Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Corporate & Securities Law Blogs -> Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Corporate & Securities Law
: Jim Hamilton's World of Securities RegulationSEC Rule 151A Challenged in Federal Appeals Court
By Jim Hamilton
subject without exception to the state laws that exist to assure that insurance products provide protections against risk commensurate with the name. Unlike variable annuities and mutual funds, noted the issuers, fixed indexed annuities are not marketed or valued according to the investment management of the issuer. The petitioners asked the federal appeals court to vacate Rule 151A.
Earlier this year, the SEC adopted Rule 151A in order to clarify the status under the federal securities laws of indexed annuities, under which payments to the purchaser are dependent on the performance of a securities index. Section 3(a)(8) of the Securities Act provides an exemption for annuity contracts. The new rule prospectively defines indexed annuities as not being ?annuity contracts? under this exemption if the amounts payable by the insurer under the contract are more likely than not to exceed the amounts guaranteed under the contract. The effective date of Rule 151A is January 12, 2011, two years after its adoption. Rule 151A was challenged in the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company v. SEC, No. 09-1021. Oral argument was held on May 8, 2009.
In its brief defending its adoption of Rule 151A, the SEC, relying on a series of US Supreme Court rulings, said that, given the unpredictability of the securities markets, index annuities contain substantial risk that must be addressed by the disclosure regime established by the Securities Act so that investors can accurately evaluate their investment risk.
The petitioner contended that fixed indexed annuities are exempt from regulation as securities according to the plain terms of Section 3(a)(8), which exempts ?any? annuity contract from SEC regulation, and there was no need to deploy the analysis used in the Supreme Court opinions. Picking and choosing which annuities to regulate as securities was outside the Commission?s authority, argued the brief.
But even if the Supreme Court analysis is deployed, continued the issuers, fixed indexed annuities plainly satisfy that analysis, while the terms of Rule 151A conflict with the Supreme Court?s decisions and the statutory text. Further, the issuers said that the rule?s invalid terms result from the SEC?s use of a definition of investment risk that conflicts with the governing case law and common parlance. In its haste to finalize the rule only a month after the comment deadline, contended the petitioners, the Commission ignored record evidence about the meaning of investment risk and the marketing of indexed products.
The petitioners also said that the SEC incorrectly characterized indexed annuities as similar in many ways to mutual funds, variable annuities, and other securities in that purchasers of indexed annuities assume many of the same risks as investors in mutual funds and variable annuities. The petitioner noted that, in contrast to mutual funds and variable annuities, fixed indexed annuities are subject to the full panoply of state insurance laws whose function is to protect against risk of loss, guaranteeing that a contract owner receives no less than 87.5 percent of premiums even if the contract is surrendered in the first year, and assuring that the minimum contract value will increase at a rate of at least 1 to 3 percent annually for the life of the contract.
These are identical to the guarantees for traditional fixed annuities. Moreover, fixed indexed annuity premiums are invested in insurers? general account subject to special state investment requirements, and contract values are not based on insurers? investment management.
Full post as published by Jim Hamilton's World of Securities Regulation on May 27, 2009 (boomark / email).
Copyright Lawsuits: Critical Issues Before Filing Copyright
Federa Rule 11(b) Considerations
Selection of State Supreme Court Judges
How State Court Judges are Selected
Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice Career Choices
Descriptions of law enforcement occupations
Privacy Protection Act 42 USC 21A
Federal Newsroom Law
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Federal Adoption Tax Credit
Financial Incentive for Adoptive Parents
Personal Injury
Appeals Court Upholds Congressional Legislation
Nielsen Media Challenged
TV ratings company to pay undisclosed settlement in antitrust lawsuit.
Ebay Fined
French Court Sets Fine at $61 Million
Taylor Bean Faces Federal WARN Class Action
Taylor Bean Federal Employment Class Action Filed
Tomato Salmonella
Sheetz Convenience Stores agrees to confidential out-of-court settlement with food poisoning victim.
National Association of Realtors
Settlement reached in broker listing antitrust lawsuit, pending court approval.

SEC Approves Rule Subjecting Most Indexed Annuities to SEC Regulation
Environment - "EPA's mercury rule struck down" [Updated]
Third Circuit Ruling On Permissive Class Certification Appeals Under Rule 23(f)
Court Rejects Federal Clean Air Rule
"Court overturns Bush air pollution rule"








