I would never recommend a life settlement.......

Recently I received a phone call from an agent.  He said he had a client who wanted to sell her life insurance policy.  My first question was "How old is your client?".  He told me his client was in her late 50's.  I broke the bad news to him that unless the client had  serious medical issues she probably wouldn't qualify for a life settlement.  I explained that the market is generally looking for LE's (life expectancies) of around 10 years or less.  This took him by surprise.  He asked why any client would sell their life insurance policy if they only had 10 years or less to live.  He said he would never recommend that his clients sell their policy if they had less than 10 years to live. He would tell them to borrow the money.  Well it's not always easy to borrow the money to pay premiums.

I think this conversation elicits a discussion on a few of the reasons one sells their life insurance policy.

But before we go further I want to bring up an important point.  Life settlements don't make sense for everyone.  Every situation has to be examined on its own merits.  But its important that everyone is aware of life settlements.

The most common scenario I see when reviewing cases is an older person who has had their universal life insurance policy for many years , their cash value is dwindling down, and since they haven't paid their premium in a few years have recently received a notice that the carrier is requiring them to pay a higher premium to keep the policy in force.
Well there's a reason for this.   These people are usually in financial straits.  Typically they have limited resources and are on a fixed budget.  They either haven't planned well for retirement or are experiencing unexpected extra ordinary cost, such as nursing home care or a home health aid.
If you were a bank would you lend these people money to pay premiums?  Banks are not in the life settlement business and are not interested in tracking lives and premiums.

Another scenario which is not uncommon is business' selling their key man policy.  Sometimes the reason they are selling the policy is because they are having financial issues.  Again if you were a bank would you lend money to this business so they can maintain their life insurance policy.

Another common situation are people selling their term policies.  Typically they bought the term insurance because they had a insurance need for a limited time that they needed covered.  Now that the need is gone they typically don't want to maintain the policy.  Often times they don't have the resources to pay the conversion premium.  Is it better to let this policy lapse or to convert that policy into a lump sum of cash?

Well clearly you can see there are plenty of situations where a life settlement makes sense.  People cant always afford to continue their coverage, nor can they always borrow to pay those premiums, nor do they necessarily want the coverage.

Do Life Insurance Agents have a responsibility to discuss the life settlement option with their clients?

What is an agents responsibility to his client?

According to this article - http://www.pearsonitcertification.com/articles/article.aspx?p=415191

"By definition, a fiduciary is a person in a position of financial trust. Thus, attorneys, accountants, trust officers, and insurance agents are all considered fiduciaries.

As a fiduciary, the agent has an obligation to act in the best interest of the insured. The agent must be knowledgeable about the features and provisions of various insurance policies and the use of these insurance contracts. The agent must be able to explain the important features of these policies to the insured. The agent must recognize the importance of dealing with the general public's financial needs and problems and offer solutions to these problems through the purchase of insurance products."



From this description it sounds like insurance agents have a fiduciary responsibility to explore the life settlement option for their clients.
So why aren't more agents discussing life settlements?
Why aren't agents mandated by law  to explore the life settlement option for anyone lapsing their policy or any one who has the ability to convert their life insurance policy but chooses not to?
Isn't a life settlements in the best interest of these clients?
Isn't it better for the clients to recover some of the money they've poured in as premiums over the years than to get nothing at all?

At least one state will look at this in the near future.
Here is a blurb from LISA (LIFE INSURANCE SETTLEMENT ASSOCIATIONhttp://www.lisa.org/ )

California Couple Sues Lincoln National   The court battle continues on in California, where a couple has filed a lawsuit against Lincoln National Life Insurance Co., alleging that had their insurance agent told them about the life settlement option they may not have reduced coverage on their policy, of which the premiums were becoming too expensive. One of the key arguments in the case is whether or not agents have a fiduciary duty to their client – of which Lincoln National believes they do not. While California law does not require consumers be told about alternatives to the lapse or surrender of a policy (something LISA has advocated for), this case further illustrates the need for states to consider such legislation that would allow consumers to be told about all of the options available to them when considering lapse or surrender of their life insurance policy.

Investing in Life Settlements

As life settlement brokers in the Life Settlement industry, it is becoming more and more apparent to us Integrity Life Solutions, LLC, that investments in life settlements may not only be prudent from a diversification standpoint, but also relative to internal rates of return, or return on investment. Life Settlements are generally non-correlated investments with possible yields from 10% to in excess of 20% on a net basis, even after accounting for fees and other expenses. The slowdown of purchases of life insurance policies on seniors and the lack of liquidity in the marketplace has made this truly a buyer’s market.

But we find that a lot of institutional investors are kicking the tires again. The market has stabilized in the sense that certain illicit behaviors have all but ceased (STOLI and illicit premium finance transactions) and the Internal Revenue Service has opined in two Revenue Rulings last year (IRS Revenue Ruling 2009-13 and IRS Revenue Ruling 2009-14) dealing with the tax impact on the seller of a life settlement, and the investor, respectively. Although these IRS Revenue Rulings may not have the effect of adjudicated or statutory law, they do provide some clarity as to tax rules as they apply in the Life Settlement arena. http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/rr-09-14.pdf

In the first IRS Revenue Ruling 2009-13, the Service asks and then answers two questions:

1.       What constitutes a gain?

2.       To the extent there is a gain, how is it characterized – ordinary or capital?


To learn more about Life Settlements visit http://www.freecpe.org/
Integrity Life Solutions offers continuing education credits to CPAs, CFPs, and NJ insurance licensed agents