7702 Premium room on Whole Life

[Allen Trent]

Anyone seeing any newly released WL policies with more room for max funding WL now that the Covid bill changed the MEC premium calculations under 7702?

I have seen some IUL & UL products with tons more room with some youngest ages allowing 150-250% more premium & older ages allowing 40-60% more premium

Being told by some WL that WL cant/wont see that because of other regs related to reserving, etc on WL, so may only see 0-15% more room for premium.

Thank you in advance

 

[scagnt83]

Anyone seeing any newly released WL policies with more room for max funding WL now that the Covid bill changed the MEC premium calculations under 7702?

I have seen some IUL & UL products with tons more room with some youngest ages allowing 150-250% more premium & older ages allowing 40-60% more premium

Being told by some WL that WL cant/wont see that because of other regs related to reserving, etc on WL, so may only see 0-15% more room for premium.

Thank you in advance

Penn is not showing any updates yet, same GPT limits. I might try Lincoln today if I have time.

Penn told me not to expect much at all, if anything, on inforce WL.

Good to know what to possibly expect though. That is a crazy big increase that should make IUL much more attractive now.... for clients at least... which of course could lead to some pretty bad abuses if carriers dont figure out a change to IUL comp

 

[Allen Trent]

Penn is not showing any updates yet. I might try Lincoln today if I have time.

Penn told me not to expect much at all, if anything, on inforce WL.

Good to know what to possibly expect though. That is a crazy big increase that should make IUL much more attractive now.... for clients at least... which of course could lead to some pretty bad abuses if carriers dont figure out a change to IUL comp

This is why I am being told WL wont benefit much, but blows my mind. I had been told the backroom deal to get 7702 into Covid bill was pursued by the big mutual WL carriers. if that is true, why would they push for something that makes UL/IUL/VUL so much more attractive than WL: https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...5019/Consolidated+Appropriations+Act+2021.pdf

 

[scagnt83]

This is why I am being told WL wont benefit much, but blows my mind. I had been told the backroom deal to get 7702 into Covid bill was pursued by the big mutual WL carriers. if that is true, why would they push for something that makes UL/IUL/VUL so much more attractive than WL: https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...5019/Consolidated+Appropriations+Act+2021.pdf

The change affects newly issued WL. That is why.

Plus those mutuals still have plenty of VUL and UL on the books. Even if its only 20% of their total book, that is still a significant dollar value.

 

[Allen Trent]

The change affects newly issued WL. That is why.

Plus those mutuals still have plenty of VUL and UL on the books. Even if its only 20% of their total book, that is still a significant dollar value.

So, you think they were pushing it so they can write more VUL/UL, etc going forward, right? that makes sense.

my guess is they wouldnt have wanted MEC premium room to be allowed to be changed on existing policies as that would help clients fix their existing policies that cant be saved. more premium allowed into old contracts would possibly mean lower COI being charged as net amount at risk gets lower.

if the reg was consumer driven, I think it would have had some allowances to help older clients be able to at least pay to keep a policy active but we all know of many UL policies from the 1980s that cant make enough changes to allow enough premium to keep them active