SOA 2012 Life & Annuity Symposium May 21-22, Session 31 PD, Life Insurance Illustration Regulation: 15 Years Later

Transcription

1 SOA 2012 Life & Annuity Symposium May 21-22, 2012 Session 31 PD, Life Insurance Illustration Regulation: 15 Years Later Moderator: Kurt A. Guske, FSA, MAAA Presenters: Gayle L. Donato, FSA, MAAA Donna Christine Megregian, FSA, MAAA Primary Competency Professional Values

2 SOA May 21, 2012 Life & Annuity Symposium Session 31 - PD Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation: 15 Years Later 1 Presenters: Gayle L. Donato, FSA, MAAA donatog@nationwide.com Donna Megregian, FSA, MAAA donna.megregian@milliman.com Presenter Disclaimer 2 Presentation not endorsed by SOA or AAA Presentation solely the opinions of the presenters 1

3 Illustration Actuaries Polling? 3 Are you the Illustration Actuary or do you work with the Illustration Actuary for your company? 1= Yes 2 = No History Agenda 4 Annuity Disclosure Model Regulation Regulatory Requirements Challenges Faced Today Solutions Best Practices Conclusion and Questions 2

4 History Pre Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation 5 Need for regulation: Lack of consumer understanding No consistent content / format for illustrations Misleading illustrations Vanishing premiums Aggressive non-guaranteed interest rates, dividends, etc. Terms undefined or not clear History continued Life Insurance Illustration Model Regulation 6 Primary purpose consumer protection and education Effective date covered policies issued after January 1, 1997 Covered policies all individual and group life new and inforce illustrations except: Variable Life Individual and Group Annuities Credit Life Death Benefit less than $10,000 3

5 Annuity Disclosure Model Regulation Primary purpose illustration disclosure standards to foster consumer protection and education No Illustration Actuary requirements Adopted by NAIC in October 2011 No state approvals as of April 2012 Covered policies most annuities including the following groups: Variable Annuities unless SEC passes illustration regulations Individual and Group Annuities Index Annuities special requirements & impact on Index UL 7 Testing new business policy form must be selfsupporting and cannot be lapse-supported Self-supporting At every illustrated point in time starting with the fifteenth policy anniversary (with the twentieth for second-or-later-to-die policies), the accumulated value of all policy cash flows, when using experience assumptions underlying the disciplined current scale, should be equal to or greater than the illustrated policyholder value, i.e., the cash surrender values and any other illustrated benefit amounts available at the policyholders' election Prevent lapse-supported 8 Policy form must be self-supporting under the same assumptions and with the same level of aggregation as described above, changing only the persistency assumption to 100% persistency after year 5 4

6 Self-supporting Accumulated cash flows > Cash surrender value Year 15 and beyond 9 Accumulated cash flows year t= Prior accumulated cash flows year t-1 + Premium + Investment income -Benefits (deaths, surrenders, dividends, etc.) -Expenses (commissions, admin, sales, overhead, etc.) -Taxes Regulatory Requirements 10 Regulations and guidance Illustration Actuary Responsible Officer 5

7 Regulatory Requirements regulations and guidance Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation Actuarial Standard of Practice No. 24 Practice Note ASOP No. 24 Compliance with the NAIC Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation Illustration Work Group (IWG) updating Other related ASOP s Non-guaranteed charges No. 1 Risk classification No. 12 Dividends No. 15 Data quality No. 23 Actuarial communication No Regulatory Requirements Polling? Does similar wording exist in the Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation? 12 Standard Valuation Law Except in cases of fraud or willful misconduct, the qualified actuary shall not be liable for damages to any person (other than the insurance company and the commissioner) for any act, error, omission, decision or conduct with respect to the actuary's opinion. 1= Yes 2 = No 3 = Not sure 6

8 Regulatory Requirements Illustration Actuary Certifies Certification with disclosures -> Board of Directors and State s Insurance Commissioner Annually certify 13 Familiar with Actuarial Standard of Practice No. 24 Disciplined current scales are in conformity with ASOP No. 24 Illustrated scales meet Model Regulation requirements Includes not using or describing non-guaranteed elements in a manner that is misleading or has the capacity or tendency to mislead Regulatory Requirements Illustration Actuary Discloses If payable scale, for issues in the last 5 years, has been reduced for reasons outside of experience factors underlying the disciplined current scale If non-guaranteed elements for new and inforce differ e.g., Re-priced current COI s for new business, new money interest rate for several years then portfolio rate If non-guaranteed elements illustrated differ from those being paid e.g., Charges lower than illustrated charges Method used to allocate overhead expenses fully allocated, marginal or GRET 14 7

9 Inforce Business Over 5 Years Polling? 15 If all your inforce business for a form is over 5 years old do you still need to test? 1 = Yes 2 = No 3 = Not sure Inforce Illustrations Polling? 16 If you were illustrating a policy form and have changed to no longer illustrating that policy form for new business, what are you illustrating to inforce policy owners sold prior to the point you stopped illustrating new business? 1 = Current compliant non-guaranteed elements 2 = Guarantees only 3 = Not sure 8

10 Current Requirements Responsible Officer Not the Illustration Actuary 17 May or may not be an Actuary Guidance only from: Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation Certify annually: Illustration format meets Model Scales illustrated are those certified by Illustration Actuary Agents were provided with expense allocation method Fully allocated, marginal or GRET Illustration Actuary Polling? 18 Is the Illustration Actuary responsible for how the scales they certify are utilized (for example how the scales are illustrated or disclosed) in the Illustration? 1= Yes 2 = No 3 = Not sure 9

11 Challenges Faced Today 19 Index Universal Life Inforce testing Impact on product development Low interest rate environment Using distributions of surplus for inforce Index Universal Life 20 Index Universal Life (IUL) Illustrated interest credited rate blend of fixed and index Fixed rate set based on assets backing product Index 7 8% at max based on year look-back is common Rate often applies to non-loaned and loaned value Include hedge costs in testing 10

12 Index Universal Life Index Universal Life (IUL) Variable loan illustrated interest rate Permitted by most states 21 Loan charged rate e.g., 5% (based on Moody s) Loan often earns index return so illustrated between 7 8% Illustrating credited > charged in all durations Supportable? Spirit of the Model Regulation? Moody s 25-year end average 7.33% Regulatory requirements protect & educate consumers /not mislead Illustrate current, min and max loan charged rate? Index UL example IUL loan example Polling? Male, 45, non-tobacco, $1M DB pays $9,000 for 20 years Index account and loan account credited 7.6% Loan charged 5% Loans $11,500 ages (i.e. income = lifetime to age 120) AV = 0 at age Assuming loan interest charged changes to 7.6% (from 5%) what happens to the loan duration now? 1 = Same loan income through age = Same loan income through age 90 3 = Same loan income through age 80 4 = Same loan income through age 70 11

13 IUL loan example 23 Can we rely on the Guaranteed section of the Illustration? Inforce testing 24 Per ASOP No. 24 section The DCS, for a policy inforce one year or more, continues to be in compliance with the Model and this standard, if any of the following apply: A. The currently payable scale has not been changed since the last certification and the illustration actuary determines that experience since the last certification does not warrant changes in the disciplined current scale (DCS) that would make it significantly less favorable to the policyholder; or B. The currently payable scale has been changed since the development of the disciplined current scale most recently certified only to the extent that changes are reasonably consistent with changes in experience assumptions underlying the disciplined current scale; or C. The currently payable scale has been made less favorable to the policyholder since the last certification and the change is more than the change in the current experience would dictate 12

14 Inforce testing Key challenges in meeting A, B or C in section A. No change in scale and experience lines up with model Experience studies versus assumptions modeled often not credible B. Scale changed and are consistent with experience Straightforward for maintaining interest spread Relies some on actuarial judgment C. Scale made less favorable and it is more than experience would dictate Need to consider ASOP s such as No. 1 when determining scale Document rational, experience studies, etc. for meeting A, B or C Inforce testing Polling? 26 Is testing required for inforce policies where the policy form was filed as illustrated but now due to systems limitations, cost, lack of owner requests, etc. the company does not provide an inforce illustration? 1 = Yes 2 = No 3 = Not sure 13

15 Inforce testing 27 Section 3.7 of ASOP No. 24 Harder to comply with as experience changes e.g., distribution, lapse, expenses, earned rates, mortality, policyholder behavior such as payments, etc. Inforce testing 28 Inforce model variations: Model each issue year and project forward Aggregate issue years when possible, and project forward Current inforce model 14

16 Modeling inforce changes / challenges Product knowledge Separating results by policy form vs. aggregating results e.g., NY vs. Non-NY version -combine if similar Testing only policies issued > January 1, 1997 Assumption changes e.g., Mortality without improvement, fully allocated expenses, investment returns based on experience, etc. Policyholder behavior e.g., Premium deterioration, dynamic lapses Starting surplus Cash value Reserves Reserves and Target Surplus 29 Inforce testing Experience Study Considerations 30 Data grouped by product & aggregated by similar product Credibility Actual to expected expected from model Mortality Late durations Underwriting changes / audit results / x-factor changes Lapse focus on product / policyholder trends No-lapse products low in later durations & zero once paid-up Dynamic lapses based on policy behavior Shock lapses Term 15

17 Inforce testing Experience Study Considerations Continued Investments earned rates, spread & credited rate Illustrated interest rate shown < earned rate per Model Regulation Earned rate and spread by product Reflect deterioration that has occurred Do not reflect future improvements Consider likely future deterioration Test credited rate or spread that varies by duration 31 Sensitivity test assumptions with low credibility, range of earned rates, etc. Reinsurance Inforce testing challenges Modeling third party and or captive reinsurer Charges guaranteed? Product shifts Distribution sweet spots Underwriting Commission changes Maturity age Model and test through age 120 Late duration mortality vs. late duration COI s Grade late duration mortality into VBT 16

18 Inforce testing Polling? 33 Is testing required for inforce policies where the policy form was filed as non-illustrated? 1 = Yes 2 = No 3 = Not sure Impact on Product Development 34 Testing occurring earlier in product development Communication to management Term, no-lapse guarantee UL not illustrated Illustrations impact 17

19 Impact on Product Development 35 Relationship with the pricing actuary Assumption setting reliance on similar blocks Explore grey areas Premium persistency Reinsurance Expense allocation methods Considerations when failing self and/or lapse-support tests Refine and enhance model Peer review when close to passing OR failing Decrease commissions Stop selling e.g., low band, higher issue ages Change illustrated charges COIs, premium load, interest credited rate, etc. Change on admin system also work through ASOP No. 1 Illustrate only guaranteed elements No Lapse Guarantee UL s recently some have done Distribution of surplus 36 18

20 ASOP No. 24, Sect. 3.7: Distribution of Surplus 37 In the context of inforce illustrations for policies receiving distributions of accumulated surplus or prior gains (including those resulting from the formation of a closed block), the actuary should consider including these distributions both in the disciplined current scale and in the illustrated scale, only to the extent that (1) such distributions are currently being paid to the policyholder by the insurer, and (2) the insurer has indicated its intent and ability to continue to do so for the foreseeable future. Such accumulated surplus or prior gains may be used in conducting the tests for self and lapse-support Best Practices Review Life Insurance Illustrations Model Regulation, ASOP No. 24 & Practice Notes Start early and plan key steps Utilize existing experience studies, models & product information Stress or sensitivity test Shows product risk & can help avoid re-testing during year Document assumptions, testing method, model and results Methodology behind assumptions 38 File on time with states and Board of Directors 19

21 Conclusion 39 Awareness of the latest requirements is not enough Actuaries are called to be business advisors Understand issues facing Illustration Actuaries today Illustration Actuary role is more challenging today Questions 40 Additional questions Submit to for consideration as Practice Notes are updated Thank you for attending! 20