UL Nonforfeiture Model Scuttled

By

San Diego

Work on a model regulation opposed by insurers and wanly received by regulators was ended during the winter meeting of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners here.

In a 7-3 vote with one abstention, regulators decided not to expose the “Minimum Nonforfeiture Values for Universal Life Insurance Products and Variable Universal Life Insurance Products With Secondary Guarantees Model Regulation.”

During discussion on the draft, Sheldon Summers, a life actuary with the California insurance department, suggested work should focus on a general nonforfeiture project. The suggestion received positive feedback from both insurers and regulators.

The draft provided methods and standards to determine minimum nonforfeiture values for UL products with secondary guarantees, which are provisions that ensure the policy will remain in force if, in the absence of a guarantee, it would have terminated. The regulation would have applied only to secondary guarantees that extended over 20 years.

After the vote, regulators cited various reasons for not proceeding with the model. These ranged from a simple, “its not needed” to concerns that the model would become part of the NAIC Codification of Statutory Accounting Principles, and, consequently, a criterion for accreditation.

Insurers for their part, roundly opposed the draft, citing the cost of reserving for guarantees and the possibility such products would not be sold if secondary guarantees had to be reserved for and treated as guarantees instead of shadow accounts.


Reproduced from National Underwriter Life & Health/Financial Services Edition, December 16, 2002. Copyright 2002 by The National Underwriter Company in the serial publication. All rights reserved.Copyright in this article as an independent work may be held by the author.