On September 1, 2015, the first phase of Actuarial Guideline XLIX (AG 49) became effective for all Fixed Index Universal Life (FIUL) insurance policy illustrations. Jason Wellmann, senior vice president of life distribution at Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America (Allianz Life), and Todd Petit, assistant vice president actuary and illustration actuary for Allianz Life, offer their perspectives on the new guideline.
Q: What was your initial reaction to the proposed AG 49?
JW: AG 49 was originally proposed by manufacturers of FIUL policies — including Allianz Life — that wanted to develop a consistent methodology for determining maximum illustrated rates. In its initial stages, the proposed methodology was simple and straightforward, and could easily be understood by consumers.
But as certain non-FIUL companies questioned the proposal and proposed alternatives, the conversation became more actuarial in nature. At that point, we relied heavily on our actuaries to demonstrate the strong value that FIUL provides to consumers and help shape a compromise that we could support. At Allianz Life, we wanted a level playing field, and we think that was achieved.
Q: Todd, can you describe your role as the illustration actuary for your company?
TP: The illustration actuary performs a series of tests to ensure that the illustrated scale used in a life insurance policy illustration is compliant with insurance regulations and guidelines. Many financial professionals know that illustrated values cannot exceed the current rates and charges in effect at the time of the illustration (called the “currently payable scale”), but some may not know there is a secondary limit placed on illustrated values (called the “disciplined current scale”).
The purpose of the disciplined current scale is to prevent a company from showing an illustration of a product that they cannot afford. My job as the illustration actuary is to determine the disciplined current scale for each policy we illustrate, and then set the maximum illustrated scale.
Q: What factors do you consider when you determine the disciplined current scale?
TP: In order to demonstrate that a policy can be afforded at a certain scale, a company must be able to show that the accumulated cash flows equal or exceed the policy’s cash value at certain durations.
Accumulated cash flows are a company’s “cash in” minus “cash out,” and reflect premiums paid by the policy owners, investment income earned by the company, expected death benefit claims, living advantages such as withdrawals or loans, management expenses, commissions paid to the agents, and taxes incurred. The illustration actuary must use a number of assumptions for these calculations, including mortality assumptions, policyholder behavior assumptions, and interest rate assumptions.
Q: Prior to the adoption of AG 49, what rules were in place for FIUL insurance illustrations?
TP: Prior to AG 49, illustration actuaries looked to the Life Insurance Model Regulation and ASOP 24 for guidance on FIUL. For traditional UL policies, companies credit a set rate of interest directly to the policy, so the guidance was straightforward: The maximum illustrated rate is the credited rate on the policy, so long as the illustrated scale can be afforded (i.e. it passes disciplined current scale testing).
But for FIUL policies, instead of crediting a set rate of interest directly to a policy, companies typically invest that rate in derivatives and then apply their payoffs to the policy in the form of indexed interest. So two grey areas existed for FIUL:
“What is an appropriate derivative payoff assumption for disciplined current scale testing?” and
“What is an appropriate credited rate for the policyholder illustration?”
Q: How did AG 49 address those questions?
TP: Section 4 of AG 49 addresses the illustrated crediting rate question directly, by prescribing a process to determine the maximum illustrated rate for each policy. There is still some actuarial judgment in the determination of the illustrated rates for each individual index allocation within a policy, so financial professionals may see some differences between companies in their approach. However, the overall maximum illustrated rate in place for each illustration should be fairly consistent between companies assuming they have similar index allocations and caps.
Section 5 of AG 49 limits the investment income earnings assumption used in the disciplined current scale testing. This change impacts the testing process for the illustration actuary, and may indirectly impact the maximum illustrated scale, but shouldn’t be a prominent component for non-actuaries.
JW: As we start to see these new illustrations in early September, there may be some companies with illustrated rates that seem to be outliers for products with features that are similar to other products in the industry. If financial professionals see an illustration that seems out of place, I would encourage them to ask why.
For example, does the illustration credit a large bonus that isn’t guaranteed? Or does the company have a solid history of rate renewals? And don’t be shy about asking the company’s illustration actuary to talk you through their process — a good insurance company should be transparent about its sales practices.