There is much to be considered under the new set fiduciary rules recently proposed by the DOL, especially as we sort through the (very extensive) details of this new regulatory regime. We are already hearing much about the impact and change which would be introduced into the market over the expansive reach of this new
Revenue Ruling 2012-3; the preamble to the QLAC Regs; IRS Notice 2014-66; and the Oct. 23, 2014 DOL Information Letter to Treasury are just a few of the critical building blocks which have enabled an exciting new generation of lifetime income products which we are now seeing in the market. The three 2019 SECURE ACT
Let’s face it. Annuities generally are not well received in much of the retirement plan adviser community. From the historical impression that “annuities are sold, not bought;” to some advisers perceived baggage associated with being that ghastly “licensed insurance agent;” to the historically “salty” nature of a number of retail annuities; there is a lingering
A title like this one was bound to happen; and I was tempted to publish it on April Fool’s Day-except that its really not a joke.
Where it comes from is the simple fact that any DC Lifetime Income Program (ok, why not, lets use the acronym “DCLIP” while we’re at it) that guarantees lifetime
202(b) actually does not make any statutory change to any of the Code’s or ERISA rules governing the distribution of a plan’s assets pursuant to divorce or separation orders. Instead, it instructs Treasury to amend its QLAC rules, which are obscurely found under Required Minimum Distribution applicable to dc plans which purchase annuities (Reg 1.401(a)(9)-6). The regs must be changed to reflect that if a QLAC is issued as a joint and survivor annuity (which it is required to be unless spousal consent is obtained, under plans to which such rules apply), and a divorce subsequently occurs prior to the date the annuity payments actually begin, the DRO “will not affect the permissibility of the joint and survivor annuity benefits” as long as that order meets certain requirements.
Continue Reading Secure 2.0’s New QDRO Rules: The Mainstreaming of the QLAC?
Most of the commonly available individual annuities sold to consumers are not suitable for the purchase by plans as part of their DC Lifetime Income program without changes being made to the design, administration and compensation (it is also worthwhile to note that the pricing and disclosure rules related to individual and retirement plan products can be vastly different). The differences can range from the types of disclosures being way, to the handling of money in and none out, to the manner in which it is all reported on required annual statements, along with a basketful of other sorts of requirements.
A number of insurers have made the investment necessary to accomplish this feat. It does, however, become a key fiduciary inquiry as to whether or not the annuity being purchased has been designed for use by retirement plans plans. Recognize also that different products of the same insurer might be supported by different systems and processes, and the fiduciary will need to make sure it is getting to the right one.
Continue Reading “Engineering” the Use of Individual Annuities In DC Lifetime Income Programs
Actuaries and mathematicians will tell us that the “actuarial cost” of any annuity you may purchase is effectively the same, no matter what sort of annuity you purchase. After all, your life expectancy is what it is; the interest rates are what they are; and the insurance companies investments supporting the lifetime guarantees are what
When we assess how to implement the tremendous changes that we see on the horizon, whether it be implementing unique lifetime income vehicles, PEPs, collective trusts, or any other of the sort of the innovative programs being develop which are designed to enhance retirement security. Putting them all into play requires attention to this obscure detail.
Continue Reading The “Entity” Difference Between 403(b) and 401(a) Plans
“Decumulation” of retirement benefits has shifted from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans. I had written in 2009 that the demise of the DB plan was inevitable because of the rise and fall of plan sponsors. It is one thing to rely upon an employer’s current funding of the accumulation of the lifetime income benefit through its employer sponsored retirement plan; it is quite another to expect that same employer sponsored plan to actually provide the guaranteed retirement payout over the retiree’s lifetime.DC plans can avoid this fate.
Continue Reading Avoiding Studebaker
With all of the current focus on unique programs designed to enhance the attractiveness to participants and fiduciaries of adopting lifetime income programs under defined contribution plans, there is little discussion about how all of this plays out in the 403(b) market. Guarantee lifetime payouts from 403(b) annuity contracts are still alive and well, particularly in the higher eduction market which is still dominated by TIAA and its insurance products. However, with the the now-decade-long-shift in the 403(b) market to the mutual fund based group custodial arrangements designed to mimic 401(k), where do those new lifetime income programs fit?
Continue Reading 403(b) and Lifetime Income