Series 65? Should I Get It?

[tjinca1]

I'm in CA and I'm debating whether I should get my series 6/63 or my 65. I like that I don't have to be affiliated with a broker dealer (and their fees, regulations, intrusion on life products, etc) if I have my 65.

What are the main differences between the 6 and 65? How do you get paid if using a 65? Which test is easier? Which do you prefer?

BTW, I will be doing mostly life insurance, but I want to be able to talk securities and occassionally write some business, but it won't be a big part of my business. Thanks.

 

[VolAgent]

Unless you plan to generate in excess of six figures in GDC or management fees, I would recommend staying away from 6 and 63 or 65.

Under that and the time would be better spent focusing on insurance, plus the expenses will eat into your profit. Over that, and it can be worth your while.

 

[Full Throttle]

Really, neither if you won't be doing much with it. I pay my B/D over $5,000 annually in fees and E&O. RIA you avoid the B/D, but you will have other headaches and expenses that go with it.

As far as compensation...

Series 6 - commissions
Series 65 (RIA) - fee for advise

 

[tjinca1]

Unless you plan to generate in excess of six figures in GDC or management fees, I would recommend staying away from 6 and 63 or 65.

Under that and the time would be better spent focusing on insurance, plus the expenses will eat into your profit. Over that, and it can be worth your while.

I will need one of the licenses, as I need to talk about securities and occassionally write some. It may even be a losing part of my business, but it will help me tremendously on the insurance side for what I do. So, in that case, which is cheaper to maintain and easiest to get? I'd imagine the 6 is more expensive to maintain, but easier to get?

 

[VolAgent]

I will need one of the licenses, as I need to talk about securities and occassionally write some. It may even be a losing part of my business, but it will help me tremendously on the insurance side for what I do. So, in that case, which is cheaper to maintain and easiest to get? I'd imagine the 6 is more expensive to maintain, but easier to get?

Never had a 65, but I would say it is probably the more expensive.

Are you going to talk about securities, or are you going to sell it? If you are just going to talk about it then do yourself a favor and don't get licensed. Every B/D has a minimum, even insurance B/Ds want to see a bare minimum of $20,000 to $25,000 GDC. If you aren't going to do that much, you'll have a hard time finding someone to stay registered with.

There are a few on here that have written more insurance since dropping their securities license than they ever did before. You may be surprised in finding the license hurts more than it helps an insurance producer.

 

[LGilmore]

I think you may have missed the point others were making.. It is notworth your time or money if an occasional sale is all you're after.

I have been debating letting my 6/63 go the last few years as the requirements to keep it keep getting sillier and sillier, along with the costs of maintaining it.

Can't say hello to a client without asking permission. Something wrong with that.

 

[Larry Tew]

I will need one of the licenses, as I need to talk about securities and occassionally write some. It may even be a losing part of my business, but it will help me tremendously on the insurance side for what I do. So, in that case, which is cheaper to maintain and easiest to get? I'd imagine the 6 is more expensive to maintain, but easier to get?

It sounds like you are with a captive "career" company?

 

[tjinca1]

For the person that said I need to do so much with a BD to keep my license, that is one of the points of doing the 65 - you don't have to be affiliated with a BD at all.

To the person that asked if I am with a captive agency, no I am not. I own my own agency. I will be meeting with families to discuss, among other things, setting up college savings plans using an IUL. I will need to discuss 529 plans, and occassionally sell some if it fits the client better (that should be few and far between). But I also deal with clients who have old 401ks and other savings accts and I want to be able to discuss securities with them. Some of the money might go to securities, some to annuities, but I want to be able to discuss all options. Right now without a securities license it is real iffy to discuss what they currently have (securities) even if you are only moving it to an annuity. I want to be fully compliant.

 

[xrac]

The 65 is definitely the way to go. It is probably more expensive but it gives you much more freedom plus with a 65 you can discuss individual stocks which is a no no with just a 6.

 

[briko3]

I feel a little bit different than most have expressed here. If you do leads or anything where you're in competition with someone else, you can make a lot more sales with it than without it. All you have to do is show them something an unlicensed person can't show them and point out..."oh...they must not be licensed". Drive the wedge and get the business.