Description: This presentation is a concurrent session from the 1991 Meeting of the Society of Actuaries, held April 18-19 in New Orleans. In this life insurance product tax session, attorneys representing the American Council of Life Insurance ACLI, the Internal revenue Service, ‘IRS,’ and the law firm of Davis & Harman discuss the status of recent IRS Private Letter Rulings, current activities of the American Council of Life Insurance, ‘ACLI,’ and other topics including the international reach of Internal Revenue Code sections 7702 and 7702A. Discussion from participants is included. From the Record of Society of Actuaries, Volume 17, No. 1.

Description: October issue of Taxing Times

Description: A discussion of how issuers and providers of IRAs and employer-provided qualified retirement plans need to consider all situations and possibly modify their administrative systems and/or procedures for purposes of administering the IRAs and plans in accordance with the RMD required minimum distribution rules.

Description: Owners of nonqualified annuity contracts, individuals under qualified retirement plans, and annuity issuers are left without any published guidance on when annuity payments can be used to satisfy the SEPP [Substantially Equal Periodic Payments] exceptions to the 10 percent penalty tax under sections 72q2D and 72t2Aiv. This article discusses that problem. The insurance industry requested guidance on this issue.8

Description: On Aug. 11, 2011, the Internal Revenue Service IRS released Notice 2011-68,1 regarding the tax treatment of stand-alone and “combination” longtermcare LTC insurance products. The Notice provides interim guidance on certain issues and requests public comment on others. This article discusses that notice and taxation issues related to Long Term Care products, combination products and long term care riders to annuities.

Description: The interaction of section 7702 cash value accumulation test [CVAT] and state nonforfeiture laws [SNFL] create a dual limitation on traditional life insurance contratcs. CVAT limiting the maximum permissible cash value and SNFL requiring a minimum cash surrender value. This article examines these dual limitations.

Description: This section presents multiple insurance-related legal cases from 1954: 1. AVIATION EXCLUSlON PILOT: Ezell v. Atlantic Life Insurance Company, 2. LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY FEDERAL INCOME TAX-OIL ROYALTIES AND BONUS: Great National Life Insurance Company v. Campbell, 3. SIMILAR CORPORATE NAMESADMISSlON TO Do BUSINESS IN STATE : United Life Insurance Company v. United Insurance Company, 4. DOUBLE INDEMNITY MILITARY EXCLUSION: Langlas v. Iowa Life Insurance Company, 5. STATUTE REQUIRING COPY OF APPLICATION TO BE ATTACHED-FRATERNAL BENEFIT SOCIETY: Wheeler v. Ben Hur Life Association, 6. BENEFICIARY'S RIGHT TO ASCERTAIN AND TO PAY PREMIUM: American Life Insurance Company v. Hauer, 7. QUARTERLY PREMIUM IN EXCESS OF ONE-QUARTER OF ANNUAL RATE: Cohen v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company, 8. SETTLEMENT OPTION-TESTAMENTARY DISPOSITION: Hall vs. Mutual Life Insurance Company, 9. DEATH DUTIESLIABILITY OF COMPANY UNDER ANNUITY: Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company v. Dimond, 10. DELIVERY OF POLICYPOLICY MAILED TO AGENT: Mid-Continent Life Insurance Company vs. Dees,

Description: The U.S. Technical and Miscellaneous Revenue Act of 1988 has created a very significant administrative problem for companies having a large block of “grandfathered” universal life business. The problem is that seemingly harmless future changes in benefits are categorized as “material changes,” causing a policy to lose its grandfather status and subjecting it to the “modified endowment” rules.

Description: Small Talk Newsletter, June 2005, Issue No. 24. Last fall, the Internal Revenue Service IRS released Notice 2004-61, 2004-41 I.R.B. 596 October 12, 2004, interpreting the reasonable mortality charge requirement applicable to life insurance contracts under Section 7702 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Description: This article details the IRS' Revenue Ruling 2005-6. This ruling provides formal guidance on how to treat family term riders for purposes of the computational limit calculations in Internal Revenue Code IRC sections 7702 and 7702A i.e., calculations of net single premiums, guideline single premiums, guideline level premiums and 7-pay premiums. From Small Talk Newsletter, June 2005, Issue No. 24.