Now
Fair and Breezy
58°
High
66°
Low
43°

Bill takes aim at life insurance gimmick

Text Size: 
Tools Sponsor

By NANCY HICKS/Lincoln Journal Star

Sunday, Feb 03, 2008 - 12:25:36 am CST

The Nebraska Department of Insurance wants to stop the latest ghoulish investment gimmick, a new twist on life insurance that targets seniors, banking on the likelihood that they will soon be dead.

A legislative bill supported by the department targets what is called stranger-originated life insurance, or STOLI.

Here’s how STOLI works. A financial company solicits and pays a stranger, usually an elderly stranger, to buy a life insurance policy.  The soliciting company generally pays the stranger $1,000 or more, and it pays the premium on that policy — and eventually gets the death benefit.

The companies generally target people 75 to 85, and the products are sometimes marketed as zero-premium life insurance policies, according to state Insurance Director Ann Frohman.

The person who buys the insurance names the beneficiary for the first two years. After that, the insured sells the policy to the soliciting company, generally in return for canceling the outstanding loan made to pay the premiums.

These insurance policies become part of life settlement-backed security marketed to investors. Some are now being pooled then divided into death bonds and sold to pension funds, college endowments and other professional investors.

The bill (LB853), based on a national model, would lengthen the two-year window before the policy could be sold to five years. That would discourage the practice because it would limit the profit companies could make with STOLIs, since more older policyholders would die during the five years, according to Frohman.

STOLIs pervert the traditional underlying principle that has guided life insurance for centuries: that life insurance provides financial protection for family members, a business and more recently a charity, according to life insurance department and industry leaders who supported the bill during a public hearing last week.

The idea is that you can’t insure against something you don’t have reason to care about.

STOLIs change that underlying principle and threaten both life insurance’s preferential tax treatment and premiums, according to supporters of the bill.

“The best thing about life insurance is that the death proceeds are income tax-free,” said Sen. Tom Carlson of Holdrege who has been in the life insurance business for decades. “And that characteristic has been preserved through all the years because life insurance is a product that is for the public good. It is not a commodity to be bought and sold.”

Converting insurance into a mere commodity threatens those tax benefits, said Terry K. Headley, president of Headley Financial Services in Omaha, who represented the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors-Nebraska, at the public hearing.

Insurance premiums also are based on the premise that a number of people will drop their policies, letting them lapse, he told senators. Since STOLIs reduce that lapse rate, their growing use could lead to premium increase, Headley said.

“This is about making sure that everyday Nebraskans have access to reasonably priced life insurance,” said Eric Dunning, the insurance department’s legislative liaison.

The proposed change in law would increase the state’s timeline between initial purchase and the ability to sell a policy from two to five years. During that period, an insurer can contest the legitimacy of a policy, which can’t be purchased simply to be resold, Headley explained.

Opponents, like Robert Wooley, with Coventry, the nation’s largest life settlement company, believe the bill and the lengthened ban on selling a policy takes away property rights from citizens who want to sell their life insurance. 

But policyholders could still sell for any reason after the five years. And they could sell it for a list of legitimate reasons during the five-year period, Headley explained. Legitimate exceptions include a policyholder who gets sick or has a terminal illness and needs money for health care and other bills, or an insured who is widowed or retires.

The list of exceptions protects people who no longer need the insurance for its original purpose, explained Carlson, who says he understands but is not comfortable with all of the “legitimate reasons.”

When a policy is sold to someone, it totally changes the view of life insurance, he said.

“The minute you buy that policy, you hope I die, and the quicker the better,” Carlson said. “Once it leaves the primary purpose and becomes a business transaction, then there is hope for death.

“I don’t like it.”

STOLIs go one step further.

“To me it (STOLI) is a macabre, sinister way to look at the life insurance business. Our products were never intended to be used in these types of ways,” Headley said.

Reach Nancy Hicks at 473-7250 or nhicks@journalstar.com.

 


$1 Sunday Delivery - Subscribe Today!
Politics > Back to Top of Story

All posts to JournalStar.com are subject to our Terms and Standards.
Your posted comment will appear after it has been approved.
Frequently asked questions about story commenting.
(optional)
   
whatever wrote on February 3, 2008 8:02 am:
" Is there no end to what Big Business will do to squeeze a dollar out of people. We need a Teddy Roosevelt type president to hammer these unethical companies and their parasitic schemes. "

liconlnite wrote on February 3, 2008 11:24 am:
" what is the difference when an attorney writes will for elder or a person on hospice and places their name as a beneficiary. "

Laurie wrote on February 3, 2008 3:26 pm:
" Gross, gross, gross. Just when I thought insurance companies could not be any more evil.... here you are. What do we expect from a business that profits from the fear and misfortune of others and sells their product to us under the guise of "protection"? Speculation about the relative lifespan of one person or another is a tasteless party game, a crass office pastime, and a B-rated movie, not good business. Hope this bill passes. "

Ick! wrote on February 3, 2008 3:35 pm:
" That's just morbid... It's nice to know that some people will do anything to make a buck... There's going to be a special place for some people... "

Phil wrote on February 3, 2008 4:14 pm:
" Please note that it is not insurance companies promoting this macabre practice. It is the insurance industry as a whole that is trying to stop investors who are using legitimate life insurance products as an investment vehicle in an ethically questionable way. "

Marvin wrote on February 3, 2008 5:44 pm:
" The ghoulish investment gimmick is the state Insurance stopping a perfectly legal investment for the elderly to obtain a few extra dollars. This is not a scam by big business like some of the anti-business and liberals are posting. This is creating an investment tool that responds to the current tax laws passed by lawmakers to promote the insurance industry at the working person expense. Any tax break must be paid by someone and most of the time that would be you. "

Mike 22 year life insurance employee wrote on February 4, 2008 7:58 am:
" Laurie, read the article. It's not the life insurance companies who are pertetuating this scheme. It is unethical financial advisors, life settlement and agents. "

db wrote on February 4, 2008 8:46 am:
" lincolnite, if an attorney writes him/herself as a beneficiary, this is unethical and that part of the will could be deemed invalid. An exception may be if the attorney is related to the person writing the will and would have been a beneficiary to the same degree as written in the will. However, even this would be discouraged.

Reports of potentially unethical attorney behavior should be sent to the Counsel for Discipline. They can be reached by telephone at 402-471-1040 or by mail at:

Counsel for Discipline
3808 Normal Blvd.
Lincoln, NE 68506 "

D wrote on February 4, 2008 10:54 am:
" Laurie, someone obviously didn't read the article! As an employee of a Lincoln life insurance company I can tell you that the life insurance companies are the ones who want this to stop. "

Don't see the big deal... wrote on February 4, 2008 3:27 pm:
" Is it macabre? Yes. But it is also legal. And assuming the elderly person is in their right state of mind when they sign up for this - a protection that should be ensured - then I don't see what is immoral about it. I believe that adults should have every right to create value from their body in any way they want. As long as people are not being taken advantage of from a mental health perspective, I think what is more immoral is the government saying how people may and may not use THEIR LIVES in a way that DOES NOT harm others. I am sickened by people who think that the government should step in every time they disagree with something SOMEONE ELSE wants to do. "

how is it that this is wrong? wrote on February 4, 2008 4:55 pm:
" I agree that this does seem to be taking advantage of those advanced in age. However, if a senior citizen has a life insurance policy that they have paid on for years and years (sometimes 75 years or more) but now they sign up for medicaide, they are forced by our government to cash in those policies, because they can't have that asset. So how is this practice wrong, yet our medicaide practices are ok? "

Laurie wrote on February 4, 2008 6:03 pm:
" Oh. My bad. Maybe. Are you telling me that the purpose of the policy sold to the consumer is unknown to the insurance agent when he sells it? The scant research I have been able to do indicates that the arrangement between financial speculator and elderly consumer is usually made by the INSURANCE AGENT. Nevertheless, I appreciate efforts by the insurance business to police their own. "