There’s lots of things that make sense from a business point of view–I
can go on vacation in Europe and get the company to pay for the plane
ticket by stopping into the branch into a branch and visiting with the
branch manager.<<<Putnam Trader





Just as I was typing that Joyce, my beloved assistant, came in and asked a question.



Joyce is older than I am and was never “hot.”  I’ve never found it
necessary to stoop to choosing my associates because they’re hot–I
much prefer pleasant and loyal.

[quote=Put Trader]

Perhaps you can tell me how having a life insurance policy on an
executive replaces the skills and talents brought to the table by the
executive?
 

[/quote]



Putsy, it’s only your fault that you enjoy arguing with emotional munchkins…you arrive under your own duress.



 If you really want to learn why corporations (private or public)
of all sizes increasingly engage nonqualified benefits, including
nonqualified deferred-compensation (NQDC) plans using COLI as a way to
restore benefits limited by legislation - then all you have to do is
ask.



Your statements in this thread imply that you want to argue about
succession issues while the “insurance guys” are talking about “top
hat” exemption offered to corporations by the DOL.



 Do you want to know the break points that allow the “employee” to
own a policy where the employer may recieve a current tax deduction if
the compensation does not violate IRC restrictions? These vehicles
allow the corp to mirror 401 (k) benefits where the exec can achieve
pretax compensation into investment alternatives similar to the ones
enjoyed by the lower compensated individuals. The numbers start to
seperate at about $165K/yr.



OR - Do you want to know the reasons why an individual would purchase
life insurance on a Key employee or partner…if that’s the case, you
should call your State Farm Agent. He lives where you live.

Whatever.



I acknowledge that COLI is–at least currently–legal.



My quesiton is philosophical.  Why does my employer have any more
of an “insurable interest” in me than they would in any other person?



Why not buy insurance on our customers too?  IF Mr. Johnson is
generating $25,000 per year in commissions and has an expected life
span of twenty years why is he not worth buying a declining benefit
policy?



What is the justification of owning a $250,000 death benefit for the gu
who changes the oil in the trucks we use to deliver stuff from the
warehouse?  Is he so skilled at what he does that we could not
possibly replace him?

[quote=stanwbrown]As I suspected, you haven't a clue what you're babbling about. B shares never had a the A share front load...[/quote]

Who said a B Share had a front end load? I only see stanwbrowneye!

[quote=stanwbrown]Again, as suspected, you haven't a clue what you're babbling about. There's no "toll" on SMAs. An existing stock or bond portfolio is liquidated w/o cost as a part of the management fee the client's already paying. It doesn't matter if they hand you a current portfolio or cash, there's simply no "toll", no cost difference.[/quote]

You're just plain ignorant.<?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=stanwbrown]Now, given the fact that you’ve embarrassed yourself and every other wearer of loud plaid twice in rapid succession, isn’t it time you run along and buttonhole some poor soul on the street corner about the value of whole life insurance?[/quote]

The above paragraph is neurotic projection.

[quote=Put Trader]Perhaps you can tell me how having a life insurance policy on an executive replaces the skills and talents brought to the table by the executive?[/quote]

Go enroll in the CLU program at The American College. After you pass, if you pass, get the ChFC, the AEP, and the MSFS. Then you'll be prepared to listen to my lecture, crack boy.

[quote=Put Trader]I completely understand the idea of key man insurance when used to provide a surviving partner with sufficient capital to buy the deceased partner's share of the business so as to avoid having a widow assume a role, or worse sell a role to a third party in order to "cash out" her share of the business.[/quote]

Then why did you ask your first question? Crack is killing the only brain cell you have left.

[quote=Put Trader]I know that my employer has a policy on me, we were asked to acknowledge that several years ago.  What I cannot buy into is the idea that getting a check for $2,000,000 if I die is going to replace what I brought to the table.[/quote]

I think you're a liar. You're not worth $2.

[quote=Put Trader]Oh I know, I know, it's used to fund the benefits program and it does make sense from a business point of view.[/quote]

Then why do you make stupid statements and ask dumb questions? It that what crack does you to, boy?

[quote=Put Trader]There's lots of things that make sense from a business point of view--I can go on vacation in Europe and get the company to pay for the plane ticket by stopping into the branch into a branch and visiting with the branch manager.[/quote]

If only you could afford to take a trip.

[quote=Put Trader]That is not right, and neither is insuring my life with a policy that names my employer as the beneficiary.[/quote]

Your analogy is poor, in the extreme. You are guilty of judgemental heuristics and confirmation bias.

[quote=Put Trader]Even more offensive is the idea that when I leave the employment situation the insurance remains in effect--whether I retire, get fired or quit for greener pastures.[/quote]

I suspect you'll get fired. That makes the most business sense in your situation.

[quote=Put Trader]Senior people being insured is one thing--but it would be fun to read how insuring the lowest level employees for hundreds of thousands of dollars is anything other than using our common tendency to die sooner or later to fund our employers obligations.[/quote]

Cost recovery via DBO plans. QED

[quote=Put Trader]As I said, it's legal--just like me expensing my plane ride to Europe is legal--but that does not make it right.
[/quote]

Incorrect. You must wear pink panties, my wee little crack boy. Your straw man is now aflame.

[quote=Put Trader] Joyce is older than I am and was never "hot."  I've never found it necessary to stoop to choosing my associates because they're hot--I much prefer pleasant and loyal.
[/quote]

I prefer my girls to be intelligent, savvy, witty, catalytic, empathic, persuasive. Being pleasing to the eye goes with being pleasant; the combination is vastly superior to just merely being pleasant.

The fact that you mention loyalty means you've been burned before. I never have. My girls all love me.

And they are all HOT.

[quote=Put Trader]Whatever.[/quote]

The last gasp of an overblown windbag as their dingy sinks beneath them.

[quote=Roger Thornhill]

[quote=Put Trader] Joyce is older than I am and was never "hot."  I've never found it necessary to stoop to choosing my associates because they're hot--I much prefer pleasant and loyal.
[/quote]

I prefer my girls to be intelligent, savvy, witty, catalytic, empathic, persuasive. Being pleasing to the eye goes with being pleasant; the combination is vastly superior to just merely being pleasant.

The fact that you mention loyalty means you've been burned before. I never have. My girls all love me.

And they are all HOT.

[/quote]

I like my girls a little on the nasty side.

[quote=annuity guy]I like my girls a little on the nasty side. [/quote]

I've always got one or two college interns working here, and they do a little dance almost every day.

When I heard them singing Nitty's "Nasty Girl" I got turned on, I must admit.

I just LOVE this business.

Behold the BOLI guy in a cluster phuck with the Annuity guy.  Collective IQ somewhere near 100.

[quote=Put Trader] Collective IQ somewhere near 100. [/quote]

The only Charlie Foxtrot here is YOU, crack boy.

The first time I took an IQ test, it was 158. Since then, I've taken some others, scoring 164 and 172.

I'd sell you some of my extra, if you could afford them.

[quote=Roger Thornhill]

[quote=Put Trader] Collective IQ somewhere near 100. [/quote]

The only Charlie Foxtrot here is YOU, crack boy.

The first time I took an IQ test, it was 158. Since then, I've taken some others, scoring 164 and 172.

I'd sell you some of my extra, if you could afford them.

[quote=Put Trader] Right, and armed with that IQ you decided to not pursue science, or even a profession of any sort.  No law for Roger, not even banking or stock brokering.[/quote]

I had a science scholarship, but I didn't renew it after the first year. I found the classes boring. I prefer to be around people.

I had three appointments to the naval academy, too. The AAs all called on Christmas Day, which was the first day they could extend the offer, but I decided to go somewhere else.

[quote=Put Trader] Roger decided to be--now get this--and inshwance agent, just like every other loser any of us ever met.[/quote]

I followed the money. I remember seeing the agent year end statements all lined up on the dining room table. $300,000+ was what the top 5 were doing, and that was nigh on three decades ago. One had a Ph.D., two had masters degrees, but one of them was an viet nam vet (Navy SEAL) who had never attended college.

That's when I shelved the idea of going to law school or dental school.

[quote=Put Trader] Go to a high school or college reunion--how many of the "most likely to succeed" or the "Brainiest" ended up as inshawance agents?[/quote]

There are two guys that do as well as I do, in my class. One is an attorney (he's second generation, like I am), the other produces TV shows out in Hollywood.

[quote=Put Trader] Inshawance agents are the epitome of the idea of lowering your expectations until you can finally land a job.[/quote]

I just love the fact that I made more money before I was 25, than you have in any year of your life.

[quote=Put Trader] How many of you would advise your son or daughter, "My child, if you really apply yourself you might be able to become an insurance agent?"[/quote]

The first thing humanity should do is insist that you do not procreate. Your end of the gene pool is shallow enough already.

Snappy.



I am the son of a flag grade USAF officer and I received an appointment
to the USAF–but turned it down for the same reason that I did not go
to Aggieland.  My father was most pissed, but was also privately
anti-war so he did not object too strenously as long as it was
understood that each of his three sons would wear a uniform for at
least two years.



He also told his three sons, "Whatever you do be more than an insurance agent."



It defies credibility for somebody to write the drivel you wrote. 
Three appointments to the Naval Academy–both Sentors and your
Congressman I suppose.



By definition a smart kid would know the importance of finishing
school–only morons who are destined to be inshawance agents drop
out.  You are a drop out–a failure at the game of life,
regardless of the fact that you now sell inshawance.  Anybody can
get a job selling inshawance, just anybody.



Let’s add another reality to the picture.  Anybody–even a drop
out who became an inshwance agent–can be taught how to discuss
something like Corporate Owned Life Insurance.  Hell there are
guys out here who could pursuade a Medal of Honor winner that they were
in the same foxhole–they spend their entire life researching what they
wish they were, they go buy uniforms at surplus stores and learn to
react to sudden noises as if they were flashing back to a fire fight
long ago.



It is singularly unimpressive that you reel off inshawance
terminology.  It is just as meaningless to me as it would be if
you were telling us you were a brain surgeon and peppered your
simpleton writings with medical terminology.



Tell me, how did a guy with a high IQ not know that finishing school was going to open a lot more doors?

[quote=Put Trader]I am the son of a flag grade USAF officer and I received an appointment to the USAF--but turned it down for the same reason that I did not go to Aggieland.  My father was most pissed, but was also privately anti-war so he did not object too strenously as long as it was understood that each of his three sons would wear a uniform for at least two years.[/quote]

Uh huh. Sure you are. *cough*

Wing wipers promote anybody, if they can kiss enough arse.

[quote=Put Trader]He also told his three sons, "Whatever you do be more than an insurance agent."[/quote]

You're lying again.

[quote=Put Trader]It defies credibility for somebody to write the drivel you wrote.  Three appointments to the Naval Academy--both Sentors and your Congressman I suppose.[/quote]

I'm surprised you can spell credibility, since you've never had any. Oh, wait, you must have used the spell check feature.

[quote=Put Trader]By definition a smart kid would know the importance of finishing school--only morons who are destined to be inshawance agents drop out.  You are a drop out--a failure at the game of life, regardless of the fact that you now sell inshawance.  Anybody can get a job selling inshawance, just anybody.[/quote]

I've never dropped out of anything, crack boy. If earning more than 99.5% of everyone else is failure, then how do you define success? I bet you're good at that, crack boy.

Anybody can get a job selling insurance, just like anybody can get a job peddling stock. It takes an exceptional person to achieve exceptional success. I'm not going to apologize for the fact that I made more in January that you'll earn all year long.

[quote=Put Trader]Let's add another reality to the picture.  Anybody--even a drop out who became an inshwance agent--can be taught how to discuss something like Corporate Owned Life Insurance.  Hell there are guys out here who could pursuade a Medal of Honor winner that they were in the same foxhole--they spend their entire life researching what they wish they were, they go buy uniforms at surplus stores and learn to react to sudden noises as if they were flashing back to a fire fight long ago.[/quote]

Then how come you can't learn how to at least talk about COLI? All you've done is prove that you don't know jack, crack boy.

[quote=Put Trader]It is singularly unimpressive that you reel off inshawance terminology.  It is just as meaningless to me as it would be if you were telling us you were a brain surgeon and peppered your simpleton writings with medical terminology.[/quote]

I find it amusing that you can't spell insurance, since I've had a Series 7 longer than you've been in the business, crack boy.

[quote=Put Trader]Tell me, how did a guy with a high IQ not know that finishing school was going to open a lot more doors?[/quote]

When one is already in the right room, they don't need doors opened for them. The mentally handicapped like yourself are the ones that need help. You're boring everyone to tears.

Everyone take you seats…class today will be on Qualified Benefit Plans as viewed by an "Insurance Guy."



Defined-contribution plans, such as 401 (k) plans, contain annual
contribution limits which tend to discriminate against highly
compensated executives. The 2K4 contribution limit of $13K would
represent 26 percent of the before-tax compensation of an employee
earning $50K per year, but just 2.6 percent of an executive grossing
$500K. Easy numbers. They help illustrate the considerable chasm that
exists for higher paid employees when left to use the doubledecker bus
approach of filling seats. What add’s insult to injury is that the
maximum salary cap for any qualified plan in 2K4 was $205K. Following
the allowable maximum contribution by an employer of $41K - the results
is a maximum benefit that can be derived from a defined-benefit plan
was about $165K - with the excess amount liable to a 15 percent excise
tax.



Following the above limitations, an individual, aged 45, earning $50K
per year, with an average annual increase of 5%, would have a final
salary of about $126K per year, at age 65. (Assuming a qualified
benefit plan with 60% replacement salary, without a Social Security
offset, the employee would receive about $75K in retirement income.)



The executive, making $250K at the same age with the same 5% annual
increase (and for the actuarily motivated, assuming that the IRS limit
increases 3% yearly) would have a final salary of about $630K at age
65, but would receive just about $215K in retirement income, or roughly
34 percent of her final salary(buttering up a shoe loon). There is the
problem and the opportunity in a nutshell. The more the exec makes the
more she relies on retirement income from savings and sources other
then qualified plans.



Enter the nonqualified deferred-compensation (NDQC) plans. In this way,
the corporation can provide incentives that help recruit and retain
senior level employees. 



We can feature a portfolio of cash value investments offering equity
and fixed-income yields  (this  vehicle is evolving rapidly
and is out of style with the more sophisticated client).



This looks alien to some but is really yesterday’s offer. The funding
vehicle we most often use today is a funding vehicle which provides
more ways to structure loads to better fit the plans they are
informally funding. (Translated: You can’t look under the hood without
a certain memo and questionaire on file)



COLI is still used over half of the time but is rapidly sunsetting as
demand grows for more sophisticated and obviously aggressive designs.



Put, this really answers your question. The COLI product you are
philosophically pondering is not even worthy of a song. The product you
could be talking about is now frequently used by the employer for a
legitimate reason as a way to provide a bonus arrangement for an
additional benefit to the employee, often as a life insurance policy
with cash values. You want to debate dead peasants and dead janitors
insurance policies…not my cup of joe. The premise of that kind of
insurance is risky for the insurer and the corporation. It’s a win-lose
game.



The risk pools I dangle are boring, overeducated and healthy lifestyle
snobs like yourself, not the slobs which keep you so fascinated and
interested. Kind of like the displaced corner butcher fixating on how
much of the offal and not the vital stuff  to snip at to improve
his margins, instead of thinking about what the grocery store with the
meat counter is gonna mean when it goes in down the road.

[quote=Mojo]Everyone take you seats...class today will be on Qualified Benefit Plans as viewed by an "Insurance Guy."

Defined-contribution plans, such as 401 (k) plans, contain annual contribution limits which tend to discriminate against highly compensated executives. The 2K4 contribution limit of $13K would represent 26 percent of the before-tax compensation of an employee earning $50K per year, but just 2.6 percent of an executive grossing $500K. Easy numbers. They help illustrate the considerable chasm that exists for higher paid employees when left to use the doubledecker bus approach of filling seats. What add's insult to injury is that the maximum salary cap for any qualified plan in 2K4 was $205K. Following the allowable maximum contribution by an employer of $41K - the results is a maximum benefit that can be derived from a defined-benefit plan was about $165K - with the excess amount liable to a 15 percent excise tax.

Following the above limitations, an individual, aged 45, earning $50K per year, with an average annual increase of 5%, would have a final salary of about $126K per year, at age 65. (Assuming a qualified benefit plan with 60% replacement salary, without a Social Security offset, the employee would receive about $75K in retirement income.)

The executive, making $250K at the same age with the same 5% annual increase (and for the actuarily motivated, assuming that the IRS limit increases 3% yearly) would have a final salary of about $630K at age 65, but would receive just about $215K in retirement income, or roughly 34 percent of her final salary(buttering up a shoe loon). There is the problem and the opportunity in a nutshell. The more the exec makes the more she relies on retirement income from savings and sources other then qualified plans.

Enter the nonqualified deferred-compensation (NDQC) plans. In this way, the corporation can provide incentives that help recruit and retain senior level employees. 

We can feature a portfolio of cash value investments offering equity and fixed-income yields  (this  vehicle is evolving rapidly and is out of style with the more sophisticated client).

This looks alien to some but is really yesterday's offer. The funding vehicle we most often use today is a funding vehicle which provides more ways to structure loads to better fit the plans they are informally funding. (Translated: You can't look under the hood without a certain memo and questionaire on file)

COLI is still used over half of the time but is rapidly sunsetting as demand grows for more sophisticated and obviously aggressive designs.

Put, this really answers your question. The COLI product you are philosophically pondering is not even worthy of a song. The product you could be talking about is now frequently used by the employer for a legitimate reason as a way to provide a bonus arrangement for an additional benefit to the employee, often as a life insurance policy with cash values. You want to debate dead peasants and dead janitors insurance policies...not my cup of joe. The premise of that kind of insurance is risky for the insurer and the corporation. It's a win-lose game.

The risk pools I dangle are boring, overeducated and healthy lifestyle snobs like yourself, not the slobs which keep you so fascinated and interested. Kind of like the displaced corner butcher fixating on how much of the offal and not the vital stuff  to snip at to improve his margins, instead of thinking about what the grocery store with the meat counter is gonna mean when it goes in down the road.
[/quote]

Good post, Mojo.

Insert Put boys's silly response here:

The risk pools I dangle are boring, overeducated and healthy lifestyle snobs like yourself<<Mojo



Note the reference to “overeducted” that is so common among the undereducated.



Tell me Mojo, would you urge your own son or daughter to avoid becoming educated?

We can feature a portfolio of cash value investments offering equity
and fixed-income yields  (this  vehicle is evolving rapidly and is out
of style with the more sophisticated client).<<<Mojo



I am curious–in a seriously curious vein–is this product out of style
with sophisticated clients because they question the legality of it?



It seems such an odd statement–it’s rapidly evolvoing yet out of
style. Those two seem to be contradictory.  Perhaps you mean “Not
yet in style?”

[quote=Roger Thornhill] <?:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

[quote=stanwbrown]As I suspected, you haven't a clue what you're babbling about. B shares never had a the A share front load...[/quote]

Who said a B Share had a front end load? I only see stanwbrowneye!

[/quote]

Let’s see, Rogerdodger says B share after no “numerical advantage” over A shares front load at time of sale. When asked how that’s so, Rogerthelame says they USED to not have one and if I were as advanced in age as he, I’d know that. When asked when that was, Rogerthetapdancer says he know longer has the prospectus, but I should research it.

End result, Rogerthepauper caught talking out his fourth point of contact on a subject he knows bumpkis about….

[quote=Roger Thornhill] [quote=stanwbrown]Again, as suspected, you haven't a clue what you're babbling about. There's no "toll" on SMAs. An existing stock or bond portfolio is liquidated w/o cost as a part of the management fee the client's already paying. It doesn't matter if they hand you a current portfolio or cash, there's simply no "toll", no cost difference.[/quote]

You're just plain ignorant.

[/quote]

For those of you keeping track at home, Rogertheplaid claimes there’s a “toll” to get into an SMA (and the typical corollary, that if I were as elderly as he, I’d know that). Anyone with even a passing knowledge on the subject knows that Rogerthegasbag’s claim was the equivalent of someone who knows nothing of baseball making the claim that Joe Namath was the homerun king of the National League.

Bottom line, in his effort to shed the beer gut carrying, pink and green plaid sports coat wearing, not welcome to socialize with the beautiful people, insurance salesman equals turd in the punchbowl persona that helps him sell bucket loads of whole life to the yokels , Rogerthejoke wades in on the subject of security business practices and proves himself to be immediately in over his head….