there need to be updates to state insurance laws to accommodate these structured product annuities and where they stand with respect to reserving and nonforfeiture laws.

To make things more interesting from a product intel point of view, the latest round of structured product annuities have presented annuity researchers with new difficulties when harvesting flow data.

For instance, Morningstar Inc. can track variable annuity products as long as they have a legal subaccount that's filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, according to John McCarthy, product manager, annuity solutions at the firm.

But not all structured product annuities have subaccounts, which makes it difficult for Morningstar to follow them. The annuity research team is discussing how to best cover these new annuities, Mr. McCarthy said.

Indeed, the major distinction for Morningstar is that true variable products use separate accounts, have investments that mimic open-ended mutual funds and the client can lose money.

“The differentiator [between structured product annuities and whether they're truly fixed or variable] is how safe is your principal: Voya and AXA lean toward a variable product, where the principal isn't guaranteed,” Mr. McCarthy said. “But if the principal is guaranteed, that would lean more toward [fixed].”

This story has been changed to say that the minimum interest rate guarantee tied to the non-forfeiture rule is no greater than 3%. A previous version stated that it was generally about 3%.

0
Comments

What do you think?

View comments

Recommended for you

Sponsored financial news

Upcoming Event

Apr 30

Conference

Retirement Income Summit

Join InvestmentNews at the 12th annual Retirement Income Summit - the industry's premier retirement planning conference.Much has changed - and much remains to be learned. Attend and discuss how the future is full of opportunity for ... Learn more

Featured video

Events

Get creative: How to boost your message to prospects

Communicating with prospects can be difficult. What are some creative ways that you can enhance your messaging? Bob Huntley of Wise Counsel Wealth Management offers some ideas.

Video Spotlight

The Search for Income

Sponsored by PGIM Investments

Recommended Video

Path to growth

Latest news & opinion

T. Rowe Price steps up its game to serve financial advisers

The Baltimore-based mutual fund giant is more aggressively targeting financial advisers with a beefed-up wholesale crew and placement on custodial platforms.

The most important tax changes for 2018

The Internal Revenue Service issued inflation adjustments to more than 50 tax provisions for 2018.

Shift to Roth 401(k)s 'highly likely' part of tax reform: former Treasury official Mark Iwry

Mandated contributions to Roth accounts would likely only be partial, as opposed to having a full repeal of pre-tax accounts.

E*Trade acquiring custodian Trust Company of America

Discount broker buying second-tier custodian for $275 million.

Another thousand Dow points higher, and investors yawn

Market milestones keep falling like dominoes, with 51 records broken so far this year.

X

Subscribe and Save 60%

Premium Access
Print + Digital

Learn more
Subscribe to Print