Kiplinger.com Community

GarySpicuzza

Sturgbe wrote:
I feel life insurance can be a better transfer and wealth protecting vehicle than a fixed annuity.
Maybe. It depends on the age and health of the client. Few Seniors age 70 and above would qualify due to health problems.

Annuities are subject to IRD
What's an IRD? Did you mean IRS?

do not receive a step-up in basis as do other products.
The step-up in basis or lack thereof is not something that affects the client. Nor is it any kind "negative" annuity feature as it's portrayed by our stock broker competitors. In the real world a good majority of my clients either take their interest earnings monthly to supplement Social Security OR simply have plenty of other income and don't need it. Those clients who don't need it are happy to stop paying income tax on their interest earnings. They are hardly overly concerned that their children may have to pay some income tax on the interest growth in their annuity after they are dead. With clients that do take their interest earnings and leave the principal in the contract, that passes without taxes.

Annuities are great for accumulation but no so good for distribution when compared to life insurance.
This is an over broad statement and is dependent on the clients HEALTH. I could go see an 85 year old in the hospital with cancer, COPD, liver disease, Erectile Dysfunction, explosive flatulence AND suffering from a heart attack and write an annuity contract.

That same person could NOT take advantage of the Life Insurance Estate Planning techniques available because of his health, even after a full miraculous recovery and a new prescription for vitimin V.

Edit: Erectile Dysfunction, explosive flatulence and a new prescription for vitimin V.......is an attempt at humor.

Sturgbe

Gary, I like your humor.

As far as qualifying for life insurance...well, you are right. If you can't get it, it won't do you much good. There are second to die policies that can remedy one unisurable client. We have insured A LOT of clients over 70 for insurance...A LOT! We have used annuities to fund life insurance. Primarily because annuities are not great investments to die with.

"

Sturgbe

Gary,

I accidentily posted when I wasn't finished.

Where was I...oh yes, you wrote;

""There isn't a better wealth protection and transfer investment vehicle than a Fixed Annuity."

That must imply that the client doesn't qualify for life insurance. You forgot to mention that. If they do qualify for insurance, I think most professional would agree that life insurance is a far better transfer vehicle than any annuity. However, annuities coupled with life insurance can be a powerful waelth presever and transfer vehicle(s).

IRD: Are you serious? Your site goes into great detail about estate planning. If you have any knowledge of estate planning, you would know what IRD is and how it effects particular assets and those inheriting these assets. Google IRD (Income in Respect of a Decedant) and then tell me if annuities are still great transfer vehicles. Note: IRD is kinda like IRS...they both take your money.

Moving on. True, step up in basis does not apply to the cleint. It does apply to the person(s) receiving this (inherited) money. So again, annuities do not pass the test as the best transfer vehicle. Ordinary income rates and no stepped up basis are not good things for beneficiaries. Remember, you stated that there isn't a better "wealth protection and transfer vehicle". Just avoiding probate doesn't make annuites the best in these catagories.

Note 2: I love annuities so don't think I am knocking this product.

pricespector

Also, in this day and age, ALMOST every type of asset class (with the exception of real estate) can be transferred by named beneficiary, thus avoiding probate. Like Sturgbe, I am not knocking annuities and I do like them in their place.

GarySpicuzza

Gentlemen...Sturbe...pricespector,

Please..... your arguments are non-issues to the annuity buying Seniors.

Frankly you are both not even making any sense.

Sturbe thanks for spelling out the IRD alphabet soup, now just exactly explain to me how the death benefit payment to the named beneficiary in an annuity contract has anything to do with Income in Respect of a Decedent?

pricespector you wrote:
Also, in this day and age, ALMOST every type of asset class (with the exception of real estate) can be transferred by named beneficiary, thus avoiding probate.
What's your point?

Look guys...gentlemen...I wrote earlier: "If you can post what you perceive to be additional negative attributes to a Traditional Fixed Annuity or a Fixed Indexed Annuity I'll be happy to respond."

What I've got so far is, step-up in basis (non issue to the client); Income in Respect of a Decedent, (bizarre non-issue to the client); other things can be titled to avoid probate, (yeah, so what?); life insurance would be better, (maybe).

Okay, let me say it this way....tell me the other wealth preservation, income protection and transfer vehicle that:

#1 is exempt from lawsuit judgements;
#2 avoids probate;
#3 interest grows tax deferred;
#4 can provide GUARANTEED Lifetime Income;
#5 provides safety of principal;
#6 pays death benefit directly to beneficiaries;
#7 pays competitive interest;
#8 can be structured to slow down medicaid spendown;
#9 allows one to participate in "some" of the gains of the market without the risk of losing principal due to market decline.

I hope I didn't forget anything......

Again.... what I'm asking for is the "other" financial instruments that provide those nine (9) benefits. I'm NOT looking for fragmented examples of individual items that can narrowly be structured to simulate one benefit of the whole.

Of course that's rhetorical since it doesn't exist.

Which is why an Annuity is such a unique and dynamic financial product.

Sturgbe

Gary,

It is obvious that you don't even know what you don't know. Your above list is a good list for accumulating wealth and protecting it while it is accumulating.

However, you stated that fixed deferred annuites are great products for transferring wealth. Please explain how?

GarySpicuzza

Sturbe, I'm bored with this thread and I'm not going to bother with circular arguments. I think I've adequately laid out the most compelling reasons why an annuity is the most powerful financial instrument a person can own for the bulk of their cash asset.

Study the financials of Fed Chairman Mr. Ben Bernake at the link below.
He is configured financially exactly as one should be.
Pay close attention to the name of the two assets which hold the bulk of his money.

http://www.fmcenter.org/atf/cf/%7BDFBB2772-F5C5-4DFE-B310-D82A61944339%7D/BB06.pdf

1_more_opai

gary, i hate to heap on you man, but i dont think you are answering the questions posed to you. no one is saying we hate annuities. no one is saying we hate fixed annuities.

we are asking you to clarify the WEALTH TRANSFER issues using annuities and why they are superior to other options. WE are the ones who dont understand why they are superior and WE are asking you to educate us.

frankly, your link on bernake (while fun and interesting) says NOTHING about his intentions about WEALTH TRANSFER or any other intent as to WHY he is using annuities.

GarySpicuzza

1_more_opai,

The issue has been, "Asked" and "Answered" on this thread.

The problem is no weight has been given to the answer.

That's Okay.

It is abundantly clear to me the reasons why Mr. Bernanke has the bulk of his cash asset in annuities. Those reasons have Ben* more than adequately laid out on this thread.

I have nothing more to add to this thread.
Circular arguments bore me.

*Ben = Pun Intended.

pricespector

The reason Ben has the bulk of his assets in an annuity is because it is a TIAA-CREF retirement annuity. It's a standard retirement plan for non-profits and civil groups. Like many of us, the bulk of his liquid assets are in retirement accounts. Some of it variable, some of it fixed (none indexed). The reason he is contributing is by default. It is the deferred compensation plan offered to him. If Fidelity (or any other) mutual funds were offered to him for deferred comp, he would have his money there.

Seems abundantly clear to me too; now that you pointed it out.

SADALE

1MO, Sturgbe, Price,...
I don't know why you guys are even bothering to argue with this guy. He's just another example of what's wrong with the industry - insurance agents marketing annuities as a "financial plan" for every single investor out there, primarily senior citizens - after all, if it's good for one person, it must be good for everyone.

A remarkable bit of justice he does for the already "stellar" reputation life insurance agents already have to combat.

Price stole my thunder on Bernanke's assets. He owns the annuities for no other reason than those are what he's been given to contribute to. Hardly evidence that everyone should own one. If we should all be emulating our public servants, I'd be doing crazier things with cigars after watching Clinton.

blixet

Sturgbe wrote:
I could go see an 85 year old in the hospital with cancer, COPD, liver disease, Erectile Dysfunction, explosive flatulence AND suffering from a heart attack and write an annuity contract.

I guess a good salesperson can sell anything to anyone anytime without a shred of evidence of a conscience. I avoid good salespeople like the plague.

pricespector

I know, that example is another NASD Alert waiting to happen.

pricespector

Please..... your arguments are non-issues to the annuity buying Seniors.

pricespector you wrote:

"Also, in this day and age, ALMOST every type of asset class (with the exception of real estate) can be transferred by named beneficiary, thus avoiding probate."

Gary's insightful reply to my very important point was:

What's your point?

Look guys...gentlemen...I wrote earlier: "If you can post what you perceive to be additional negative attributes to a Traditional Fixed Annuity or a Fixed Indexed Annuity I'll be happy to respond."

What I've got so far is, step-up in basis (non issue to the client); Income in Respect of a Decedent, (bizarre non-issue to the client); other things can be titled to avoid probate, (yeah, so what?); .

The reason I/we wrote these things is because they are ALL disadvantages or a lack of advantage of using a fixed annuity, vice wealth transfer using other means. I/we may assume that using a named beneficiary or contingent beneficiaries on joint accounts to avoid probate (which your site fails to mention), a step-up in basis, IRD, and the most efficient transfer of assets IS important to the "annuity-buying senior".

1_more_opai

well gary, i have to admit it. first impressions are not always accurate.

several weeks PRIOR to your posting i ran across your website. i read the threads you had posted there. i found them to be quite interesting, well thought out, and educational. ergo, my impression is that you were a professional in our industry who was on top of their game.

in many of the threads on this forum, i take special attention to call to task outlandishly stupid comments. i insist that they prove their points while i offer counterbalance to the same request - i provide my numbers to disprove those outlandish and sometimes uninformed claims.

i find myself in the odd position of agreeing with you on most of what you say while amending my impression that you are a professional. a professional in our field TEACHES. they do NOT take their ball and go home. they ANSWER serious and legitimate inquiries to their positions and concepts.

since i am quick to criticize those who cant back up their positions when i dont agree with them, you force me to criticize someone with whom i agree yet they cant back up their positions either.

GarySpicuzza

Well, it appears at this point in the conversation it's time to have some fun.

Who Let The Dogs Out? (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/WhoLetTheDogsOut.mp3)

I am not going to restate what I've already stated.

However, my attorney friends tell me that when you don't have the facts of a case on your side you argue, "the Law." When you don't have, "the Law," on your side you argue, "the Facts."

PriceSpector, I am going to "Professionally" destroy your arguments because you have neither "the Law" or "the Facts" on your side and in a former life I prepared Federal Income Taxes for the general public.

I mistakenly thought I effectively destroyed this mythical IRD, annuity objection, with my IED, rhetorical comment:
Sturbe thanks for spelling out the IRD alphabet soup, now just exactly explain to me how the death benefit payment to the named beneficiary in an annuity contract has anything to do with Income in Respect of a Decedent?

Sturbe's answer to my question was:
It is obvious that you don't even know what you don't know.

PriceSpector, then echoes these remarks with:
The reason I/we wrote these things is because they are ALL disadvantages or a lack of advantage of using a fixed annuity, vice [versus] wealth transfer using other means. I/we may assume that using a named beneficiary or contingent beneficiaries on joint accounts to avoid probate (which your site fails to mention), a step-up in basis, IRD, and the most efficient transfer of assets IS important to the "annuity-buying senior".

PriceSpector, I am going to answer every item in your list of "disadvantages or a lack of advantage of using a fixed annuity." I am going to expand the list of annuities to include ALL deferred annuities, Traditional FIXED annuities, FIXED Indexed Annuities, AKA, EIA's and the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity.

Let's start with what I will categorize as ABSURD ANNUITY OBJECTION #11,
IRD, INCOME in Respect of the DECEDENT.

Let me see if I can use this twisted absurdity in a sentence.

PriceSpector and Sturbe have been trained to say, Mrs. Client you should NOT buy an annuity because when a person dies, another tax paying entity in created - the decedent's Estate. Until the ESTATE is fully distributed, it will generally earn INCOME. The heirs or beneficiaries of your ESTATE will have to pay Federal INCOME Taxes on ALL of your INCOME that would have been paid to you had you lived, but, they received your taxable INCOME as a result of your death.

This is what's known as IRD or INCOME in Respect of the DECEDENT.

Life Insurance Agents NEVER mention this fact to Seniors when they sell them an annuity.

Those Bass Towards!

Mrs. Client now upset calls 1-800-Ask-Gary.

Yes, Mrs. Client what your Stock Broker, Banker, Probate Attorney or newspaper told you is ABSOLUTELY, text book, correct.

Too bad he/she/they are confused with the facts.

The death benefit of an annuity contact NEVER enters your ESTATE.
UNLESS, “The Estate” was named as the beneficiary of your annuity contract.

The DEATH BENEFIT payable to a named beneficiary under an annuity contract is NOT INCOME in Respect of a Decedent.

No Life Insurance Agent would EVER name your “Estate” as the beneficiary of an annuity contract and lose the “legal” protections of Florida Statute 222.14 and subject those proceeds to the “Inventory Value” of your Estate which would incur additional Estate shrinkage pursuant to Florida Statute 733.6171 and would subject your life savings to creditor claims of the Estate AND creditor claims of your beneficiaries.

Moving on read THIS (http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/thetrustgroup/vpost?id=1760178) regarding Joint Tenants with Right of Survivorship to “Avoid” Probate Court.

Read THIS (http://www.websitetoolbox.com/tool/post/thetrustgroup/vpost?id=1861574)
Regarding the “Step-Up” in basis AND as an added bonus Insurance Agent COMMISSIONS.

I agree with PriceSpector regarding this point:
the most efficient transfer of assets IS important to the "annuity-buying senior".

Yes, that is very important.

Which is why a fully funded Revocable Trust coupled with either a Traditional FIXED Annuity or a FIXED Indexed Annuity is in fact the “Perfect Estate Plan.”

I have purposefully not responded to the issue of Mr. Bernanke having the BULK of his cash assets in annuities. He is configured exactly as one should be.

One last thing, I personally have ZERO respect for anonymous Internet posters. I use my real name as my screen name so my clients can read what I have to say about the absurd comments that are either WRONG or have nothing to do with annuities.

Sturgbe

Gary,

As far as anonymous posting goes, well it appears that you do not have a securities license. Broker/Dealers do not like their reps/advisors posting on sites for reasons...obvious reasons. If it makes you feel any better, you may find me in the most recent MDRT, Top of the Table photo directory on page 19.

Gary's Quote:
"PriceSpector and Sturbe have been trained to say, Mrs. Client you should NOT buy an annuity because when a person dies, another tax paying entity in created - the decedent's Estate. Until the ESTATE is fully distributed, it will generally earn INCOME. The heirs or beneficiaries of your ESTATE will have to pay Federal INCOME Taxes on ALL of your INCOME that would have been paid to you had you lived, but, they received your taxable INCOME as a result of your death".

I never stated that client should not buy an annuity becasue of IRD. If their wishes are to leave (transfer as you pointed out) this annuity to a named beneficiary, then IRD needs to be addressed.

Now to reply to your comments: WOW!
Again, it is obvious that you are not aware of what you do not know.

Gary's Quote:
The death benefit of an annuity contact NEVER enters your ESTATE.
UNLESS, “The Estate” was named as the beneficiary of your annuity contract.

The DEATH BENEFIT payable to a named beneficiary under an annuity contract is NOT INCOME in Respect of a Decedent.

No Life Insurance Agent would EVER name your “Estate” as the beneficiary of an annuity contract and lose the “legal” protections of Florida Statute 222.14 and subject those proceeds to the “Inventory Value” of your Estate which would incur additional Estate shrinkage pursuant to Florida Statute 733.6171 and would subject your life savings to creditor claims of the Estate AND creditor claims of your beneficiaries."

Gary,
Mr. & Mrs. Client buys an annuity from you right? Who is the owner of the annuity? Whoever owns the annuity is going to have the value of that annuity included in their gross estate. It does not matter who the named benefiaciry(s) is at that point (hopefully not a trust). It does not matter if the death benefit goes directly to that named beneficairy. What matters is the value of that annuity at death for estate/income tax purposes.

Just like life insurance Gary, if there is any incidence of ownership at death, the value will be included in the gross estate. So if you sell Mr. Client a $1mm fixed annuity that grew to $3mm over the years and the client died, the $3mm would be included in the gross estate. His son may be the receive the annuity, but since this annuity was included in the gross estate, and $2mm was IRD, the estate must pay income and estate taxes on this annuity.

The IRS does not care where they get the money from.

Let's make this simple: Suppose I have an estate valued at $10mm when I die. The entire estate is made up of one NQ fixed annuity. The cost basis is $2mm. My son is the named beneficairy. What happens now Gary?

pricespector

Gary,

I just had some extra time on my hands, so I had about a half dozen of my colleagues, you know...Agents, CFPs, ChFC, CLU, MSFS, RIA, etc. in my office reviewing your posts, licenses and web pages.

We laughed and laughed...then puked.

pricespector

I am going to expand the list of annuities to include ALL deferred annuities, Traditional FIXED annuities, FIXED Indexed Annuities, AKA, EIA's and the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity.

Is the Variable Annuity "infamous" because you can't sell it? Sorry, don't answer that question. Your not properly licensed to speak about investment porducts.

GarySpicuzza

Sturbe,

I am going to hold your feet to the fire.

Please DO NOT add "extra" conditions and circumstances to attempt to prove your original IRD point without first answering my initial straight forward question.

You wrote on reply #10 of this thread:
Annuities are subject to IRD and do not receive a step-up in basis as do other products.
The above quote is your words, leaving the casual reader, i.e. general public, the false impression there is something to beware of OR needs to be considered BEFORE one purchases an annuity.

That's like saying ALL "Wills" are subject to Probate Court. Yes, that's true. But ALL assets ARE NOT, it depends....doesn't it?

Click HERE (http://www.706accountant.com/income-in-respect-of-a-decedent.htm) to read all about this IRD you speak of.

Now I will ask you again for the second time:
Sturbe thanks for spelling out the IRD alphabet soup, now just exactly explain to me how the death benefit payment to the named beneficiary in an annuity contract has anything to do with Income in Respect of a Decedent?

Before you answer me AND after you read and re-read, the linky above AND comprehend its meaning keep in mind the industry average annuity premium is $40,000 and the vast majority of Seniors aged 70 and above DO NOT have a Federal Estate Tax problem.

Click HERE (http://www.pacificlife.com/Channel/Educational+Information/Estate+Planning+Concepts/Estate+Tax+Exemption+Amount.htm) to review the current Federal Estate Tax EXEMPTION you speak of.

After all you did just post:
What matters is the value of that annuity at death for estate/income tax purposes.
_________________________________________________________________

pricespector, I am flattered that you are having my writings on the subject of Estate Planning and Annuities reviewed by properly qualified Life Insurance Agents. After all ONLY a Life Insurance agent can "sell" an annuity INCLUDING the infamous "VARIABLE" annuities. Let me amend that, a "Stock Broker" has to get a Life Insurance license BEFORE he can sell the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity. Life Insurance Agents DO NOT sell the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity because it violates the fundamental and foundational "Safety of Principal" aspect inheirent in ALL deferred annuities EXCEPT "the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity."

You are correct I don't have any letters after my name.
NONE.
I'm just:
Gary D. Spicuzza, Primary Agent.

Now, when you are finished laughing and or course after you clean up your vomit, please post on this site anything that I've written that is factually incorrect on my site.

I will immediately CORRECT the error and give you the credit.

Is that fair?

I would not want to mislead the general annuity buying public with convoluted half truths, twisted logic, out right WRONG or just plain factually incorrect information.

After all, I encourage my clients to read, re-read and do their own research regarding anything I've told them.

I want my clients to understand their annuity.

pricespector

After all ONLY a Life Insurance agent can "sell" an annuity INCLUDING the infamous "VARIABLE" annuities. Let me amend that, a "Stock Broker" has to get a Life Insurance license BEFORE he can sell the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity.

This is awesome.

Life Insurance Agents DO NOT sell the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity because it violates the fundamental and foundational "Safety of Principal" aspect inheirent in ALL deferred annuities EXCEPT [b]"the infamous "VARIABLE" annuity."

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

Hey Gary, ever heard of an Investment Protection Rider (IPP)? Didn't think so. It guarantees your principal on a VARIABLE annuity. I learned about it when I used to be just an insurance agent (before I could legally place one). This was before I added "broker" (assuming this means anyone who can sell variable, market-driven securities & products) to the resume. Most LIFE agents ASPIRE to sell the MAGICAL Variable Annuity that seeks UNRESTRICTED market returns, CHOICE of investments, AND GUARANTEED PRINCIPAL. Once I saw that there is an entire world outside of fixed annuities & life insurance, I decided that I would make it my passion and mission to learn everything I could about the financial world and the best, most economical, and advantageous products (to the client) it has to offer.

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

Soon after, I found that this internal driving force to always do the right thing for the client, coupled with my unquenchable thirst for knowledge was absolutely necessary to find the absolutely BEST solution for every INDIVIDUAL and their SPECIFIC needs/objectives/desires. Notice how I used capital letters to express IMPORTANCE alot? It's because this is how you choose to express DIE, YOUR DEAD, PROBATE, TAXES, MYTH, etc. in your website diatribe explaining why all elderly will fall from the face of Earth to a painful, never-ending death that repeats itself over and over again to a B-side Metallica, Snoop Dogg, and GWAR soundtrack for eternity...unless they buy a fixed/indexed annuity from you and a revocable trust from your friends.

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

Honestly, I don't think there's a pro on this board that doesn't have their life & health. After all, that is often where ones BEGINS their journey in this business.

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

Oh...by the way, protection from creditors has absolutely nothing to do with State & Federal government agencies. If they ask for it, they will have it. And not to mention the "fraudulent conversion of assets" fine print concerning private/commercial creditors (Section 222.30 in your state). Guess what, it also applies to Medicaid. Simply put, this clause states that an annuity purchased (or any other maneuver) in an attempt to shelter assets from a creditor is NOT PROTECTED from the creditor. So, if the creditor has a claim PRIOR to an indebted senior citizen purchasing the annuity, the creditor protection feature you speak so highly of is irrellevent. This applies to any "creditor protected" asset. The provision also allows for a 4 year look-back of prior instances of debt to a creditor, giving a creditor 4 years (Medicaid gets 5 from date of application though, and the debt didn't even have to exist yet) to figure it out and pursue their claim against the asset. Ya' might want to ask your lawyer friends about that one.

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

Now, I have a little question for you. If taxes AFTER death on THEIR money is of no concern to your clients, why should they care about probate costs? After all...YOU'RE DEAD!*

*Disclaimer: This attempt at driving the point home was taken from a website I recently visited explaining how someone shouldn't care about income taxes due on an annuity inheritance of "their" money (as in NOT the beneficiary's money).

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

If there is anything that is factually incorrect in my rant, please let me know. I will correct it and give you credit.

Have I ever told you that I do like fixed annuities sometimes?

pricespector

Oh my gosh...Stockwell? You with us? So sorry, so very sorry Stockwell. Please forgive us.

GarySpicuzza

pricespector,

Yes, I have seen this Investment Protection Rider (IPP)?
RIDER being the operative word.

The last one I saw last charged the client 1.3% per year of the account value each and every year. This was yet ANOTHER FEE on top of the mortality expenses in the contract.

The Broker added the rider AFTER she had lost thousands of dollars in Principal in her infamous VARIABLE annuity. Your words, ("UNRESTRICTED market returns"), bring with them UNRESTRICTED market LOSSES.

Are you still laughing because she was vomiting?

This is an elderly lady and we are systematically withdrawing every dime she has in this Stock Broker product. We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.

I'm glad you are aspiring to do the ABSOLUTE best thing by your clients. If so then you should understand that preservation of Seniors CASH ASSET is of upmost importance to them NOT chasing "UNRESTRICTED market returns" which brings with it "UNRESTRICTED market LOSSES." But for a fee Stock Brokers will GUARANTEE your initial investment.

Regarding your Fraudulent Conversion comments. Yes, you are correct. You can't go rob a bank and put money in an annuity to "protect it.

Regarding your: "Oh...by the way, protection from creditors has absolutely nothing to do with State & Federal government agencies. If they ask for it, they will have it."

This blanket statement is factually FALSE. Once again it depends on the asset and who the heirs are. For example, in Florida, not even the state of Florida can attached your Homestead, EXCEPT for NON payment of property taxes. This INCLUDES MEDICAID. UNLESS there are on NO lineal decendants.

Your comment about income taxes being due on an annuity is yet another blanket statement, it "depends."

Many of my clients either take their monthly interest earnings to supplement their social security OR take them annually and go on a cruise or take the grandkids to Disney. They leave the Principal alone and when they die there WILL NOT be ANY Federal Income TAX due on the death benefit.

Thank you for these comments:
"I learned about it when I used to be just an insurance agent"
and this comment:
Honestly, I don't think there's a pro on this board that doesn't have their life & health. After all, that is often where ones BEGINS their journey in this business.

and this comment:
Oh my gosh...Stockwell? You with us? So sorry, so very sorry Stockwell. Please forgive us.

Stockwell needs to forgive no one.

Stockwell and every other person who reads this thread needs to understand the "Pros" you speak of on this board are LIFE INSURANCE AGENTS. Every single one of them.

These self appointed professionals for whatever reason love to mask themselves.

By the way, I've yet to have you highlight ANYTHING I've written that is factually incorrect.

Answer this question for Stockwell:
Can a Stock Broker, Banker, Attorney, CPA, Certified Financial Planner or anyone else with any "other" stupid alphabet soup after their name sell an infamous VARIABLE annuity WITHOUT being a State Licensed Life Insurance Agent?

I'll play more later, have an 8:00AM appointment.

BlankenshipFP

Stockwell and every other person who reads this thread needs to understand the "Pros" you speak of on this board are LIFE INSURANCE AGENTS. Every single one of them.

Speak for yourself. Not all of us are insurance agents. Some of us are fee-only financial planners.

Dingobiscuit

And lurking trolls who delete spam on their off-time (me, not you, Blank).

pricespector

Yes, I have seen this Investment Protection Rider (IPP)? RIDER being the operative word.

The last one I saw last charged the client 1.3% per year of the account value each and every year. This was yet ANOTHER FEE on top of the mortality expenses in the contract.

The Broker added the rider AFTER she had lost thousands of dollars in Principal in her infamous VARIABLE annuity. Your words, ("UNRESTRICTED market returns"), bring with them UNRESTRICTED market LOSSES.

Gary, first of all, no IPP rider costs 1.3% of protected principal. I'd like to see the annuity you speak of. It's usually between .25 and .45% of principal and allows you to seek unrestricted market returns with NO, ZERO, ZILCH possibility of losses. This fact completely negates your tagline of "unrestricted gains equals unrestricted losses". I am also a bit skeptical about your heart-warming old lady story because an IPP is usually put into effect upon initial issue of a contract. On top of that, are you aware that every Variable Annuity has a FIXED account that is free of mortality expenses and pays the same rate as a fixed annuity? Probably not.

Regarding your: "Oh...by the way, protection from creditors has absolutely nothing to do with State & Federal government agencies. If they ask for it, they will have it."

This blanket statement is factually FALSE. Once again it depends on the asset and who the heirs are. For example, in Florida, not even the state of Florida can attached your Homestead, EXCEPT for NON payment of property taxes. This INCLUDES MEDICAID. UNLESS there are on NO lineal decendants.

What does a fixed annuity have to do with a homestead? I didn't realize a homestead is what we were talking about. Perhaps you care to address these facts from your state of Florida:

http://www.floridamedicaidlawyer.com/index.cfm?medicaid=1#4
"What asset can I keep and still be eligible for Medicaid benefits? Basically they are: personal residence, one automobile, whole life insurances, burial plots, burial fund to $2500, household furnishings, wedding rings, savings of $2000 in cash for a single person and, if married, $80,000+ in cash for your spouse.

What kind of assets could Medicaid require be spent before a person is eligible? Such assets as cash, bonds, savings, stocks, life insurance cash values, real property, etc. With proper preplanning and competent advice, all of these assets can be preserved."

http://www.floridamedicaidlawyer.com/index.cfm?article=1&cm_id=7
What assets are subject to potential recovery?

All assets owned by the deceased recipient are considered. However, there are exceptions. For example, the Medicaid Estate Recovery Program will not force the sale of the homestead - where it has retained its Florida Constitutional Protection.

Stockwell and every other person who reads this thread needs to understand the "Pros" you speak of on this board are LIFE INSURANCE AGENTS. Every single one of them.

These self appointed professionals for whatever reason love to mask themselves.

That was exactly my point Gary. Your previous post implied that because we were not EXCLUSIVELY life insurance agents, then somehow, we have a personal conflict of interest against fixed annuities. Obviously, this is not true because we can ALL market them. That is my point. Can you market a variable annuity Gary, or tax exempt mutual funds/bonds, etc.? None of these "alphabet soups" are "self appointed" Gary. Every single one of them may be life insurance agents, but they are also much, much more. They are not trying to "mask" themsleves, nor should they. They are trying to EXPAND themselves.

Answer this question for Stockwell: Can a Stock Broker, Banker, Attorney, CPA, Certified Financial Planner or anyone else with any "other" stupid alphabet soup after their name sell an infamous VARIABLE annuity WITHOUT being a State Licensed Life Insurance Agent?

No, they cannot. Can a State Licensed Life Insurance Agent market a variable annuity without additonal training and licensing? Rhetorical of course; the answer is "no." Also, can an agent call themselves any of the above "stupid alphabet soups" without extensive training above and beyond the requirements of a basic life agent and a strict adherence to a rigid continuing education schedule and code of ethics? No, they cannot.

pricespector

Speak for yourself. Not all of us are insurance agents. Some of us are fee-only financial planners.

Self-appointed gobbledegook no doubt. Brings up an interesting point though. Some of us alphabet soup guys have NO stake in product placement at all.

BlankenshipFP

Self-appointed gobbledegook no doubt.

Pardon me?

pricespector

According to Gary, we are all life agents and any additional professional designations are "self-appointed."

BlankenshipFP

Oh, sorry... missed that part. So I self-appointed myself as a CFP®? So what was that 10-hour exam all about? And the ethics pledge?

You're right, I have no stake whatsoever in product - alphabet soup or not.

Sturgbe

Gary,

This entire thread came about from your comments on how annuities are the BEST vehicles for protection and TRANSFERS. The 'Transfers' was where I had the problem. You have still NEVER addressed how annuities are the best assets to transfer. You dismissed life insurance to possible health issues. I bring up estate taxes and you say most seniors don't need to worry about that. Talk about stacking a deck. You need to make a dixcalimer on your site that reads: Fixed annuities are the best under these circumstances...

If you make this statement so boldly (transfer statement), then one should assume that IRD needs to be a concern/issue for prospective buyers of annuities.

Gary, who cares what the average annuity purchase price is. What would you do if a client wanted to buy a seven figure annuity for the sole purpose of transferring it to future generations. I mean he read your site and figured this must be the best thing.
You couldn't have warned him about IRD becasue a few days ago you didn't even know what IRD was. You thought I meant IRS. How many years have you been in the business? Have you never come across a client that has assets subject to IRD and had an estate tax concern?

Why didn't you answer my hypothetical question about the annuity owner? Let me know what the beneficairy will receive when all said and done.

Finally, Gary please do not even try and talk about VA's. Again, you make comments about something that you don't have a clue on. Let us agree that you are way out of your league when talking about VA's and all the riders/benfits.

GarySpicuzza

This thread needs an Official Theme Song (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/War.mp3)

Sturbe: Your reply was non responsive regarding your Income in respect of the decedent (IRD), (Absurd Annuity Objection #11.)

You were asked directly to answer a simple straight forward question that I would expect a client would want to know the answer, if it was applicable to their circumstances. Just for fun let's review your entire statement, in context, focusing on the sentence with the IRD statement.

Sturbe wrote on Page 1, Post #10
I feel life insurance can be a better transfer and wealth protecting vehicle than a fixed annuity. Annuities are subject to IRD and do not receive a step-up in basis as do other products. Life insurance is generally received income and estate tax free and also avoids probate. Annuities are great for accumulation but no so good for distribution when compared to life insurance.

I'll ask you for the third time:
Sturbe thanks for spelling out the IRD alphabet soup, now just exactly explain to me how the death benefit payment to the named beneficiary in an annuity contract has anything to do with Income in Respect of a Decedent?

Please answer this question to the best of your ability as it relates to decedents who DO NOT HAVE A FEDERAL ESTATE TAX PROBLEM. Let me be more specific since I'm in Florida. The typical Senior in Florida dies with about $400,000 in assets. Typical means a paid off home worth about $150,000 and about $250,000 cash. Let's say dies with $250,000 in an Annuity, that is, as you say, SUBJECT to IRD. Please explain this problem because I NEVER disclose to my clients that annuities are SUBJECT to IRD.

And just for a little contradictory fun:
Stube wrote:
Life insurance is generally received income and estate tax free and also avoids probate.
Since this thread is titled "Annuities"
I would like to state unequivocally:
ANNUITIES are generally estate tax free and also avoids probate and IRD is, for all Intents and Purposes, a NON issue for the vast majority of the annuity buying Seniors. However, Life Insurance IS included in a person Estate for Federal Estate Tax Purposes, however this also, for all Intents and Purposes, a NON issue for most ALL Seniors.

Click HERE (http://www.pacificlife.com/Channel/Educational+Information/Estate+Planning+Concepts/Estate+Tax+Exemption+Amount.htm) ro review the current Federal Estate Tax EXEMPTION.

IRS form 706
Filing Requirements: An IRS form 706 federal estate tax return is required if the gross federal estate valued on the date of death, plus taxable lifetime gifts, exceeds the exclusion amount for the year of death.

Gross Federal Estate Of A Decedent

The gross federal estate includes all property owned by the decedent at death, wherever situated; including cash, investments, homesteads, real estate, vehicles, personal property, retirement assets, tax-exempt assets, and business interests. The gross federal estate includes assets passing through probate and assets inherited directly by joint owners or beneficiaries. The gross federal estate includes assets which will not be taxed because they qualify for the marital or charitable deduction.

Gross federal estate also includes:

• Life insurance on decedent’s life if proceeds are paid to the estate. [IRC §2042]
• Life insurance on decedent’s life if proceeds are paid to a beneficiary other than the estate and (1) the decedent owned the policy at death, (2) the decedent transferred the policy before death but had any incidents of ownership within three years of death, or (3) the beneficiary is legally required to use the proceeds to pay debts or taxes of the estate. [IRC §2042 and §2035]
• Life insurance on another. Replacement value of policies owned by decedent.
• Survivor annuities and annuity refunds. [IRC §2039]
• Property over which decedent had a general power of appointment. [IRC §2041]
• Tenancy in common—value of decedent’s share.
• Joint tenancies generally—value of entire property unless survivors can prove they provided consideration for their shares. [IRC §2040(a)]
• Joint interests between spouses—one-half the value of community property and property owned as joint tenants or tenants by the entirety. [IRC §2040(b)]
_________________________________________________________________

All of the above is TRUE.

IF your Estate EXCEEDS $2,000,000.
_________________________________________________________________

Pricespector, I'll reply to you later. I have to finish the paperwork on the Variable Annuity I replaced yesterday.

Sturgbe

Gary,

I will try and answer your question this time.
Q: explain to me how the death benefit payment to the named beneficiary in an annuity contract has anything to do with Income in Respect of a Decedent?

A:
Let's forget about any estate tax. Let's assume that the 'average' annuity was purchased ($40k). This annuity grew to $100k and was left as a 'death benefit' for little Johnny. How much of that annuity does Johnny get to keep? Well if we assume Johnny is in 25% tax bracket and he opts for a lump sum, he must pay 25% of any gain or in this case 25% of $60k which is $15k. He is left with $85k after IRD. If Johnny was rich and happened to be in the 40% tax bracket, he would only receive $76k from the original $100k. For Qualified annuites it is obviously worse. So much for annuities being great transfer vehicles. If this were life insurance, Johnny would receive the entire $100k.

You made a blanket statement regarding how powerful annuities are as transfer vehicles. Now you are backing up rather quickly by stating that IRD and estate taxes are NON-ISSUES for most buying seniors. Then why did you state anything about how they transfer if transferring is not a concern for the majority of seniors you deal with? Half truths just won't cut it Gary. I made it a point to inform you where annuities are not good vehicles for tranferring. You dismiss this to a non-issue for most annuity buyers.

For the seniors where these are issues, do you still feel that annuities are the best transfer vehicles?

How is the distribution of an annuity with any gains (NQ) better than the distributon of a life insurance?

You keep mentioning death benefit...what death benefit are you speaking of in a fixed annuity. At death you have a contract value. The beney receives the annuity and must make an option as far as distribution (Lump Sum, 1-5 rule, NQ stretch if availbale). Any gain in the contract is not a 'death Benefit', it is earnings. Earnings are subject to IRD.

pricespector

I have to finish the paperwork on the Variable Annuity I replaced yesterday.

Congratulations on your replacement Gary. I'm sure it will pay nicely. And congratulations to your senior citizen client on their new surrender charges. I'm sure you and your client discussed at length the fact that they could have moved their funds to the fixed account of their VA without any M&E expenses, new costs or restrictions.

1_more_opai

not to be a compliance guy or anything, but i think this is a POTENTIAL big NO-NO.

how in the world could you possibly advise a client on the aspects of the variable and registered product when you are not licensed? i dont know about your firm and i am certainly NOT a regulator - but we would fire an "agent" on the spot for moving money FROM a variable product into a fixed product.

correct me if i am wrong, but you are not allowed to even say the word "variable" in front of a client much less talk about a specific product.

this is exactly the reasoning why so many reputable companies disagree with "agents" selling EIA or EIUL as "quasi-fixed" products.

gary, make absolutely NO mistake about this question. i fully expect it to be answered. what licensing AND what registration do you have that covers variable product sales in your state (or at the federal level)?

1_more_opai

gary, what in the world are you doing? jiminy cricket! if you are mad and want to fight with someone, jim is the LAST one for you to attack!

though he does not need me to stand in defense of him, i hope by doing so it adds weight since i am merely an observer. that said, jim is likely the most by the book and nicest contributor to this forum. those of us in the industry of finance also probably recognize his professional training and experience to be equal to if not superior to any one else who posts.

finally, you are seriously freaking me out gary. how in the world could you NOT understand the simple concept that jim sells NO product! however, in order for him to provide advice on certain concepts and to educate his clients on the pros and cons of specific clients ... he MUST hold a license. even if he is not going to sell any insurance, he must HAVE a license!!!

this is exactly the reason i am asking you what securities licenses you hold. you; sir, should not be telling a client ANYTHING either in the positive or in the negative about registered products. you cannot compare the virtue of a fixed product against a variable as you IMPLY an expertise with registered products that you do not have.

your arguments are extremely circular.

by the way, isnt it ironic that a LAYPERSON can get on here and say all the misinformed and uninformed comments they want about any security or insurance product and it is just fine. however, someone who is licensed is about to get seriously spanked for it. THAT is why you go to a professional - there is accountability.

incidentally, it is FURTHER irony what gary said about anonymous posting: "One last thing, I personally have ZERO respect for anonymous Internet posters. I use my real name as my screen name so my clients can read what I have to say about the absurd comments that are either WRONG or have nothing to do with annuities."

1_more_opai

1_more_opai,

Just to give you a heads up.

Not only am I a Life Insurance Agent.

I'm also an advanced computer user and you nor anyone else on the Internet is Anonymous.

Click the link below to see the exact location of your computer right now.
http://www.danasoft.com/vipersig.jpg

Please feel free to file all the complaints your desire.

By the way, Mr. Blankenship. CFP stated:
Speak for yourself. Not all of us are insurance agents. Some of us are fee-only financial planners

Public records don't lie.
He is IN FACT an Insurance Agent. In fact there is quite a bit of the pot calling the kettle black in the Life Insurance Industry right now.

The Public needs to know that for all intents and purposes the alphabet soup self-appointed "Professionals" they are dealing with are in fact just Life Insurance Agents.
i am not an expert computer user, yet i know how to mask an ip address (or at least my company does). but ooooooooohhhhh, scary.

also, i think it is important to point out that:

1. i can read.
2. i can research.

ergo, when i look up your website this is what it says: Your IP address and other information are only visible to YOU, not to others, but because people see their own IP address and computer information displayed in the graphic, they think that their information can be seen by everyone!

for you to "try" to scare me with your "trick" it reveals the "type" of person you are.

in fact, i think you proved that you are as "advanced" a computer user as you are an "advanced" financial professional.

pricespector

I'm not even sure why I'm giving you the time anymore, but technically Gary, an insurance AGENT is DEFINED by SELLING insurance. I mean, I feel like I'm speaking to someone who has never even heard of personal finance before. Your level of thinking is like that of brand new greenhorn who hasn't even been in this business for a year yet. As you know (or probably don't), a fee-only planner sells no product! What they sell is expertise, which may explain all the animosity you have toward professionals who have graduated from life insurance agent to more advisory roles. Like you would have a clue anyway.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/insurance+agent

http://www.investordictionary.com/definition/insurance+agent.aspx

http://www.answers.com/topic/insurance-agent-1

http://www.investorwords.com/2511/insurance_agent.html

http://personalinsure.about.com/od/insurancetermsglossary/g/agent.htm

You see, they are all defined as "selling" insurance. I mean holy moly, why can't you just SEE why you are under SO much flack here. Do you still believe you are TEACHING us something? I personally, who cannot speak for others, truly believe with every grain of my being that you are entirely what is WRONG within the financial industry. You're a salesman though and through. Ugh, I can't anymore...so very tired. A bit skeezed out too.

GarySpicuzza

1_more_opai,

I haven't had this much for on an Internet Message Board in a long time.

Your good. I'm impressed. I got banned from two mesaage boards for using that sig line.

The point of course in that NO ONE is truely anonymous on the Internet.

By the way, if you don't mind me asking.....

are YOU a Life Insurance Agent?

If NOT, what's your favorite letters of the alphabet?

pricespector

Sorry Gary, this is going to hurt me more than it hurts you, but I'm gonna throw 1MO a bone here. JB should appreciate it too.

http://www.ulead.com/userstory/vs/garyspicuzza.htm

I didn't realize you were a Financial Planner Gary, I thought you were an insurance agent. Are you certified too? Puulleeasse say it...I'm begging.

Let me define Financial Planner for you Gary. Althought the term itself is not regulated, it does have a very specific definition: A financial planner will focus on your needs first before recommending a course of action. Most planners have been trained to take a broad look at your financial situation, while accountants, investment advisers, stockbrokers or insurance agents may focus on a particular area of your financial life. Always ask a financial adviser what qualifies him or her to offer financial planning services.

GarySpicuzza

pricespector, you're quite cocky.

May I ask you......
Are you a Life Insurance Agent? Yes or No?

Regarding the Variable Annuity some of your "Professionals" put my 67 year old client in....

She started with $150,000;
She LOST $60,000;
Leaving her an account value of $90,000, when one of your "Professionals" for an yet another FEE, added the "Investment Protection Rider."

The client is providing me with all the documentation next week. I will then post links and SHOW in Black and White, dollars and common sense what's WRONG with the infamous Variable Annuity and the Broker/Wheeler/Dealer/Salesmen "Professionals" that sell them.

Well, at least she doesn't have to worry about the step-up in basis.

Are you still laughing? She'll NEVER make back her $60,000 LOSS.

When filing your complaints make sure you use your real name and send them to:

Steven W. Moore
Attorney at Law
8200 Bryan Dairy Rd.
Suite 300
Largo, FL 33777
727-395-9300

1_more_opai

gary, a couple follow ups.

if you hold yourself out to the public as a financial planner, you should be licensed as such. i can guarantee you this, neither the NASD nor the SEC see an insurance agent as a financial planner.

finally, i am not an insurance agent - though i do hold licenses for life and health. in other words, i do not sell any policies. but, just to be clear ... a PROFESSIONAL life insurance agent can be a great asset.

GarySpicuzza

pricespector, I'm flattered that you are Googling my name.

Check out THIS (http://www.judiciary.state.nj.us/opinions/a3925-05.pdf) one.

All though I doubt you know the difference between an,
Attorney-at-Law and an Attorney-in-Fact

pricespector

Wow, you're weird.

The term attorney-in-fact should not be confused with the term attorney at law. An attorney-at-law in the United States is a lawyer—someone licensed to practice law in a particular jurisdiction. In most other common-law jurisdictions lawyers are not called attorneys, and the term "attorney" generally refers to either attorneys-in-fact or lawyers from the United States.

pricespector

She'll NEVER make back her $60,000 LOSS.

You're right...now she won't.

pricespector

Are you a Life Insurance Agent? Yes or No?

Of course. Insurance Broker technically. And so much, much, more! How else would I know so much about fixed annuities? I've only sold one fixed annuity in my whole life though. Amazingly, it was the one time that it was a perfect fit for my client's needs and objectives. I know, surprised me too!.

GarySpicuzza

pricespector, when are you going to knock off your cocky attitude?

You know what's funny? I got a call at the office the first day I posted on this annuity thread after the three jokers, opai, sturbe and pricespector weighed in.

The gentleman told me all about your (meaning all three) intimidation techniques and you have all proven yourself true to form.

Although I will give Sturbe (after the third time) credit for explaining the IRD NON issue using what my attorney friends would call a distinction without a difference.

Anyway may the VAST majority of the infamous Variable Annuities be replaced with foundationally sound products and I look forward to the day THAT dog is forever laid to rest.

Have a good week end Price Speculator.

my2cents

Gary,
Have you been reading any of these posts? I don't think you have one person agreeing with you and your infinite wisdom. I am pleased to see that someone besides myself feels that a higher authority needs to step in and take a look at your actions. I just wonder how you sleep at night.
To answer a question you have been asking lately, I hold a life, health, and variable license; in 5 states. No letters yet, but they are coming. I commend anyone who has taken the initiative of higher education and ethical standards so that they can provide their clients with thoughtful and proper recommendations. Knowledge is key.
I have seen you call yourself a Financial Planner and your occupation here is Estate Planner. I'm sure if you were to take a test today for the CFP, you would fail.
I am sorry that your recommendations are so limited in "helping" seniors transfer wealth. Perhaps if you would look at what people who have an education would recommend, you might be able to broaden your scope a bit.
All insurance and financial products are not right or wrong, it is how they are used that makes them right or wrong for a particular situation.
Make me happy Gary and say something that makes sense.

~
Stockwell, what do you think now?

pricespector

Thank you my2cents, for clarifying the message that had somehow become lost (more like never heard) in the exchanges.

Dingobiscuit

You know what's funny? I got a call at the office the first day I posted on this annuity thread after the three jokers, opai, sturbe and pricespector weighed in.

The gentleman told me all about your (meaning all three) intimidation techniques and you have all proven yourself true to form.

Looks like we have ourselves a Kiplinger's Forum watchdog group! I knew all of that Google-ing would end up with some prank calls...

1_more_opai

gary, you may not realize this ... but nothing you write sounds true. you have been professionally discredited to a greater degree than anyone in the history of kiplinger (perhaps, the history of the world). you exacerbate this with quite frankly some of the most superfluous and inane criticisms (like how you dismiss professional education and designations). finally, you tell us that you "get phone calls" in support of your positions and you post computer games in threat to others.

after that recap, now to my point. gary, it was hard to come to the decision that you needed external review of your practices. i always feel a person should have benefit of the doubt. i also think that we as readers on a forum cant know clients as well as those who sit with them so we shouldnt be too prone to second guess. however, you have such a limited, convoluted, and erroneous understanding of our profession that you need to be culled from the field.

in my opinion, you are the epitome of the "negative perception" that the American public has of folks in the financial services profession. that you exist in the profession brings us all down several notches. even the most professional and experienced amongst us.

BlankenshipFP

Are you going to deny that YOU and the Illinois Life Insurance Agent known as James K. Blankenship are in fact one and the same person?

No, I do not deny that I am the same person that you found listed. But as others have pointed out, carrying a Producer License and being a Life Insurance Agent are two different things. For one thing, if I were a Life Insurance Agent I would need to have some sort of association or contract with a carrier - in your fun on the internet, did you find that? I'd be shocked if you did, because I do not have any such association. Merely carrying the license does not make one an agent.

As you've pointed out, it is against the law (in Illinois, too!) to provide advice about insurance without a Producer's License. Since I give advice about all things financial, and Life Insurance is one of those things, I have a Life (and A&H, by the way) Producer's License.

So, I'll restate my original point (nits thoroughly picked) -
Speak for yourself. Not all of us are Life Insurance Agents. Some of us are Fee-Only Financial Planners, who happen to provide advice about Insurance products and therefore carry Life Insurance Producer's Licenses as required by the state, but do not sell insurance.

I hope this clears things up.

1_more_opai

not that any amount of explanation will "clear it up" but what the heck:

An Agent in Commercial Law is a person who is authorised to act on behalf of another (called the Principal) to create a legal relationship with a Third Party. Agency law deals with the tripartite relationship between:

Agents and Principals;
Agents and the Third Parties with whom they deal on their Principals' behalf; and
Principals and the Third Parties when the Agents deal on their behalf.

in other words, while a person (in this case jb) has a PRODUCER's LICENSE, he has no affiliation with a life carrier. defacto as no relationship is in place he is NOT an agent.

pricespector

She started with $150,000;
She LOST $60,000;
Leaving her an account value of $90,000

The client is providing me with all the documentation next week. I will then post links and SHOW in Black and White, dollars and common sense what's WRONG with the infamous Variable Annuity and the Broker/Wheeler/Dealer/Salesmen "Professionals" that sell them.

Well, at least she doesn't have to worry about the step-up in basis.

Are you still laughing? She'll NEVER make back her $60,000 LOSS.

Gary, this will be my last message. Be sure to show your 67 year old "client" in black & white that YOU (and YOU alone) are causing her to lose $60000 (which is stealing if you don't make it very clear to her) in permanent death benefit to her loved ones by replacing her VA. Fantastic estate transfer planning! Luckily, you were there to rescue her. I noticed you never mentioned it earlier.

pricespector

I found this to be an interesting read. Gary, you are out of control...really.

JB...this is MUST read.

my2cents

Gary Spicuzza,
You have most certainly crossed many lines in your misunderstanding of what is ethical behavior in regards to your "clients" and others that you should show respect. As you have been absent I'm wondering if you have realized your errors. I think you owe a lot of people apologizes and should look up the word humility.
Whether you choose to just be a life agent or progress to be a fee based planner or anything in-between it is our duty to be as knowledgeable as possible so that we do not cause anyone any hardship. I'm sorry that you do not answer to any higher authority like some of us do that belong to an agency or a code of ethics for those that have taken that pledge. You truly are a disgrace to other life insurance agents. Yes, I am one and I am embarrassed at your actions, your demeanor, your lack of respect, and your misrepresentation.
This is my last post as well; those are my2cents.

Dingobiscuit

That's the loneliest message board in the World Wide Web...

BlankenshipFP

I found this to be an interesting read. Gary, you are out of control...really.

JB...this is MUST read.

Wow. I guess when you own the board and your brother (?) is the only other member of the board, you begin to think you can post any sort of nonsense you like - including out and out lies. Thanks a ton, mister fixed annuity.

Now - if you have any shred of decency about you, you'll kindly remove that libelous post from your board asap. I suppose if you choose not to, there's not much recourse for me, other than knowing that no one is reading the board anyhow, so I guess I'll just forget about it.

I'm wondering just how little you think of your profession, mister fixed annuity, if you believe that folks will lie outright on a public message board to distance themselves from being called insurance agents? Again, Wow. Seems like you need to attend to a little professional esteem problem, or find a different line of work if you are that ashamed of your profession.

I'll continue to rest assured in my position as a fiduciary for my clients - as a fee-only financial planner, focused strictly on my clients needs, not on selling whatever product I happen to carry a license for (like some fixed annuity salesmen). But you can also rest assured, mister fixed annuity - I am still not an insurance agent. My membership in the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (www.NAPFA.org) should be enough proof - call them and check it out if you like. Or do some more digging and look up my ADV on the NASD site (yes, I'm a Registered Investment Advisor as well - what does that make me in your book - a rodeo clown?). Either way you'll find the same answer: I am a fee-only financial planner, not an insurance agent.

1_more_opai

jim, i would be freaking out and sniffing around for a fight as well. but take solace from two facts - one is as you said, no one reads his posts on that bulletin board. the second is that those who read what he writes will finally discover him for the being both bitter and not well educated in his profession. sorta the old, "consider the source" argument.

GarySpicuzza

This is the "Best" thread I have ever participated in on an Internet Message board.

Well, it appears that ALL of the anonymous Professional "IMPOSTORS" have been flushed out for who they really are.

They are all LIFE INSURANCE AGENTS

That's right. Life Insurance Agents.

Annuities are a Life Insurance product, manufactured ONLY by Life Insurance Companies. When the public buys an ANNUITY, upon whatever form, INCLUDING - the infamous bloated PIG with lip sick, - VARIABLE ANNUITY, the public is buying that product from a Life Insurance Agent.

The "public" must understand that Stock Broker Wheeler Dealers had to get their Life Insurance License to be able to sell to the public -the infamous bloated PIG with lip sick, - VARIABLE ANNUITY.

They use the fact they have a securities license as a "sales technique" coupled with all kinds of pejorative comments toward anyone who does not have a Stock Broker Wheeler Dealer securities license as I believe THEY have demonstrated for the public themselves on this thread.

END OF STORY.
_________________________________________________________________

Strube, Pricespector and Ms. Opai have made some ABSOLUTELY absurd comments on this thread regarding Annuities. As my time permits, I will in exacting detail, as I love to do, EXPOSE, their flawed understanding of Annuities.

One more thing.....Sturbe, What's a MDRT?

The casual reader of this thread, you know, "my clients", (Mom & Pops across the kitchen table) probably don't know what that is - nor do they care.

Please explain without having to be asked three (3) times.
_________________________________________________________________

Oh, by the way, while your "Googleling" type in, Steve Spicuzza.
As time permits I'll upload the "Countryside Wrestling Moves" video.

Best regards,

Gary D. Spicuzza,
Primary Agent

1_more_opai

gary, just out of curiosity ... what do you mean when you say "they are JUST life insurance agents"?

usually when someone says someone is JUST something, it is sorta meant as an insult. it implies there is MORE but that the person hasnt achieved it or hasnt quite arrived yet.

you know, someone might say "he is JUST a kid".

what confuses me is that you are "just" a life agent but you have stated that we are "just" life agents too. do you hold the profession of agent for life companies in disdain?

make no mistake here, i think that someone who specializes in life products can be a phenomenal part of a families team in making wise decisions. however, in these days and times i think it is an extremely rare insurance professional who doesnt have additional licensing and enhanced education.

what i find most interesting is if we illustrate your example in a college scenario. first off, while i have some degrees, i dont think college is a mandatory and exclusionary measure of knowledge.

having your insurance LICENSE is kinda like having a high school diploma. it is, frankly, the minimal 'ticket' for entry into the game. there are many many many different licenses which could "round out" a degree. but your expertise is still pretty lacking. all this alphabet soup (at least to me) coupled with or supplanted by tons of experience is what gives a person the breadth of knowledge necessary to be a true professional.

SADALE

A life insurance agent who doesn't know what MDRT is? Wow.

Indicative of his level of success?

1_more_opai

yea, i thought the same exact thing sadale.

BlankenshipFP

I even went on a search for an alternative. Finding none, I'll make my own suggestion:

Monster Deer-Rack Truck?
Multi-Dimensional Rotary Trimmer?
Mogen-David Rotgut Turpentine?

(even a non-life-insurance-agent like myself knows of the million dollar round table. mister fa does as well, but he's making the point that the consumer of insurance products doesn't know about or care about such matters.)

Athena53

Million-Dollar Round Table. It's agents who have sold life insurance with a face value totalling over $1 million. In 1975, when people probably bought $50K at a time, this was a big deal. Now many people need that much any high-earning executive with a stay-at-home spouse, a few small kids and a big mortgage.

1_more_opai

actually athena, you would need to write about $13MM in whole life or about $100MM in term to qualify for the lowest level of MDRT. these are pretty substantial amounts even by today's standard. in fact, if the average client now did $200K in whole life instead of the $50K you mentioned in your post, the agent today would have to write more than 3 times the numbers of policies necessary back in 1975.

needless to say, i think it is still a very good group with pretty significant production requirements. in fact, only about the top 5% of folks in the business QUALIFY for membership - and of course, not all of those who qualify actually join.

BlankenshipFP

So, I guess we can add blackmail to the list. What follows is the interaction between myself and Mr. Spicuzza, via private email, wherein he alludes that if I can guess the correct answer to his question (Rumplestiltskin?!), he might remove the post. What a piece of work... I will be contacting higher authorities, you can be sure.

Mr. Blankenship,

I am going to drive home a point regarding annuities, upon whatever form, with "our" situation.

Probably tomorrow morning.

After I do, I want you to respond to that point.
Your response will determine my actions as to whether I will or will NOT remove that thread.

By the way, I have the utmost respect for persons, such as yourself, who post under their real name.

I have ZERO respect for anonymous posters such as, Sturbe, Pricespector or Ms. Opai who are more focused on whether the Poster has a securites license than they are with simply having a no-non-sense, straight-forward, informational discussion of the topic.

However, I will also inform you I will publish to the Internet this e-mail comunication on Kiplinger's BEFORE I remove that thread, if at all.

This is so, Life Insurance Sturbe, Cocky Pricepector and pedantic Ms. Opai, understand that your e-mail to me today is a NON-ISSUE as to whether or NOT the thread on my site is removed.

As far as a "Higher Authority" goes, that's NON ISSUE.

Best regards,
Gary D. Spicuzza

On Mon, 7 May 2007 09:49:35 -0500 <Jim@BFPonline.com> writes:
> Dear Mr. Spicuzza -
>
> I have asked you on the Kiplinger's forum to remove the libelous post from
> your "Trust Group" message board, entitled "Unmasking the imposters". I
> assumed that proper explanation of the facts would bring you to the
> conclusion that you have misunderstood the situation, and therefore
> would correct your erroneous message. Now that the message has been up on
> your forum for more than two days, I wanted to approach you directly,
> one-to-one before taking this matter to a higher authority. What I
> specifically take issue with is your assertion that I am an imposter and am
> misrepresenting myself. This is dangerous territory, for sure.
>
> While you may have (incorrectly) believed that you were uncovering
> a critical mistake on my part, let me assure you that nothing could be
> further from the truth. If I remember correctly, your original intent with
> your message painting all professional members of the Kiplinger's forum
> as life insurance agents, was to point out that they (the insurance agents)
> are all intent on selling variable annuities. As a professional member of
> the Kiplinger's forum, I responded to your message indicating that I am
> not an insurance agent, which in fact I am not. You may consider the fact
> that I do hold a producer's license to be proof otherwise, but that's where
> you'd be found off base. As I have indicated in subsequent messages on
> the Kiplinger's forum, I am a fee-only financial planner. The Life
> Producer's license that I hold is a formality required by the Illinois
> Department of Insurance for anyone providing advice regarding Life Insurance
> products. As a fee-only financial planner, I cannot and do not sell any products,
> fixed, variable, or otherwise, nor can I be a representative of any
> insurance company - which throws out the original intent of your blanket
> statement that all professionals who are members of the Kiplinger's forum are
> insurance agents. Furthermore, I have never been an insurance agent
> of any kind, life or otherwise.
>
> Getting to the facts of your libelous post: you state "He is a
> LIFE INSURANCE AGENT who earned a CFP designation." You've got the
> facts backward - I am a CFPR certificant who, properly, acquired the
> requisite licensure to provide advice on insurance products.
>
> I hope you can be reasonable and recognize that you have made an
> incorrect assumption about the nature of my professional status, and either
> correct or remove this libelous message from your message board. Beyond this
> situation I currently have no other reason to take issue with you, your
> message board, or your business. Hopefully you feel the same, as I believe I've
> given you no reason to think otherwise, the best of my knowledge.
>
> Thanks in advance for promptly taking care of this matter.
>
> Jim Blankenship, CFPR, ChFC, CCPS
> Blankenship Financial Planning, Ltd.
> New Berlin, Illinois
> Phone 217-488-6473 -
> Toll Free 866-488-6473 - or -
> Visit http://www.BlankenshipFinancial.com
> "Hourly, As-Needed Financial Planning and Advice...
> The New Choice for Smart Consumers"T

1_more_opai

sometimes you have to squint your eyes really really hard and cock your head a little to the left to see something clearly. i have done that. yet, this situation truly astounds me to no end.

BlankenshipFP

It has been proven once again that, trying to reason with an fool is like wrestling with a pig: you both get muddy, and the pig enjoys it.

1_more_opai

jim, i totally agree with you .... but what is so vexing is that you didnt enter the pig pen. heck, you werent even on a farm. you are walking down main street USA and this whole herd of freaking pigs just sorta attacked you. that is what freaks me out so much.

1_more_opai

at this point, i believe the gary spicuzza issue is resolved. specifically, i believe there is nothing more that he nor any of us other can say in response to any topic whatsoever related to him or his professionalism.

that said, i actually see something quite interesting that i thought i might "observe" for all. i invite your comment on my observations and any other insight you might offer.

there is continuous debate on several threads on this and other forums and in the general public at large about the trustworthiness of professionals in the financial field. i think this long thread proved quite interesting in this debate.

first, in deference to all of those who believe that financial professionals are not worthy of trust ... we have a case in point to support their opinion. interestingly, it was the OTHER professionals who took measures to correct the clear deficiencies of character, knowledge, and professionalism of one of their 'own'.

"of their 'own'" as just because you have a singular license in our field (as is now obvious) does not a professional make.

i am proud to have association with so many individuals who gave gary every opportunity to clarify and or amend comments that were either factually wrong or were offensively impolite. during these many opportunities, the true professionals kept their comments tempered to the actual issues and not personally toward the 'offender'. only after many opportunities to clear the issue up and it became apparant that gary clearly was acting improperly, the PROFESSIONALS took action. taking this action to clean up 'one of their own' is exactly what makes those in the financial services arena worthy of the trust that so many in the public have heaped upon them.

from me to each of the professionals who frequent this thread and the many others on the forum ... i am proud to be associated with you.

my2cents

Gary Spicuzza,
Perhaps you still don't get. I as stated before I hold a life, health and variable license; I am referred by my associates that hold those exact licenses and choose not to sell the product. They use me to do that for them. They hold the license so that they can have an intelligent conversation about it legally. Not like some people who hold no license of which they speak product about or try to replace. So Gary some professionals in the world, open your eyes, don't need to get paid directly by selling product; they are knowledgeable and professional and guide their clients to someone that would like to sell and service the products.
I'm still not sure why you are making a big deal about it anyway. In order to be a fee only planner you have to hold the licenses otherwise you can't do your job properly. It's kind of like you calling yourself a financial planner with no education. What good is that?
My2cents.
I wish you could see how ridiculous you look.

GarySpicuzza

BTTT, Annuities.

Calling out NON Insurance Agent James K. Blankenship,CFP

Mr. Blankenship I’m disappointed.

You should have had more patients.

So let’s lay everything out here.

James K. Blankenship, CFP,
PLAINTIFF

Vs.

Gary D, Spicuzza,
Defendant.
_______________/

Judgment for the Plaintiff for $500,000 Dollars.

Defendant Gary D. Spicuzza has $2,500,000 in cash in an annuity. And has a home worth 3,000,000 on Clearwater Beach and is DEBT FREE. Combined net worth $5,500,000 DOLLARS.

Now since I live in Florida and the BULK of my cash, i.e. Money, is in an Annuity Contract and the rest of my wealth is the value of my Florida home with NO mortgage.

Please give the good people who read this thread the EXACT dollar amount you will be able to collect from EITHER of those two substantial assets while I’m alive or after I’m DEAD.

I’m NOT looking for a debate on this issue.

I’ll stipulate you won a Judgment against me for $500,000. PLEASE post the exact dollar amount you will be able to collect from either of those two (2) assets.

IF, you post the correct answer I'll remove your information from the thread titled Unmasking the "Impostors" from my site.

I believe the above to be a "Good Faith" offer. Should you fail to respond, be non-responsive or get the answer WRONG the thread will remain unless and until you obtain a Court Order to have it removed.

Is that Fair?

The Florida Constitution

ARTICLE X
SECTION 4.

Homestead; exemptions.--
(a) There shall be exempt from forced sale under process of any court, and no judgment, decree or execution shall be a lien thereon, except for the payment of taxes and assessments thereon, obligations contracted for the purchase, improvement or repair thereof, or obligations contracted for house, field or other labor performed on the realty, the following property owned by a natural person:

(1) a homestead, if located outside a municipality, to the extent of one hundred sixty acres of contiguous land and improvements thereon, which shall not be reduced without the owner's consent by reason of subsequent inclusion in a municipality; or if located within a municipality, to the extent of one-half acre of contiguous land, upon which the exemption shall be limited to the residence of the owner or the owner's family;

(2) personal property to the value of one thousand dollars.
(b) These exemptions shall inure to the surviving spouse or heirs of the owner.

(c) The homestead shall not be subject to devise if the owner is survived by spouse or minor child, except the homestead may be devised to the owner's spouse if there be no minor child. The owner of homestead real estate, joined by the spouse if married, may alienate the homestead by mortgage, sale or gift and, if married, may by deed transfer the title to an estate by the entirety with the spouse. If the owner or spouse is incompetent, the method of alienation or encumbrance shall be as provided by law.

222.14 Exemption of cash surrender value of life insurance policies and annuity contracts from legal process.--The cash surrender values of life insurance policies issued upon the lives of citizens or residents of the state and the proceeds of annuity contracts issued to citizens or residents of the state, upon whatever form, shall not in any case be liable to attachment, garnishment or legal process in favor of any creditor of the person whose life is so insured or of any creditor of the person who is the beneficiary of such annuity contract, unless the insurance policy or annuity contract was effected for the benefit of such creditor.

BlankenshipFP

I see the point to all of this. You're intimidated by me, and think that calling me an insurance agent will somehow discredit me, when in fact, I've disclosed on several occasions on this board that I carry a Life Producer's license. As I have stated on several occasions, it's a question of semantics - but I still will assert that to be an agent, one must have a contract relationship with an insurance company. I also have a driver's license - does that make me a NASCAR driver?

But that's it - I give up with trying to deal with you. I'll let the Florida Department of Financial Services deal with you.

BTW, the answer to your inane question is zero, of course. I don't know what that proves, but I'm sure that in your twisted mind it makes you superior somehow, which is what this is all about.

Mr. Blankenship I’m disappointed.

You should have had more patients.

I didn't have more "patients", because I'm also not a doctor.

BlankenshipFP

BTW, that judgement looked pretty realistic... been subject to quite a few of those, have you, Gary? I think we all know the answer.

SADALE

The way I see it...

Simply holding a license does not absolutely dictate "profession" or "title". If I'm not mistaken, an "agent" is basically someone who is authorized to act for some person or entity. In this case, if there is no contract authorizing Mr. Blankenship to act on behalf of, or represent, an individual or company, then he is NOT an agent. Case closed.

I don't see why that is so hard for this guy to understand. It may not even be a question of semantics - I mean, there's no middle ground. A person either is, or is not a representative of something or someone. To falsely claim one when it's the other seems pretty dishonest and unprofessional.

pricespector

Anybody want to see Gary's $3,000,000 house?

http://www.zillow.com/search/Search.htm?addrstrthood=5045+forest+hills+dr&citystatezip=holiday%2C+fl&GOButton=%3CSPAN%3EGO%3C%2FSPAN%3E

Obviously, his lawsuit question was hypothetical. NOONE with an estate issue or any estate planning savvy whatsoever would EVER put all of their assets into a fixed annuity BECAUSE OF IRD and estate taxes, which would cost them about 80% of their annuity-based assets when settling their estate. Which by the way, makes them one or the WORST wealth TRANSFER vehicles. Luckily Gary, you seem to fall just under the estate tax limits.

GarySpicuzza

Congratulations Mr. Blankenship! You had the winning answer!
Jim wrote:
"BTW, the answer to your inane question is zero, of course."

You are CORRECT you would receive EXACTLY $00.00 from my assets to satisfy the $500,000 judgment you - Won!

Now, BTTT, Annuities, I suppose finally a "real" Professional concurs with what I said on page one of this thread:

"There isn't a better wealth protection and transfer investment vehicle than a Fixed Annuity."

I appreciate your no-non-sense, straight forward answer.

The "other" thread on that "other" site will be deleted momentarily.

pricespector

Jim wrote:

You are CORRECT you would receive EXACTLY $00.00 from my assets to satisfy the $500,000 judgment you - Won!

Now, BTTT, Annuities, I suppose finally a "real" Professional concurs with what I said on page one of this thread:

"There isn't a better wealth protection and transfer investment vehicle than a Fixed Annuity."

I think you misunderstood. There was never a concurrance about wealth TRANSFER. In fact, the opposite is quite true due to that "non-issue" IRD thingy-a-majig. I think one could concur that a fixed OR variable (all of which have a FIXED account in them) annuity may be a suitable investment for someone that has high chance of a lawsuit being brought against them though.

1_more_opai

there you go price... when gary says: "There isn't a better wealth protection and transfer investment vehicle than a Fixed Annuity."

there are two issues:

1. it is a function of the annuity as the "protective" feature. a client would receive the exact same "protection" whether the annuity was fixed or variable. this point invalidates the comment made by spicuzza on its face.

in addition...

2. there has been no agreement by anyone; professional WITH alphabet soup, professional without alphabet soup, or non-professionals on this forum about fixed annuities being "a better wealth transfer investment vehicle". while i can concur that the estate issues MAY not be a concern for some clients, the fact they are even talking about WEALTH TRANSFER implies they do.spicuzza has failed miserably in addressing how it is a better WEALTH TRANSFER vehicle and has been proven categorically wrong about its superior protection (from judgement) capability.

ps. while nothing spicuzza has said is true, i cant help but hope that one thing he said comes true. to wit:

James K. Blankenship, CFP,
PLAINTIFF

Vs.

Gary D, Spicuzza,
Defendant.
_______________/

Judgment for the Plaintiff for $500,000 Dollars.

GarySpicuzza

pricespector, wrote on page #2, post #35.

I/we may assume that using a named beneficiary or contingent beneficiaries on joint accounts to avoid probate (which your site fails to mention), a step-up in basis, IRD, and the most efficient transfer of assets IS important to the "annuity-buying senior".

No, pricespector, you are WRONG.

You may not assume that using a named beneficiary or contingent beneficiaries on joint accounts to avoid probate is the most efficient transfer of assets. This is "typical" securties/broker/wheeler/dealer and banker mentality.
_________________________________________________________________

No one should hold any assets jointly with anyone including their spouse.

I'm quite confident Joe would agree and Neil would concur.

But before I link to them I'd like to here what Mr. Blankenship has to say about joint ownership in general and joint ownership with adult children in particular.

GarySpicuzza

opai wrote:2. there has been no agreement by anyone; professional WITH alphabet soup, professional without alphabet soup, or non-professionals on this forum about fixed annuities being "a better wealth transfer investment vehicle". while i can concur that the estate issues MAY not be a concern for some clients, the fact they are even talking about WEALTH TRANSFER implies they do.spicuzza has failed miserably in addressing how it is a better WEALTH TRANSFER vehicle and has been proven categorically wrong about its superior protection (from judgement) capability.

Okay let's hold Ms. Opai's feet to the fire.

#1) Other than LIFE INSURANCE, Ms. Opai please name the other wealth (meaning cash) transfer vehicle that would be better.

#2 AND regarding this has been proven categorically wrong about its superior protection (from judgement) capability

Really? Please cite the Florida case where creditors have reached assets in an annuity. OTHER than FRAUD or the IRS.

pricespector

No, pricespector, you are WRONG.

You may not assume that using a named beneficiary or contingent beneficiaries on joint accounts to avoid probate is the most efficient transfer of assets. This is "typical" securties/broker/wheeler/dealer and banker mentality.

You really are hopeless Gary. In case you didn't notice I said "beneficiary OR contingent beneficary" of a joint account. Of course, you probably wouldn't know that this option exists, nor would you want to know because it refutes one of your "selling" points.

In a joint account, the first to pass leaves the balance to the joint owner, with a partial step-up (unless it's an annuity). A "contingent beneficiary" is only triggered upon the simultaneous death or ultimate demise of both joint owners. In the case where one joint owner survives, they can simply re-register the account (any account) as a Transfer On Death (TOD) account and name a new beneficary. OR, the surviving joint owner can leave the account "as is" and have the account pass to the contingent beneficiary upon the death of the second joint owner. Please tell me you know what a contingent beneficary is Gary. Of course real estate can't be passed this way unless there is a trust in place, but you can't put real estate in a fixed annuity either. But if you could, I'm sure YOU would.

Sturgbe

Arguing with Gary is like 'calling' a retarded person for double-dribbling. They have no clue what is going on and they are going to continue to do what they feel like doing. Just let them keep playing and know that you are going to have to let them win. Everyone else knows what is happening...except that retar_, I mean Gary.

pricespector

opai wrote:

Okay let's hold Ms. Opai's feet to the fire.

#1) Other than LIFE INSURANCE, Ms. Opai please name the other wealth (meaning cash) transfer vehicle that would be better.

#2 AND regarding this has been proven categorically wrong about its superior protection (from judgement) capability

Really? Please cite the Florida case where creditors have reached assets in an annuity. OTHER than FRAUD or the IRS.

Not that 1MO would have any problem this, but it's just too easy to answer so I thought I would save the trouble.

#1. Simple. ANY asset that allows an owner to name a beneficiary and/or contingent beneficiary. Which is virtually ALL asset classes, with the exception of real property. Or, ANY asset that is held in a revocable trust. There truly is NO ADVANTAGE to a fixed annuity here. What do you not understand about this???

#2. The credit protection only applies to debts incurred AFTER the annuity is purchased (with the exception of Medicaid and/or gov't agencies for which an annuity offers NO protection). Any attempt to "hide" assets from a creditor using an annuity is NOT protected at all. The SAME EXACT protection is already extended to retirement accounts as well, so any IRA/401k/403b etc. you put in an annuity on this premise is a complete falsehood.

#3. Medicaid recovery and any other State or Federal government lien. It also only applies to funds held in the annuity, not the proceeds that are recieved outside of it. Sure, the lump sum is protected, but anything you take out of it and put into another account over time, is very much at risk. If you receive an income from an annuity and it goes into a personal account, that income MAY be garnished.

GarySpicuzza

1_more_opai

thanks price. that is EXACTLY what i would have said. or i would have said,

Gary:

1. a Roth
2. a Roth

i know a few others, you want them too?

pricespector

pricespector you are simply WRONG again.

You ASSUME the joint owners or beneficairy die in the right order.

Let's see if I can make this clear to you.

Mom & Pops Joint Owners and their oldest child contingent beneficiary get in a car crash. They have two other kids.

Pops & Daughter die on impact.
Mom now (sole individual owner) hangs on for 3 weeks in the hospital then dies.

Who gets the money and by what method?

I'll answer that because you'll get it WRONG again.

Under the same scenario, who gets your fixed annuity, Gary??? Holy crud...amazing. Who is the owner and beneficary and contingent beneficiary of your annuity? How is it DIFFERENT??? When there is NO living beneficiary, ALL assets go to probate, ALL of them Gary...including your beloved fixed annuity. Your fixed annuity doesn't solve this scenario, a revocable trust may not even help here. Your fixed annuity has NO-NO-NO advantage in transfer. Unbelievable.

Now, what happens if all of a family's assets are held seperately. Let's say, you put $100k (the only liquid assets) into one spouses name, INSTEAD of jointly. Let's suppose that the owner of the annuity becomes incapacitated and cannot access the funds himself. What is the spouse to do? She cannot access the funds because they ARE NOT JOINTLY held. She will have to petition a court to make a withdrawal for funds that may be very badly needed due to medical costs and loss of income, etc. There are advantages and disadvantages to everything Gary, why can't you see this???

Seriously, it is truly disturbing to know that you even have a license.

1_more_opai

Gary, you do know that you can have multiple contingent beneficiaries ... right?

In fact, listed as beneficiary of my VARIABLE annuity is Gary Sicuzza in contingent position #1 million.

p.s. no, i didnt accidentally forget the "p".

p.p.s. price, i swear to God; gary has got to be purposely trying to get your goat. no one who simply reads kiplingers (much less holds a license, much less is a professional, much less has a little alphabet soup going on) could truly believe what gary is saying. on the off chance he DOES believe what he is saying, it speaks volumes about the level of knowledge that florida requires of its people to hold life licenses.

Puck

it speaks volumes about the level of knowledge that florida requires of its people to hold life licenses.

Maybe. Maybe not (I don't know a thing about it). But I DO know that Florida is so filled with seniors, some of them absolutely clueless about a lot of things (money, modern technology, etc) that they are ripe for the picking for unscrupulous and shady "professionals".

Message to everyone: Perhaps you should all consider "not feeding the troll". H

pricespector

Perhaps you are correct Puck. I don't think the board or any posts should be deleted though. It's #2 in Google now. Talk about digging your own hole.

1_more_opai

absolutely do NOT delete the posts or the thread. there is soooooo much to be learned here on soooooo many levels.

GarySpicuzza

Most 67 year old widowed clients are at LOSS at what to do when a securities licensed-stock broker-wheeler dealer with little or no life insurance or annuity training places $150,000 dollars of their life savings in a VARIABLE ANNUITY then she LOSES $60,000 and only has $90,000 dollars left.

She will NEVER make back those loses.

These are the "New" Professionals in the Life Insurance Business without a drop of common sense. Although they NEVER call themselves Insurance Agent, it's always some hollow impressive title.

Yes, this is another client who is the victim of the infamous Variable Annuity stock broker wheeler dealer securities hard charging SALESMAN.

If he was trained as a Life Insurance Agent rather than a stock broker risking Seniors life savings he would have NEVER placed an elderly woman's life savings at risk of loss.

File all the complaints you like Ms. Opai.
They don't bother me.
You are an anonymous Internet poster.

I'm not the one who "cost" this client $60,000.
It was one of the so called "new" Professionals.

In 22 years of being in the business my clients and their beneficiaries have lost exactly $0.00.

Please keep posting more of your great wealth preservation and transfer "techniques."

By the way, Opai, I'm quite certain the Variable Annuity transfering Insurance Company and the "New" company will make sure all paperwork is in order BEFORE completing the transfer. I guess you just don't KNOW a client can do whatever they please with their money.

Ya know Ms. Opai, I'm not easily intimidated.

I believe clients need to understand the new breed of so-called financial advisors.

pricespector

You're an idiot.

GarySpicuzza

BTTT, Annuities.

SEC linky: http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/varannty.htm

Variable Annuities - VIOLATE - the fundamental and foundational element of "Safety of Principal" inherent in ALL annuities EXCEPT Variable Annuities.

Variable Annuities are sold by the new breed of financial advisors.

Specifically stock broker, securities licensed, wheeler dealer SALESMAN life insurance agents. Yet they NEVER disclose to the public they are in fact Insurance Agents.

These Variable Annuities products are per se' unsuitable for Seniors over the age of 60.

Why? Because if you catch the market at the wrong time you may very well need 10 years to make up your losses.

By age 70 a loss of principal of 25% or more will most likely NEVER be regained.

I have a client right now who put $150,000 into one of these "bloated pigs with lip stick" and LOST $60,000 in the market over the past few years and is now down to $90,000.

At her current age 67 she will NEVER make up her losses.

As time permits today I will post what type of impossible market returns she would have to receive over the next 10 years, (year by year) to equal what a Traditional FIXED annuity @ 5% would have generated.

The math is is very illuminating.

SADALE

Thoughts...

I'm sure that 60 year old senior sure is going to love what inflation is going to do to their fixed annuity return over the remaining 25-30 years of their life. Especially if they're going to be needing any of that money for medical expenses over that time. A properly diversified portfolio of equities and fixed income (which may in fact include a portion of money in a fixed annuity) seems to be appropriate for a 60 year old to be in the best position to beat inflation over that time. One who is only life licensed won't be able to help with this, and has done a pathetic job masquerading as a financial planner if their advice is to put all or most of their money into a fixed annuity.

I don't think anyone here needs to have hypothetical market returns posted to show how much of a challenge it would be to have to overcome the deficit listed above. I'm sure they'll stipulate it'll be difficult. I do think some here may be interested to know how someone has lost 40% of their VA value over "the past few years". The past "few years" ('03-present) have been pretty darn good.

Besides, if a variable annuity's value drops to the point where it's likey not recoverable, it's not the products fault - is either the owner or advisor opting for an unwise allocation.

This debate started with comments on the preservation transfer ability of fixed annuities, and I'm sure that those here will stipulate that advantages exist. Nobody here has disagreed with that, except to say there may be some ways that are better in certain circumstances. However, the instigator has slowly altered his position to seemingly include comparisons pertaining to risk and earning ability. This completely changes the landscape of the argument, and seems rather amateurish for that person to even try to pit a VA up against a fixed annuity in regards to earning power. They do 2 different things. And, as I said before, if a VA loses value to that alleged degree, it's the allocation, not the "bloated pig with lip stick". A good advisor, makes this a non issue.

Gary,
Your clients have lost something - opportunity, and, like it or not, a certain degree of buying power due to inflation. Pretend you have a 60 year old potential client in front of you that tells you he's concerned not only with market risk, but also inflation risk, medical costs, life expectancy, etc. Do convince him a fixed annuity is the cure all, or do you honorably refer him to someone who is actually equipped to handle more comprehensive planning?

1_more_opai

actually, gary can show year for year if he wants and do all kinds of spectacular, whiz-bang calculations. but someone who is truly in the business can just run a simple chart.

gary, if your client had 90,000 in a VA and the underlying investments were the S&P 500; then their account would have surpassed 160K on .... drumroll please ... yesterday!

while it would not be prudent to put someone in an agressive vehicle at the outset (which is what you said happened and why there was a loss), it would also not be proper to put them ALL in the S&P 500 in order to recover the money.

however, we didnt need 200 lines of post from you to point out a long string of cumulative yearly concerns when we can simply look at the market over the last 4 years.

frankly, i think you are just "making up" situations to prove your point. i find it amazingly difficult to believe that some 'professional' put a 60 year old in an investment where 100% of their money was at risk and then the investment tanked to the tune of 40%.

course, after hearing you talk about how you "help" your "clients" (aka "fleece" your "sheep") i suppose anything is possible.

josephdegroff

I'm not sure that I've ever had a car salesman actually disclose to me he was a car salesman, but I was adept enough to perceive that that is what he was when he was trying to sell me a car. When someone sells an insurance product (such as an annuity), it's usually common knowledge that they are insurance agents.

-Joe

1_more_opai

joe, it is even more INSIDIOUS than that. your next door neighbor or some guy on E-bay could sell you a car without being a "car salesman". however, no one in the entire country can place an insurance product with you and NOT be a life agent.

this is exactly WHY gary is so frustrating. he stares boldly into the face of the obvious and declares "I dont see you".

jims money

With regards to anonymous posters let me say this. Their words carry substantially more weight with me than those who post links, be it a business, blog or otherwise. When I see links the first thing that comes to mind is that persons participation is centered on personal gain. This is particularly true of newbies. They find this site and think they have found a new marketing tool. And some think any exposure is good exposure.

It takes a lot of sound posts to overcome a link for me. I’m happy to say that some here have actually accomplished that. Most however quickly fade away.

Some of my opinions have changed over the years, we can all learn right? This thread screams my main theme though. Educate yourself to the best of your ability. Evaluating this thread is easy…that’s not always the case in the real world.

pricespector

Gary,

Even if your old lady story is true, which I really doubt, why have you not addressed the fact that her variable annuity has a FIXED account that she could move her funds into?

I also assume that your "replacement" will not be a 1035 exchange, because you are not properly licensed to exchange a variable product. This leaves you with the process of having the old lady cash her annuity out for a check because it will not be a taxable event, correct?

Well, let me illuminate your actions to the audience for you (you will ignore it anyway). Two of the benefits of ANY (fixed or variable) annuity is a death benefit AND a cost basis.

First, by replacing her variable annuity YOU are costing her $60000 in permanent death benefit that she could NEVER lose, unless someone like you comes along.

Second, unless you are doing a 1035 exchange, she will lose her cost basis of $150000, making the first dollar earned in the fixed annuity taxable. As she stands, she could move her funds to the fixed account of her variable annuity and the first $60000 of earnings would be effectively TAX FREE until she reaches her original basis of $150000.

Third, she is most likely liquid in her variable annuity (with a FIXED account) because her surrender charges are gone. Now, you are starting the surrender process all over again.

Fourth, a properly allocated variable annuity could easily make that $60000 at 6% annual return (which is almost impossible not to achieve) in only 9 years. Remember, because her basis is $150k, that first $60000 would be tax-free. Not so, using your "solution". Meanwhile, if she should pass away, she would get the full $150000 for her beneficiaries. Again, not so with your "solution". Why do I have the feeling you haven't discussed any of this her?

You are in effect stealing from her: the $60000 death benefit & the tax-exempt growth of her first $60000.

She is soooo lucky to have met you.

1_more_opai

i have done my part. i have outlined where gary is wrong or at the least, misinformed. i have reported him to regulatory bodies for their investigation. i hope others take the 2d step as I and jb have.

there is very little doubt in my mind that gary is in store for quite the beating once his state processes the complaints filed on him. while i doubt he will come on and thank us for "tightening him up", i think we will see him either go by the way never to be heard from again, or become both (1) quite active here and (2) out of the insurance business entirely.

p.s. price, i think you post prior to this is spot on. frankly, it infuriates me to no end what he is "getting away with" or "doing to his 'clients'".

pricespector

I suppose our only consolation is that the reader's of this board tend to be very smart, so the truth is quite apparent. As you stated earlier, I hope that they can see the "big picture" here.

Sturgbe

What is the name of this VA? What Insurance Company is it? What were the subaccounts she was invested in? Did she have any riders, Living Benefits? I think if you are going to exchange a product, you'd better know everything about the product you are exchanging. We could easily look up this product ( performance history) to determine, if in fact she actually lost money like it is being reported.

Also, as Pricespector pointed out, she will now certainly incur a loss. What about any Living Benfits? What about a partial 1035 or withdrawal (dollar for dollar vs. pro rata) to keep the death benefit or riders in tact (depending on contract language)?

Without the proper due diligence, you could be really "screwing' this lady out of a lot of money.

pricespector

Sturgbe got me thinking...

Just for grins, I ran the Yahoo Finance fund screener for funds losing 25% for the last 1,3,5 years. Since you claim your little old lady lost 33%, I thought it might be fun.

For 5 years, I came up with TWO (AIVTX & FEFPX). I suppose your little old lady had all of her subaccounts in this one of these TWO funds. She would have had to in order to realize the losses you are illustrating.

For 3 years, I came up with TWO (AIVTX & AHEGX). I suppose your little old lady had all of her subaccounts in this one of these TWO funds. She would have had to in order to realize the losses you are illustrating.

For 1 year, I came up with FOUR (AIVTX, AHEGX, DXDSX & DXESX). I suppose your little old lady had all of her subaccounts in this one of these funds (or maybe all of them!). She would have had to in order to realize the losses you are illustrating.

I suppose out of the THOUSANDS of funds available, she happened to be in one of these four at exactly the right moment...sounds likely doesn't it?

GarySpicuzza

Click HERE (http://www.sec.gov/investor/pubs/varannty.htm) to learn what the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission has to say about these products.

Variable Annuities - VIOLATE - the fundamental and foundational element of "Safety of Principal" inherent in ALL annuities EXCEPT Variable Annuities. See illustration below.

Variable Annuities are sold by the new breed of financial advisors. Specifically stock broker, securities licensed, wheeler dealer SALESMAN life insurance agents. Without a drop of common sense. AND they NEVER disclose to the public they are in fact Insurance Agents. They always go by some impressive sounding hollow title.

These Variable Annuities products are per se' unsuitable for Seniors over the age of 60.

Why? Because if you catch the market at the wrong time you may very well need 10 years to make up your losses.

By age 70 a loss of principal of 25% or more will most likely NEVER be regained.

I have a client right now who put $125,320 into one of these "bloated pigs with lip stick" it grew to $149,519 and she LOST $59,917 in the market over the past few years and is now down to $89,602.

At her current age 67 she will NEVER make up her losses.

As time permits today I will post what type of impossible market returns she would have to receive over the next 10 years, (year by year) to equal what a Traditional FIXED annuity @ 5% would have generated.

The math is is very illuminating.

And how about all those BLOATED FEES charged every month.

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FIXEDvsVariable.jpg

Below is the ACTUAL Policy Information from the Client by which the above illustration was based.

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig1.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig2.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig3.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig4.jpg

Let the INVESTIGATION begin.

Only the new breed of financial advisors. Specifically stock broker, securities licensed, wheeler dealer SALESMAN life insurance agents. Without a drop of common sense would have risk the 67 year old lady's money in a VARIABLE ANNUITY.

She would have more money right now today if she had simply "invested" the money in her mattress. At least she would still have her original $125,320.

Strube, Pricespector, Ms. Opai.......are you still laughing?
Yeah, you're "The Pros" who can't find your asstrick with both hands.

How about take a break from "letters" for a while and study MATH, cause you're NOT very good at what you do.

pricespector

I have a link for you too Gary, and it's not to a website that I built (like your's are).

http://www.theamericancollege.edu/

You should stop being part of the problem and become part of the solution. Did I mention that I like fixed annuities sometimes?

1_more_opai

gary, thanks for the link to the SEC. it appeared that you "posted" the link while "implying" that the SEC was negative about them. then, your next comment seems to be attributable to the SEC:

Click HERE to learn what the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission has to say about these products.
Variable Annuities - VIOLATE - the fundamental and foundational element of "Safety of Principal" inherent in ALL annuities EXCEPT Variable Annuities.

the SEC site makes no such statement by action nor implication. in fact, the SEC site says NOTHING negative about whether variable annuities are good or bad.

in fact, the only thing the SEC site "recommended" was something you clearly do not do yourself: Financial professionals who sell variable annuities have a duty to advise you as to whether the product they are trying to sell is suitable to your particular investment needs.

in all your whining and gnasing of teeth about how BAD variable annuities are and how they "violate" this and "violate" that and how they are only bought by those who are tricked by wheeler dealer, alphabet soup slurpin, non-affiliated life insurance salesman; you seem to have overlooked one small point of your own.

you posted bernake's public disclosure notice. doesnt he have approximatly HALF of his holdings in a VARIABLE annuity?

pricespector

It's like shooting fish in a barrel, only they don't die...so it's no fun.

my2cents

Gary Spicuzza,
Would you please reply to Pricespector's post 118 where he brought up 4 issues that would occur on the replacement of the VA and purchase of the FA for your fictious old lady?
For once can you reply intelligently; it might be a challenge for you I know, but for all of us here it would be entertaining none the less.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation!
My2cents

my2cents

Gary Spicuzza,
I had a look at your fictious calculations for the fixed vs. variable annuity. Please provide me with the company that can offer a fixed annuity at 5% interest indefinitely. In your fictious example that fictious company is offering 5% for 8 years. I thought you knew how these worked.
My2cents

GarySpicuzza

BTTT, Annuities.

Click THIS LINK (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FIXEDvsVariable.jpg) for a side by side commparision of how a Traditional FIXED annuity would have compared with an "Actual" Variable Annuity from August 1999 projected to August 2007 (8 years)

Variable Annuities - VIOLATE - the fundamental and foundational element of "Safety of Principal" inherent in ALL annuities EXCEPT Variable Annuities.

See illustration above.

Variable Annuities are sold by the new breed of financial advisors. Specifically stock broker, securities licensed, wheeler dealer SALESMAN life insurance agents. Without a drop of common sense. AND they NEVER disclose to the public they are in fact Insurance Agents. They always go by some impressive sounding hollow title.

Variable Annuity products are per se' unsuitable for Seniors over the age of 60.

That being said:

FIXED Annuities DO have one (1) negative feature;
THE SURRENDER CHARGE SCHEDULE.

The "Bloated Pig with Lip Stick" Variable Annuity also has surrender charges AND pays the Life Insurance Agent who sold you the policy a handsome COMMISSION!

There is exactly one (1) negative feature in a Fixed Annuity contract.

The SURRENDER charges.

They last 5, 7, 10, 12, or 15 years and DECREASE each and every year. A typical 10 year surrender charge schedule would be (12%, 11%, 10%, 9%, 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 4%, 2%, 0%)

These "surrender charge" percentages, while at first glance appear unusually severe or draconian, are nothing more than an "interest penalty."

Fixed Annuities are NOT designed for someone to put their money in and take it right back out like a passbook savings account. They are designed for Seniors over the age of 70, primarily for the wealth preservation and transfer of their cash asset DIRECTLY to their beneficiaries.

Ok, let's get back to the topic.

For example, current interest earnings on Fixed Annuities is about 6.5%. If a client put $100,000 into a 10 year surrender product at the end of year one the annuity is worth $106,500, at the end of year two the annuity is worth $113,422.

If the client wants out, end of year two, here's what happens with their money:

Keep in mind most ALL annuities have at least a 10% free withdrawal provision per year.

The company first subtracts the free withdrawal amount ($11,342) from the account value of $113,422 which leaves $102,080 that is subject to the surrender penalty. In this example 10% or $10,208.

$113,422 minus $10,208 equals a cash surrender value of: $103,214.

So by the end of year two a client in almost all cases can walk away and get back every penny they put into the annuity plus some growth.

How about a 15 year surrender penalty product that pays a 7% bonus.

Here's the surrender charge schedule:
19%, 18%, 17%, 16%, 15%, 14%, 13%, 12%, 11%, 10%, 9%, 8%, 7%, 6%, 5%, 0%.

Unusually severe, draconian? Not in real dollars. Follow the math:

$100,000 premium + 7% bonus = $107,000. Assuming just 5% interest earnings in years 1, 2 and 3 would result in an account value of $123,865 at the end of the third year and if a client wants out he pays a 16% penalty.

So just how bad is that?

The company first subtracts the 10% free withdrawal amount ($12,386) from the account value of $123,865 which leaves $111,479 that is subject to the surrender penalty. In this example 16% or $17,837.

$123,865 minus $17,837 equals a cash surrender value of: $106,028.

In both of the typical examples above the client can completely surrender the policy for its cash value after only two or three years and get back every penny paid into the contract plus some growth.

Stock brokers, attorneys, bankers and news media always misunderstand and thus misrepresent how the actual surrender charges are calculated in an annuity.

Let's pick on, End of Year 2, in the actual contract below.

Trial attorneys, brokers, bankers and news media would lead a client to believe if she made an initial premium deposit of $50,924.90 and wanted to "get out" of the contract the on the last day of year two (2) she would lose 11% of her money. They would claim the insurance company would only pay her $45,323.16.

NOT TRUE, the above is an absolute twisted material misrepresentation.

These mathematical Einsteins can even "prove it" on their calculators. They'll take her initial premium of $50,924.90 and subtract 11% and then show the result of $45,323.16.

The only problem with their calculation is the fact it's totally WRONG and doesn't jive with the stated MINIMUM CASH SURRENDER value printed in the policy of $52,340.26 at the end of year two (2).

The correct calculation goes like this:

Premium of $50,924.90 PLUS 10.75% first year interest equals an account value of 56,399.32 PLUS MINIMUM "Guaranteed Interest" of 3% equals an end of year two (2) MINIMUM account value of $58,091.30.

Now let's figure her actual MINIMUM cash surrender value end of year two (2) and see if my calculations match what's printed in the policy.

The first thing to be aware of is the fact most ALL annuity contracts allow a 10% "free withdrawal provision" per year. With that in mind, the calculation goes like this:

Account value of $58,091.30, MINUS, the 10% "free withdrawal provision" equals, $52,282.17, that is subject to the withdrawal charge of 11%. $52,282.17 times 11% equals a surrender penalty of $5,751.04.

$58,091.30. (the MINIMUM account value) MINUS $5,751.04 (the correct surrender charge) equals a MINIMUM cash surrender value of $52,340.26. EXACTLY as it's printed in the policy!

So by the end of year two (2) my client could have cashed in her annuity and received back evey penny she put into the contract plus some.

Question for Stock Brokers: Would you recommend a now 80 year old widow cash out her annuity and risk her money in Stocks or Mutual Funds?

Question for Bankers: Would you recommend she put her funds in bank CDs that on average pay 1% to 2% less than her annuity?

Question for Attorneys: Would it be better for her to exempt her cash asset pursuant to Florida Statute 222.14 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0222/SEC14.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0222->Section%2014#0222.14) and pass the cash asset upon her death DIRECTLY to the named beneficaires AND avoid Probate Court at the same time or should she pass it under her Last Will and Testament so you can collect your 3% share pursuant to Florida Statute 733.6171 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0733/SEC6171.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0733->Section%206171#0733.6171)???

Fixed Annuity Data Page.
Used with permission.

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FoleyData.gif

Fixed Annuity Surrender Page.
Used with permission.

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FoleySurrender.gif

my2cents

Gary,
Can you comment on the 4 scenarios that pricespector brought to your attention about replacing the VA for the FA in post #118? Line by line please, if you can. I didn't think so. That is why when anyone makes a comment that you can not address in your favor, you disregard it and make a long post about something else. Is that what you do to the people you talk to? Just change the subject because you can't answer the question. It is easy to confuse those old people isn't it? Too bad they have LIFE INSURANCE agents like you down there.
My2cents.

my2cents

Gary Spicuzza,
FYI you mentioned that fixed annuities are not meant to be used as a passbook savings account; basically they are a long term investment. What do you think anyone who uses a VA is doing or A shares for mutual funds? If someone needs to be totally liquid, ANY annuity is not the right investment vehicle. I think you just don't understand that there are a lot of different vehicles that people can use allocate their money and that is the key. They shouldn't put all their eggs in one basket in anything: investment risk, inflation risk, etc, and upon withdrawal tax risk. Diversification, have you ever heard of it? I forgot you don't have any training in registered products. Maybe you should read some of the other posts in the forum; you might learn something. I forgot you don't want to learn anything, you just sell what you can and adjust everyone's circumstance to suit you.
Real planners don't tailor their client's solutions based on what they are licensed to sell. I'm so sorry that you call yourself a planner in the first place and that is how you go about your business.

My2cents

my2cents

Gary,
Why would you need to address anything to Kiplingers for things that you have put in print? Do you feel the need to retract anything that you have said?
If you didn't want to be linked to these forums personally, you shouldn't have posted links to your website, name of attorney, etc; you could have remained anonymous. This is the power of the internet. I thought you were versed in how that worked too.
I wonder if Neil and Steve have given you permission to post their information on the internet. If I were them, I wouldn't want to be associated with your rants. By posting their links and their personal information along with your own information YOU have exposed them, not Kiplingers.
My2cents

1_more_opai

gary, i thought you were a super computer user - dont you understand how search engines crawl the web? if you did, you would KNOW that kiplinger has NOTHING to do with it. you would also realize that your name is associated with this forum just like it is with 'your' bulletin board. however, this forum has activity whereas your forum has none.

i am laughing uncontrollably. all this NONSENSE about being ANONYMOUS on your part. lets see; brainiac, if you were anonymous you wouldnt have at least 2 complaints filed against you with your state, your name wouldnt be maligned by professionals across this country, and you wouldnt have you name pop up on google showing how little you know about our industry and what a small person you are (with your tactics and knowledge).

but you just HAD to post your name and your website! LOL

my2cents

Gary,

Just curious Gary does Neil, who is an attorney, like to be referred to as a Life Insurance Agent or an Attorney or a CFP? He sounds like a very educated man. If he is an associate of yours, I'm just wondering why you haven't learned anything yet.
My2cents

Puck

This thread is very amusing and educational! I think I'll link it to my university website. It's an excellent lesson on how tired rhetorical devices (like the "little old lady") utterly fail in the face of facts combined with good argumentation.

It also is an excellent example of the death of a thread. We've reached the threat-of-lawsuit already. Pretty soon someone will compare something on this thread to Hitler, and it will be all over with.

1_more_opai

it is sorta hitler'esque to "trick" people into believing something that you can't defend with reason.

Sturgbe

What fixed annuity is paying 6.5%? If you are talking about an IA, that rate is very hypothetical. You can not guarnatee 6.5%. Disregard Gary's comments. They are fictitious and erroneous at best.

In your examples, you have effectively given your client a non-liquid (3-year) "investment" of around 1.5% per year. I think you have accomplished what we all thought. What a great deal for that senior. A MM account would have been much better.

Don't forget that the cleint must pay tax (LIFO) on any gains. The 10% free w/d is still subject to OI taxes. And any gain still left after the surrender charge is taxed at OI. I used a 20% rate (she's broke). I also assumed that this was a person over 59.5. I am also under the impression that there was no MVA on this annuity..right???

GarySpicuzza

Puck wrote:
This thread is very amusing and educational! I think I'll link it to my university website. It's an excellent lesson on how tired rhetorical devices (like the "little old lady") utterly fail in the face of facts combined with good argumentation.

It also is an excellent example of the death of a thread. We've reached the threat-of-lawsuit already. Pretty soon someone will compare something on this thread to Hitler, and it will be all over with.

Puck, perhaps the next university course you should take is 4th grade mathematics and common sense. Of course common sense can't be taught.

This tired, ("little old lady"), as you arrogantly call her, (who IS reading THIS thread) invested $125,319.92 on August 2nd 1999 in a Variable Annuity with American Skandia, sold to her by one of the new breed of "Professionals" without a drop of common sense.

On July 14th 2003 she only had $89,602.39 left. Then they brilliantly, for yet another FEE, added the so called Investment Protection Rider to the contract to STOP the bleeding AFTER she LOST almost $60,000 dollars.

Had she invested her $125,319.92 into her mattress on August 2nd 1999 she would've still had $125,319.92 in her mattress on July 14th 2003. That simple investment technique would have out performed her "Bloated Pig with Lip Stick" infamous Variable Annuity by $35,717.53.

Those ARE the facts as I understand them AND as printed on the statements from American Skandia.

Please click on AND STUDY the links below and give us your best, "excellent lesson on how tired rhetorical devices (like the "little old lady") utterly fail in the face of facts combined with good argumentation."

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FIXEDvsVariable.jpg

Below is the ACTUAL Policy Information from the Client by which the above illustration was based.
USED with permission for the "Pedantics on this board."
The word "Pedantic" means:
A person characterized by a narrow, often ostentatious concern for book learning and formal rules without regard to common sense.

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig1.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig2.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig3.jpg

http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/BloatedPig4.jpg

Dingobiscuit

Puck wrote:

Puck, perhaps the next university course you should take is 4th grade mathematics and common sense. Of course common sense can't be taught.

Common sense also dictates that 4th grade mathematics is not taught at the university level.

1_more_opai

gary, in the long line of untruths and misstatements you have made; lets add another. we all KNOW that your 67yr old widow (or as we affectionately call her: the little old lady), is not reading these posts.

one thing MOST little old ladies have in common with MOST americans in general is that they are a little naive and a little too trusting. so, while she might have not been best served by the person who put her in the variable annuity (as the allocation is questionable), and she was not served well for certain by you placing her in a fixed annuity; this does not mean she is not smart. like i said, just a little naive.

since i (and i am sure most of my peers) would agree that she is smart, that is defacto proof of yet another misstatement on your part.

if she were reading this thread (of over 140 posts so far!!!) then by default she would have read the following 4 posts: 118, 122, 125, 138.

these encapsulate quite clearly what you have done that is so wrong. on reading these 4 posts, she would not only have cancelled her FA with you but also been another in a long line of individuals who have filed complaints about you with the state of florida.

my2cents

Gary,
You don't have any common sense. If you are suggesting that your victims, I mean prospects, read this forum they would be running far far away from you.
You can't even answer any legitimate questions that are being proposed to you, post #118 for example. That is because the answers would not support your bizarre cause. What is the cause anyway? For you to look like a complete idiot. The whole thread started out by you stating that a fixed annuity is the best transfer vehicle for wealth. Not true. Now you are comparing VA with FA. They are totally different vehicles and are used for different purposes. I'm sure most of us in this profession have come across something that hasn't worked the way it was supposed to with new clients when discussing prior investments; however, it takes a real professional not to make even more mistakes with those assets. Let me ask you Gary, would you still switch the little old lady if it didn't fill your pockets?

Build some credibility and answer the questions.
My2cents
p.s.
If you would like to do yourself a big favor, Google psychologists in your area because you have something really wrong with you.

blixet

I understand that the VA lost money considering when it was initiated and the ensuing bear market. Yet, I can't help wondering where the balance stood as of April 2007, rather than looking at July 03 which was probably close to the worst point. Seems rather like data mining for confirmational purposes. Hard to say without complete data.

my2cents

It seems as though Gary cannot answer a simple inquiry; he must once again change the subject to redirect the conversation to something that takes the spotlight off of himself. It is no surprise.

My2cents
p.s. Gary, what is the point of your prior post? Does it really matter? If I were to sit across the table from both of you, I would choose to do business with Mr. Blankenship hands down. I wouldn't care how he got paid because I would have more trust and faith in his ability than yours.

josephdegroff

That trust is a big issue, 2cents, and I strongly agree.

Gary,

You can't assuredly say that Blankenship gets a "finder's fee." Just this past week I had a new contact that said she was going to refer all of her life insurance business over to me and no finder's fee was involved. Furthermore, touting that the insurance agent is going to get $100,000 and acting like this is the norm is asinine. Granted that there are many exceptionally wealthy agents, I don't think that there are many that are making $100,000 FYC on one sale very regularly.

So while saying that Blankenship is a verified insurance agent is an untruth (he has already explained that) you make a HUGE assumption by saying that he MUST get finder's fees.

-Joe

BlankenshipFP

Geez.

I'm really getting tired of this. To think all of this came from a flippant comment meant to show that Gary was wrong by painting all professional members of this community as life insurance agents. As I have repeatedly stated, including in posts on this forum prior to this vicious attack, I hold a producer's license, required by the state of Illinois in order to provide advice on Life Insurance products. But I am still just a fee-only financial planner, nothing more.

I'd like to take a line or two to thank all of the members of this forum who, both publicly and privately, have come out and shown support for me as I fend off this bully. It's gratifying to know that you folks, professional and non-professional alike, who don't know me other than my presence here, recognize that I am being unjustly attacked - I truly appreciate your support.

Now, to the matter at hand: Once again Gary has chosen to make a leap and come up with his "explanation" of how things work, when he has no idea how I operate my business.

Fee Only has a strict definition, according to the National Association of Personal Financial Advisors (www.NAPFA.org):
NAPFA defines a Fee-Only planner as one who, in all circumstances, is compensated solely by the client, with neither the advisor nor any related party receiving compensation that is contingent on the purchase or sale of a financial product. A NAPFA member or affiliate may not receive commissions, rebates, awards, finder’s fees, bonuses or any form of compensation from others as a result of a client’s implementation of the individual’s planning recommendations.

I am a member of NAPFA, and have been for several years. As you can see from the definition above, there can be no "arrangement" as was described in Gary's post.

Thanks again, Gary. You've given me the opportunity to explain and show the general public how a Fee-Only Financial Planner is differentiated in operation, remuneration, and responsibility.

Your post above began with a definition of "defamation" - and then followed with an example, wherein you defame me once again, making up ficticious circumstances about how my business operates. I'll get a copy of this most recent post off to the Florida Department of Financial Services first thing on Monday, to add to the other evidence of your continued defamation attack on me.

1_more_opai

gary, buddy i know you are upset. i know you are feeling surrounded. i know you feel pretty superior to most on these boards.

you would do yourself a great service to get over those feelings. after that, you need to frankly fall on your knees and BEG for forgiveness for the defamatory remarks you have made about many people here (and most specifically to blank). you also need to BEG forgiveness for your utter lack of understanding on the topics addressed here with a specific emphasis on (at a minimum) your understanding of anything registered and now apparently on our industry and how it operates.

can you not see how this makes you (and OMG, by extension) many other straight insurance people look? it makes you AND THEM look like arrogant amateurs at best, and sleazy snake oil salesmen at worst.

how can you NOT know how Fee-Only Planners work. what is it about "only" that you fail to understand. and what type of person are you that is so cock-sure about your knowledge that you will lecture us about the definition of a topic that you have to KNOW you know nothing about.

gary, other than a mea culpa; there is really nothing you can say on these boards. you have entirely eviscerated your personal and professional reputation. perhaps you recall at the beginning of this thread, i thought you knew what you were talking about in many areas. my God man, how wrong i was. with every word you write, with every breath you take, you only impugn the reputations of everyone in our industry. i hope you think hard on this.

GarySpicuzza

NASD - Variable Annuities: Beyond the Hard Sell - Investor Alert
The marketing efforts used by some variable annuity sellers deserve scrutiny -especially when seniors are the targeted investors. Sales pitches for these products might attempt to scare or confuse investors.
Furthermore, proceeds of most variable annuities do not receive a "step-up" in cost basis when the owner dies.

Only people like Stubbe, PriceSpeculator and 1_more_opai, are trained to SELL these bloated pigs with lip stick - Variable Annuities.

ClickTHIS LINK (http://www.nasd.com/InvestorInformation/InvestorAlerts/AnnuitiesandInsurance/VariableAnnuitiesBeyondtheHardSell/index.htm) to read what the NASD has to say about Variable Annuities and the securities licensed
broker wheeler dealer SALESMEN who SELL them with little or no Life Insurance or Annuity experience or training.

Confuse and Obfuscate are their mantra.

ob•fus•cate means:
1. to confuse, bewilder, or stupefy.
2. to make obscure or unclear: to obfuscate a problem with extraneous information.
3. to darken.

As is clearly demonstrated by their own writings on this thread.

Okay, BTTT, Annuities and the 1035 exchange.

This information is for the General Public and real Life Insurance Agents who are NOT securities licensed broker wheeler/dealer hard charging SALESMEN.

Gary Spicuzza states unequivocally that any annuity owner can exchange ANY annuity contract for ANY other annuity contract, upon whatever form.

It DOES NOT MATTER if a risky Variable Annuity is exchanged for a SAFE Fixed Annuity.

Insurance Agents DO NOT HAVE to be "securities licensed broker wheeler/dealers" to replace and exchange a Variable Annuity with a FIXED annuity.

End of Story.

Again, leave it to the Stubbe's - PriceSpeculators and pedantic 1_ more_opai's, of the broker underworld to Confuse and Obfuscate the General Public and attempt to intimidate NON-securities licensed Life Insurance agents.

While it's TRUE one CANNOT sell a Variable Annuity WITHOUT being a securities licensed broker wheeler/dealer......

Any Life Insurance and Annuity agent properly licensed by their state can transfer and 1035 exchange a risky Variable Annuity with a safe FIXED annuity and day of the week.

Section 1035 — Exchange of Stock for Property

(a) General rules --

No gain or loss shall be recognized on the exchange of --

(1) a contract of life insurance for another contract of life insurance or for an endowment or annuity contract; or

(2) a contract of endowment insurance (A) for another contract of endowment insurance which provides for regular payments beginning at a date not later than the date payments would have begun under the contract exchanged, or (B) for an annuity contract; or

(3) an annuity contract for an annuity contract.

GarySpicuzza

Click THIS LINK (http://www.nasd.com/InvestorInformation/InvestorAlerts/AnnuitiesandInsurance/VariableAnnuitiesBeyondtheHardSell/index.htm) to read what the NASD has to say about Variable Annuities and the securities licensed
broker wheeler dealer SALESMEN who SELL them with little or no Life Insurance or Annuity experience or training.

The marketing efforts used by some variable annuity sellers deserve scrutiny -especially when seniors are the targeted investors. Sales pitches for these products might attempt to scare or confuse investors.

As its name implies, a variable annuity's rate of return is not stable, but varies with the stock, bond, and money market subaccounts that you choose as investment options. There is no guarantee that you will earn any return on your investment and there is a risk that you will lose money.

The variety of features offered by variable annuity products can be confusing. For this reason, it can be difficult for investors to understand what's being recommended for them to buy - especially when facing a hard-charging salesperson.

7. Variable Annuities within IRAs

Investing in a variable annuity within a tax-deferred account, such as an individual retirement account (IRA) may not be a good idea. Since IRAs are already tax-advantaged, a variable annuity will provide no additional tax savings. It will, however, increase the expense of the IRA, while generating fees and commissions for the broker or salesperson.

Dingobiscuit

Nobody wants to play with Gary anymore...

http://youtube.com/watch?v=eLHSvPoM9jg

GarySpicuzza

Off Topic:Countryside Wrestling Moves (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/CsideWrestlingMoves.wmv)

Dear Friends and Anonymous Enemies,

Click on the link above to enjoy some great high school wrestling highlights.

Dingobiscuit wrote:
Nobody wants to play with Gary anymore...
Apparently not.

Although the wrestling move that best describes the "Professionals" on this thread is.......

"STFU"

Whatever THAT means?

Puck

What THAT means, is a very rude thing to say to any human being. If you are unsure of the meaning of acronyms on the 'net, don't use them. And if you ARE aware of the meaning of that particular acronym, and you are hiding behind pretend ignorance, that's just a craven and cowardly thing to do.

...and it doesn't inspire any confidence in you as an investment professional. Indeed, I have no confidence that you are a well-balanced and well-adjusted human being. Have you considered professional help?

GarySpicuzza

Dear Puck,

I would suggest you go back to the very beginning of this thread.

That's right. THE first page and start reading this thread in its entirety.

I'm quite certain I was NOT the one who began the Arrogant-Indignant-Comments.

If one is going to dish out Arrogant-Indignant-Comments then they better be able to take the same ESPECIALLY when their statements are WRONG regarding the topic being discussed.

Arrogant means:

1. Making claims or pretensions to superior importance or rights; overbearingly assuming; insolently proud;

2. Having or displaying a sense of overbearing self-worth or self-importance;

3. Marked by or arising from a feeling or assumption of one's superiority toward others.

Indignant means:

unjust, offensive, insulting

I believe these Arrogant-Indignant-Comments began in earnest with Pricespector on Page 2, Post #29 of this thread.

Interestingly, the three stooges, Strurbe, Pricespector and 1_more_opai, AKA the "other" Professional's alter ego, have all but left this thread.

Oh, by the way, just to be fair. Whenever you e-mail anyone or click on a link or visit a website that person and or website has your IP address which can be traced right back to the very computer you are sitting at right now.

If you don't understand that, I suggest you stay off the Internet because NO ONE IS ANONYMOUS.

End of Story.

1_more_opai

you are so anonymous (for the most part) on the internet. while you may broadcast your IP address, barring a court order or some 15 year old super geek, all anyone could possibly find out is that IP address. not your real address, real name, or real anything. in fact, good ol gary here tried to "impress" everyone and even scare everyone here with his computer prowess by stating he knew who you were and where you were. when in reality he had no clue.

point of order: gary offering knowledge of things about which he has no clue is his primary avocation.

gary, the reason most of your nemesi have minimal comment on this thread is because we have pretty much debunked EVERYTHING you had to say. it is only when you come up with some new and outlandish point that we feel the need to (ho hum) correct you yet again. as is the case with your "I can see you sitting at your computer right now." comment.

GarySpicuzza

Off Topic: Brief lesson on Internet Message Boards

For those of you who don’t understand the inner workings of an Internet Message Board let me explain.

The board “Administrator” is all powerful and has FULL access to ALL message board functions that only he sees when he clicks on your profile. Such as your IP address and your e-mail address. The Administrator is the one who can “Ban” any poster for repeated violations of forum civility. They usually ban a poster by both IP address AND e-mail address although that’s NOT fool proof. Most reputable message boards DO NOT allow Internet Based e-mail accounts such as Yahoo or Hotmail. They will require you to have an ISP-based (Internet Service Provider) e-mail address.

There is NO FREEDOM OF SPEECH RIGHTS on an Internet Message Board.

None.

They are privately owned and operated. And they can allow or disallow ANY content they wish at their sole discretion.

Secondly, certain individuals can be appointed as “Moderators” to keep the board civil and cleaned up. They can usually delete offensive posts and edit your posts to remove language or content on the board they deem inappropriate at their sole discretion. They usually can’t “Ban” a poster. That is generally left to the Administrator but they can do cute little things like customize a member’s title rather than have it simply say, “Registered User.”

Then there are the board members who generally don’t understand, what an “Avatar” is?
They generally don’t understand the Administrator of the board determines the user allowable features such as, a sig line, allowing website links or NOT, allowing “hot linking” or NOT and a myriad of other features.

So what’s my point?

There isn’t any point.

Just the facts in a no non-sense, straight forward, informational format.

Click THIS LINK (http://www.ipaddressworld.com/) to see your Internet Protocol address.

When sending messages over the Internet, many people enjoy a sense of anonymity (or at least pseudonymity). Many popular systems, such as Usenet, e-mail, instant messaging, and web forums, and P2P systems, foster this perception because there is often no obvious way for a casual user to connect other users with a "real world" identity.

On a technical level, all computers on the Internet use the Internet Protocol to speak to each other. Two-way communication at the protocol level requires that both parties know the IP address of the other. If communications are logged (for example, by the owner of a web-based bulletin board) or intercepted, the IP address of otherwise anonymous recipients may be discovered. Sometimes IP addresses are exposed directly as a feature of the communication system (often the case on Internet Relay Chat networks.) Casual users often do not feel that knowledge of their IP address is enough for other participants to connect their online activities to their "real world" identities.

Depending on their technical, physical, and legal access, a determined party (such a government prosecutor, or plaintiff in a lawsuit, or a determined stalker) may be able to do so, especially if they are assisted by the records of the Internet Service Provider which has assigned the IP address. Some IP addresses represent a specific computer. Others, due to proxies and Network Address Translation may represent any number of computers or users. It is usually easy to identify which ISP assigned the address, and this may reveal some identifying information about a person, such as geographic location or with the use of geo software the affiliation with a certain organization.

josephdegroff

I signed up with an internet based account. I don't even have an ISP account.

1_more_opai

nice long post. as usual, i dont think it really says anything.

EXCEPT: dont post on gary's bulletin board. perhaps i am stating the obvious since the only posters on gary's voluminous board is .... gary himself. i guess everyone already knows better than to post there.

Puck

This thread gets better and better! Now Gary's got the "I can seeeee yoooooo" thing going, which, if I recall, was my beloved cousin's favorite game, when he was a toddler (ah, the memories!). What next? -- a hearty round of "I'm rubber, you're glue"?

Cameron H.

This is a forum where members need to remain civil. This has not been the case in this thread. So I am asking you to stop the personal attacks. Anyone who continues to behave in an inappropriate manner will no longer be allowed to post in this forum.

GarySpicuzza

It's Friday afternoon.

Time to kick back, relax and enjoy,....

My Woman, a Cold Beer and a Hot Tub,

....and in THAT order.

Click THIS LINK. (https://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/SteveWinsStates.mpg)

It kinda sums up this thread.

1_more_opai

gary, apparently kiplinger removed the post you were all worried about when you google searched your name.

1_more_opai

yep, the google search showed as you said now. so i took the time to click the single post on annuities several times. it will hopefully move it up a little higher. i can only imagine what potential clients will think when they click on and then read the thread on annuities.

of course, most of your potential clients unfortunately were born before phones were commonplace so google might not have the results i would hope. cant blame me for trying though.

GarySpicuzza

BTTT Annuities.

Click THIS LINK (http://forums.kiplinger.com/showpost.php?p=26455&postcount=34) to read post in its entirety.

On, (Page 3, Post #34) Gary Spicuzza wrote:
This is an elderly lady and we are systematically withdrawing every dime she has in this Stock Broker product. We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.

On, (Page 3, Post #43) I wrote:
Pricespector, I'll reply to you later. I have to finish the paperwork on the Variable Annuity I replaced yesterday.

On, (Page 5, Post #68) Pricespector wrote:

Originally Posted by GarySpicuzza
She started with $150,000;
She LOST $60,000;
Leaving her an account value of $90,000

The client is providing me with all the documentation next week. I will then post links and SHOW in Black and White, dollars and common sense what's WRONG with the infamous Variable Annuity and the Broker/Wheeler/Dealer/Salesmen "Professionals" that sell them.

Well, at least she doesn't have to worry about the step-up in basis.

Are you still laughing? She'll NEVER make back her $60,000 LOSS.

Gary, this will be my last message. Be sure to show your 67 year old "client" in black & white that YOU (and YOU alone) are causing her to lose $60000 (which is stealing if you don't make it very clear to her) in permanent death benefit to her loved ones by replacing her VA. Fantastic estate transfer planning! Luckily, you were there to rescue her. I noticed you never mentioned it earlier.

Pricespector wrote:
I noticed you never mentioned it earlier.

On, (Page 3, Post #34) Gary Spicuzza wrote:
This is an elderly lady and we are systematically withdrawing every dime she has in this Stock Broker product. We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.

Dear Pricespector, et al

Inaccurate Inferences and Assumptions can cause a person to have their "Professional" status called into question.

Your and "others" *subsequent postings regarding "this little old lady" are LAUGHABLE regarding my handling of her infamous Vairable Annuity.

Would any of you "Professionals" care to go back and edit and/or delete your words?

If NOT that's Okay!!!

I will simply continue with my autopsy of your "Professionalism."

Best regards,
Gary Spicuzza

*English lesson:
The word subsequent means AFTER.

P.S. In the context of this thread the AFTER I am referring to is ALL posts AFTER my post on Page 3, Post #34 relating to ANY of your lack of 8th grade reading and comprehension skills and comments targeted towards me personally and/or Professionally as they relate to my handling of this Variable Annuity.

Govern yourselves accordingly.

Sales 101

Wow..........

1_more_opai

sales! we waited 6 months for your return (welcome back by the way) and all you give us is "wow"?

Sales 101

I have stayed away purposely because I have been busy and not being active in the industry I did not want to contribute. BUT this guy is at a whole new level....................just WOW.

1_more_opai

he is branching out into other threads too ... it could be the death knell of kiplingers as a reasoned forum. check out this thread too:

Can I use a Living Trust as a Partner in a Limited Partnership? http://forums.kiplinger.com/showthread.php?t=8449

pricespector

This is an elderly lady and we are systematically withdrawing every dime she has in this Stock Broker product. We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.Gary,

Once again you force me to respond, lest the public be misled.

Referencing your understanding of my 8th grade reading and professionalism in post #165:

Not to split hairs, but this IS a replacement, but you go on to point out how you are not replacing the "dog". Also, the death benefit in the American Skandia annuity (all of them in fact, with the exception of some old legacy policies) is reduced PROPORTIONATELY to withdrawals based on current account value. If you take 100% of the remaining balance, she loses 100% of the death benefit. If you remove 50% of her remaining balance, she loses 50% of her death benefit. This is true with virtually all annuities issued in the past 2 decades.

Geesh.

GarySpicuzza

Dear Pricespector,

Did you "miss" the part about her losing $60,000?
That would have NEVER happened in a FIXED annuity.

Please explain in vivid detail exactly how her DEATH should be a comforting consolation to her LOSING money and (1/3) of the value of her IRA.

Please don't make me have to ask you 3 times.

....and she is reading this thread

pricespector

Dear little old lady who is reading this thread,

Gary is about to replace your variable annuity with a fixed annuity. This transaction will put about $4500 in Gary's pocket and take $60,000 out of your beneficiaries pockets by eliminating the death benefit that equals the amount you originally put in your variable annuity. This is one of the biggest advantages of a variable annuity. Although your $60000 loss cannot be a consolation to you while living, wouldn't it be wonderful to pass this wealth on to your loving family?

I know you must be a bit scared of the market as Gary has pointed out. He is correct to tell you that a fixed annuity will preserve your remaining principal. Has he told you that there is a FIXED account and government savings bond accounts in your variable annuity that you can simply move your funds into free of any charges? If you move the funds into your variable annuity's fixed account, you can preserve your principal AND the $60000 of additional death benefit that you can transfer to your heirs, who I'm sure you love very much.

I know taxation is probably a concern to you, but your account is an IRA, so the tax deferral of an annuity does nothing for you. However, if your account was not an IRA and you decided to succumb to Gary's sales pressure, you would have to be sure that he properly executes a 1035 exchange of your annuity to preserve your cost basis. This is so your first $60000 is recovered tax-free. Whatever you do, do not cash out your old annuity and give him a check. This would make all of your recovery taxable because a properly executed 1035 is the only way to preserve your original cost basis. In any event, you will still lose your $60000 death benefit by listening to Gary. It is also recommended that any 1035 or IRA rollover is done via institution-to-institution transfer to ensure you do not take a tax hit and that all the necessary legal documentation has been processed properly.

Also, I'm sure you're aware (because Gary has told you) that you will incur a new surrender schedule if you move your funds to Gary's annuity. So, if you need more than 10% of your funds per year for retirement, medical or long term care needs, you take a huge hit (likely 6-8% of any amount you withdraw above the 10% surrender-free allowance). There is most likely no surrender charges on your current variable annuity. Also, your current annuity offers all of the creditor protections that a fixed annuity offers. In fact, since it is an IRA, you don't even need an annuity or the tax-deferral. If you're Ok with losing your death benefit, you may even consider using CDs to preserve your principal. At least this way, you won't incur any new surrender charges and your IRA can still pass outside of probate by naming primary and contingent beneficiaries.

As for credentials, I am not an "Agent-in-Charge" like Gary, but I do have thousands of hours of education, multiple licenses in multiple states, several designations and real life experiences which give me some inkling of what is going here. I would recommend that you contact and get an objective second opinion from someone who doesn't sell any product such a fee-only CFP or ChFC. Fee-only planners are NOT agents and are sworn to uphold a high code of ethics and put a clients needs first because they have NO financial gain to be had with the sale of an insurance product. They have no arrangement for compensation based on sales with any company and their loyalty lies with the client. In other words, they are not insurance agents. As with all professions, a good insurance agent can be a godsend, but an unscrupulous one can be devastating.

Good luck on your decision! I hope this helps.

Puck

Dear little old lady who is reading this thread,...Good luck on your decision! I hope this helps.

Pricespector,

I wanted to thank you for that last post, as humorous as it began. Mainly because it was CLEAR and CONCISE.

Listen, when God was handing out brains, he didn't pass me by. I've got a Ph.D. I read extensively on a variety of subjects, and can converse on various levels, with various people. I'm no dummy.

But this entire thread had my eyes rolling back in my thread. Gary's posts, in particular, were clear as mud, but even the many attempts at explaining what was wrong with Gary's information didn't make it click in my brain. Although, there was clarity enough to know that, were I thinking of changing annuities, or being Gary's client, I ought to reconsider.

And this is probably the BIGGEST problem in any kind of financial advising, whether or not one has the "right" credentials or not -- CLARITY. Making sure your client understands fully, beyond just an "initial here" and a "yep". Perhaps going back to those fourth grade educational schemes, and asking the client to repeat what you just said is what's necessary to make sure the client fully understands what he or she is getting into, especially when investments can be as complex as either variable or fixed annuities.

Too many advisors, of any stamp, are anxious to make a sale, or may even feel they are truly acting without bias, and in the best interests of their client -- but unless the CLIENT feels completely safe and aware of what they are getting into, all your efforts are worthless. What happens is, one day, the little old lady to whom you sold a variable annuity walks in to another office, worried that she was cheated, because she never understood the darned thing in the first place, and may accidentally put herself in the hands of an advisor who may or may not have her best interests at heart.

pricespector

I have long held the belief that the only thing that seperates a professional from a saleman (in any industry) is making the DISADVANTAGES as clear as the advantages. A salesman will consistently harp on the advantages while completely disregarding or dodging the discussion of disadvantages.

1_more_opai

price, i read his comment earlier today and then got busy. i just logged back on to write my own "dear little old lady reading this thread" post. you rock!

one more point for the little old lady, if you will allow:

LOL (Little 'ol Lady), in actuality, gary may be your saving grace here. by soliciting the move he is recommending of you and in doing so the way that he apparently has, he may have offered you a sure fire redemption of the lost $60K (sorry about that happening in the first place ... more on that later).

there is what is called a "reasonable person" standard. this means, what would a reasonable person do in a given situation.

as has been clear from the begining, absolutely NO ONE agrees with gary about your situation. i would further opine that EVERYONE would agree with Pricespecter's analysis of what should be done. as a result, you may wish to consider an attorney who deals in insurance and financial fraud cases. with gary's recommendation you will certainly lose (at a minumum) the $60K death benefit. you may also get additional judgements over and above the $60K. the extra good thing about this is that the judgement would all be income tax free!!!

(correct me if i am wrong here, gary. a legal judgement against you would be tax free to the LOL... wouldnt it?)

so, while a travesty may have occured in the situation that resulted in you losing the $60K it is almost ONLY because of gary's actions that you might recover it ... you will just have to sue him to get it.

my best wishes to you in your decision making process.

GarySpicuzza

Best thread EVER!

GarySpicuzza

On Page 3, Post #34 Gary Spicuzza wrote:

This is an elderly lady and we are systematically withdrawing every dime she has in this Stock Broker product. We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.

What part about.... (We didn't replace the Dog because of the life insurance component in a Variable Annuity her beneficiary would at least get back her premium minus the withdrawls.).....do you people NOT COMPREHEND???

She owns the Annuity contract.

After consultation with me and after consultaion with her securities licensed wheeler dealer.....SHE and SHE ALONE made the decision to withdrawal funds at the rate of $1,000 per month to use for living expenses until the money runs out, in about 7 years.

She is SPENDING what's left for her own NEEDS.

ALL of the posts after my post on Page 3, Post #34 are nothing butt a collection of INACCURATE INFERENCES and ASSumptions.

My "little old lady" is LAUGHING OUT LOUD at your postings.

She now has a crystal clear understanding between a Securities Licensed "Financial Advisor" and an Insurance Agent that come from two very distinct points of view with respect to financial security.

One wants to chase impossible earnings in the market with the clients money.

The other understands the protection of the CASH ASSET is the UTMOST concern to Seniors living their last days on Earth.

A 67 year old woman should have NEVER had her IRA at RISK in the Stock Market.

Those funds should have been placed in a FIXED Annuity.

FinancialRep

I am currently studying for my securities license. Will I then be a "wheeler dealer?"

BlankenshipFP

Fin -

I can't imagine why you're wasting your time... haven't you been reading all of the posts of the Great Seer (GS)? The answer to all financial questions is: a fixed annuity. Period. End of story. <insert wrestling video here>

There is therefore no need for these silly licenses and other designations.

<tongue is firmly in cheek throughout this message>

pricespector

After consultation with me and after consultaion with her securities licensed wheeler dealer.....SHE and SHE ALONE made the decision to withdrawal funds at the rate of $1,000 per month to use for living expenses until the money runs out, in about 7 years.
Gary, let's be honest. You know you wanted to replace it, and you would if you could. Too bad she consulted her securities licensed wheeler-dealer huh? Probably blew the deal for you.

Also, you may want to recognize that older people reading your post may actually take offense to your assessment that the market is just too scary for them. I know alot of people age 70 and above that would never touch a fixed annuity just because of the low interest rate. They are holding very intelligent, diversified portfolios and they are NOT scared of the market, but instead fully understand it. In fact, some of them are much more agressive than I am and they are 40 years my senior!

GarySpicuzza

Blank wrote:
The answer to all financial questions is: a fixed annuity. Period. End of story. <insert wrestling video here>

Those are Blank's words NOT mine.
___________________________________/

My words would read:

The answer to all "END OF A NATURAL PERSON'S LIFE" financial questions is: A FIXED annuity coupled with a Revocable Trust.

Period.

End of story.

<wrestling video here> (https://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/Steve-vs-Latessa.mpg)

BlankenshipFP

So, class, let's review:

I made a statement in a post as if it were what Gary might recommend, albeit facetiously. Gary didn't agree with the statement and refuted it... because he was given the opportunity!

How is this different from the case where Gary has made statements on his message board - specifically impersonating me - and I do not necessarily endorse or agree with the statements? AH HA! It's different because I can not refute the statements made on Gary's message board - including those where he's impersonating me!

You're a piece of work, Gary. I hope you're proud of yourself.

GarySpicuzza

Mr. Blankenship,

You and anyone else are FREE to comment on anything I've written on that message board.

As long as NO profanity is used and personal insults are NOT made.

ANY FALSE DEFAMATORY comments or posts will be immediately DELETED and the poster BANNED.

Now I am more than willing to kiss and make up.

I HAVE NO ANIMOSITY TOWARDS YOU.

None.

Unfortunately for you, YOU walked right into a boobie trap that I was actually setting up for Mr. Voodoo, that self appointed clown from Tennessee.

However, YOU handed me your head on a golden platter.

I'm sorry.

And I have no doubts you are in fact one of the "good guys" in the Financial Services Industry.

I will cheerfully removed and delete FOREVER any posts you personally object to just as soon as Kiplinger does the same regarding how they are linking my name with a Google Search.

Cameron H. doesn't "think" Kiplinger is responsible for what a poster posts.

That's IS TRUE.

However, they ARE and WILL be held responsible for allowing those comments to remain and the method by which they are having Google link to this Annuity thread.

It is deliberate and malicious retaliation against ME, because YOU put your own foot in your own mouth.

I believe I have more than adaquarely demonstrated on this and the other threads, the two most arrogant posters of all time (pricespector and 1_more_opai) have NO CLUE about that which they speak.

Yes indeed, a very shallow understanding coupled with utter ARROGANCE.

You are a Moderator for Kiplinger.

You go first and delete or edit each and every personal attack against me on this thread and then I will do the same on that "other" message board for you.

- IF - my name is no longer associated with Ms. 1_more_opai's infamous "former" post #68.

Yes, I know I will have to also go back and delete any references I have made to former post #68 on this thread and on my own site.

Is that fair?

Dingobiscuit

Gary,

I have Googled "dingobiscuit" and Kiplinger's was the second hit for that as well as well. I just didn't think it was worth mentioning before, but it doesn't sound like a conspiracy, just the way the search parameters happen to work out in Google.

I hope that clears things up.

Your Kiplinger's thread come in as the 11th hit on Yahoo and too far back to bother on ask.com.

1 More Opai comes out FIRST in Google (I needed another example), so you aren't the only one with a bone to pick (with Google, not Kiplinger's), if it really matters that much.

GarySpicuzza

Dingo,

Thanks I'll check it out.

pricespector

Gary,

I really don't see how you can have a beef with anyone about this board since you have about a dozen links directly to it via your own message board. How is this sane?

1_more_opai

just keepin the link alive: here google google google. please find my little post.

GarySpicuzza

GarySpicuzza wrote:
I believe I have more than adaquarely demonstrated on this and the other threads, the two most arrogant posters of all time (pricespector and 1_more_opai) have NO CLUE about that which they speak.

Yes indeed, a very shallow understanding coupled with utter ARROGANCE.

BlankenshipFP

I will cheerfully removed and delete FOREVER any posts you personally object to just as soon as Kiplinger does the same regarding how they are linking my name with a Google Search.

Here's the problem, Gary: neither I nor Kiplinger's can control how Google indexes its searches. There's a whole cottage industry dedicated to search engine optimization, and while there are apparently ways to influence your position within a Google search, such as providing links back and forth to the information, there is no way to control the search.

So - based upon a perceived wrong that this gentleman from Tennesee has done to you, and based upon the fact that I cannot control Google, I get to continue to suffer this character assassination?

You are a Moderator for Kiplinger.

You go first and delete or edit each and every personal attack against me on this thread and then I will do the same on that "other" message board for you.

You are right, I am a moderator, actually an administrator, for this message board. However, my directive is to eliminate spam messages, not to control or evaluate non-spam messages for accuracy or appropriateness. If I felt that was within my scope I would have eliminated this entire thread long ago, as I feel it has been a cancer to the community and should be eliminated.

I would suggest that you contact Cameron H. to see if she will address your wishes - I'm not in that position and I don't intend to undertake that kind of role.

GarySpicuzza

Mr. Blankenship wrote:
If I felt that was within my scope I would have eliminated this entire thread long ago, as I feel it has been a cancer to the community and should be eliminated.

Do it!

Then I'll do the same for you on that "other" message board toy of mine.

We can always start a "new" Annuities thread with no non sense, straight forward, useful consumer information.

Do it Blank!

In fact, I'll go first as a showing of my good faith!

1_more_opai

jim, i am but a small registered user. and though i have no standing to dictate what stays and what goes .... in my small voice i humbly ask that you not delete the thread.

NOTE: I know you said you felt it was not within your purview to do so in the first place, so i am not really pleading with you per se; but rather pleading with the powers that be who do in fact have the responsibility for making these decisions.

this thread (though not civil at times; though rambling often; though off topic extensively) has much to offer the community at large. as of this post, the thread has been viewed almost 5500 times!!!! it is instructional to those of us in the industry (price has made some exceptional points). it is instructional to readers (several non-pro's finally gleaned cogent points after suffering dozens of posts of obfuscation). is is instructional to people seeking professional advice to see that we are truly looking out for them by heaping scorn and ridicule on those who dont know about what they speak. truth be told, we all know that gary has learned an amazing amount from this thread whether he will ever admit it or not. finally, the little old lady LEARNED not to use a fixed annuity as prescribed by gary.

this thread has also been massively instructional in understanding the true differences between a simple life agent and a comprehensive advisor and even a fee only planner. i know several "life agents" who do not work securities and while i hold them in high regard, it has taught me how essential the additional licensing is. and above this, the additional certifications.

again, i reiterate that i understand that this thread has occasionally been rude. personal attacks have been made against me!!! yet i have not complained. the overall good of the thread outweighs these slights - even the ones against you (blank) which were the most offensive by far. i hate to pull a barbara streisand, alec baldwin, or michael moore ... but if this thread is deleted i fear i would have no recourse but to simply move to france. this thread is valuable and should stay. i would at least ask the input of others before deciding to do away with such a valuable resource.

most sincerely,

GarySpicuzza

Opai, you are truely a piece of work.

I love your Biography:
i advise people on insurance and investment choices. i place no product of any kind.

That's like a criminal defense attorney PROUDLY stating:

I advise people who have been charged with crimes of their legal rights.
I try NO cases of any kind.

An *incongruent and **preposterous statement to say the least.

*incongruent means:
at variance, conflicting, contradictory, contrary

**preposterous means:
completely contrary to nature, reason, or common sense; absurd; senseless; utterly foolish: a preposterous tale.

BlankenshipFP

Gary, that's a fair accurate description of my financial planning business. As I've explained on multiple occasions, I provide advice on investments and insurance, but sell no products. And my clients find it far from incongruent or preposterous.

A better comparison than your attorney comparison is:
"I'm a doctor and I advise people about health issues. I sell no drugs of any kind."
Or maybe:
"I'm a business consultant and I advise businesses on management issues. I sell no office products of any kind."
Or how about:
"I'm a preacher and I advice people about spritual issues. I sell no bibles of any kind."

The point is, advice can be given without the sale of a product. I do it every day.

GarySpicuzza

Mr. Blankenship,

As promised I deleted ALL references of you on that "other" message board including the member persona.

I have went though this thread and deleted and or edited any of my own references to former post #68.

As I stated before I have no animosity towards you whatsoever.

NONE.

My goal was to educate the public that each and every one of the "Professional" financial advisors they speak with are in fact INSURANCE AGENTS.

It is the Life Insurance Industry that provides the Financial Products to secure a person's and their families future financial security.

The SEC and the NASD DO NOT provide actuarily sound financial products.

ONLY the Life Insurance Industry does that.

Just ask any beneficiary who has ever received a DEATH BENEFIT check.

SADALE

Simply holding a license does not absolutely dictate "profession" or "title". An "agent" is basically someone who is authorized to act for some person or entity. In this case, if there is no contract authorizing Mr. Blankenship to act on behalf of, or represent, an individual or company, then he is NOT an agent. Case closed. His license enables him to choose to be employed as an agent, should he so desire. However, he has chosen not to be employed as such. As he's clearly stated, he holds license because his state requires it in order for him to act as a consultant pertaining to life/annuity issues.

I don't see why that is so hard for some to understand. It's not even be a question of semantics - I mean, there's no middle ground. A person either is, or is not a representative of something or someone. To falsely claim one when it's the other seems pretty dishonest and unprofessional. And that, in fact, is not educating the public - it's misleading the public.

jims money

It’s not pretty, in fact some of it should be downright embarrassing, but I think it should stay as well. There is a lot to be learned in this thread.

I think the biggest one isn’t even financial in nature. It has to do with internet/forum decorum. It worries me a little bit that folk’s may not post their questions because they want to do so with anonymity, as they should. This whole “I see you” thing even when it’s a bluff should serve as a lesson for all posters. Be careful with what information you post anywhere on the net. There are some bad people out there.

It amazes me how anyone can put down “further” education in almost any aspect. What you do with that education is open for debate but the education itself? In my younger days I had a roommate who was a Chiropractor. She was frequently belittling MD’s. I used to say to her that it would seem to me you need to become a MD before you can truly evaluate the advantages/disadvantages of traditional medicine versus chiropractic techniques. If you become a MD and still feel Chiropractic techniques are superior than you have made a truly well informed decision.

Like any other profession, advisors come in all shapes and sizes. There are good ones and there are bad ones. The bad ones come in different varieties as well. Some are just plain dishonest and looking to make a buck. Some truly believe they are doing all they can to help their clients based on the experience they have. I am not an advisor but I think it would be a rare one who would not say that they are much better at what they do in year 10 versus year 1 of their career’s. So what does that say about the information they gave out in year 1? The flip side is you can’t get to 10 without starting with 1. I know I am a better DIY’er today than I was 10 years ago, but I was still good 10 years ago. You need to educate yourself or you will not be able to evaluate the person who is helping you. In the same regard you advisor should be continuing his education as well.

My intent is not to harp on poor advisors. There are lots of great ones out there as well. Anyone who has read my historical posts knows that I am a huge backer of the DIY method. That said, in January I turned 20% of my portfolio over to a professional whom I have know for 20 years. I am very pleased with what he has done for me so far. There are lots of crummy lawyers out there too, but if you are charged with a crime you did not commit are you not going to get a lawyer because some of them are bad? By the same token you can probably handle a speeding ticket yourself. Different circumstances require different courses of action.

Yep, lots to learn in this thread, just not much about annuities.

blixet

Seems like this thread has gone through most of the stages of dying. There has been denial, anger and bargaining. Now with the postmortem in progress, maybe we can get through the depression and finally come to acceptance... and then bury the corpse.

Dingobiscuit

just keepin the link alive: here google google google. please find my little post.

quoted from Gary Spicuzza post #183

1MO,

Just when things finally calm down, you squirt lemon juice and salt in the almost-healed wound...

1_more_opai

of every action i have ever taken on kiplingers, i will count NOTHING as worthy of my time so much as my efforts at educating any who will listen about gary spicuzza. the sheer beauty of which is simply reposting his own posts.

GarySpicuzza

The autopsy of 1_more_opai's words.

1_more_opai wrote:
Biography:
i advise people on insurance and investment choices. i place no product of any kind.
If one DOES NOT place any product of any kind then they DO NOT and CAN NOT know the exact details of any product in particular.
_________________________________________________________________

Case in point: 1_more_opai, because it doesn't place any product of any kind it's utterly clueless that any Annuity can be REPLACED and 1035 exchanged for any other Annuity. Any RISKY Variable Annuities can be REPLACED and 1035 exchanged for a SAFE Fixed Annuity. An Insurance Agent DOES NOT have to be securities licensed to replace a Variable Annuity.

I REPLACE and 1035 EXCHANGE Variable Annuities all the time. IF 1_more_opai's words were correct then the transfering Variable Annuity Insurance company would NOT transfer the funds and the NEW issuing Insurance Company would NOT accept same said funds.

In fact, we transfer funds ALL THE TIME from risky brokerage accounts to safe FIXED annuities ALL THE TIME.

1_more_opai is WRONG again.
_________________________________________________________________

Case in point #2: On THIS THREAD (http://forums.kiplinger.com/showthread.php?t=8449) 1_more_opai states unequivocally:
the trust is a person.
A trust in NOT a person.
_________________________________________________________________

Case in point #3: On same said thread Pricespector, who has ZERO comprehension skills states:
I was trying to say that for all *intensive purposes (*Did you mean "Intents and Purposes?") a trust is a person in the eyes of the law. In fact, in most cases, a trust has MORE protections than a privately owned annuity or life insurance. And in both cases a trust can be the owner of each of them anyway.

And in the context of your post, yes. A trust can be considered a beneficiary and subject to the same protections as any other "natural" person.

Now he claims a Trust has, "MORE protections than a privately owned annuity or life insurance." AND "A trust can be considered a beneficiary and subject to the same protections as any other "natural" person."

Both of Pricespector's statements are ABSOLUTELY WRONG.

The ABSOLUTE most protections afforded under Florida Law 222.13 and 222.14 is when a natural person is the Owner/Insured/Annuitant of a Life Insurance policy or an Annuity contract and when a natural person is the beneficiary of a Life Insurance policy or an Annuity contract.

This is Florida Life Insurance and Annuity Contract Law 101.
It is the most basic of all insurance legal issues taught to BRAND NEW AGENTS.
_________________________________________________________________

Case in point #4: On same said thread 1_more_opai's advice to Coursms question:
Can I use a Living Trust as a Partner in a Limited Partnership?
here is why you need a face to face meeting with a CPA: is your trust a revocable or irrevocable trust? will you personally still control the trust? will your trust be a limited partner or a general partner? i can go on and on ad naseum. i recommend you contact a CPA.

why a CPA, frankly a lawyer may establish both the trust and even the partnership documents. but that doesnt always mean they understand the pro's and con's as to why select one structure over another.

Well what can I say?
Her words are a written document that speaks for itself.
She continues at the end of the thread with:

coursms, i would encourage you to find your own person and not take a referral from a silly bulletin board. if you DID want to take it from a bulletin board, i would even more strongly encourage you to NOT take one from Gary Spicuzza.

Hmmmmmm, and who did I refer Coursms to contact?

#1) Contact Joe Gandolfo (http://joegphd.com/index.html)

or

#2) Contact Neil Covert (http://www.covertlaw.com/about.htm)

Butt of course I forgot we are talking 'bout 1_more_opai who has NEVER heard of Joe Gandolfo (http://joegphd.com/index.html) or Neil Covert (http://www.covertlaw.com/about.htm)

Too busy day tradeing with Chuck I suppose.

Ms. Opai how much more do you want me to discredit you and your sidekick Pricespector before both of you STFU?

Please keep posting.

Your are both what's known as "Useful Idiots" along with Jeffrey Voudrie from Tennessee. Mr. Fuzzy Math Voodoo himself.

Will someone please get that CLOWN on this thread!
_________________________________________________________________

222.13 Life insurance policies; disposition of proceeds.--

(1) Whenever any person residing in the state shall die leaving insurance on his or her life, the said insurance shall inure exclusively to the benefit of the person for whose use and benefit such insurance is designated in the policy, and the proceeds thereof shall be exempt from the claims of creditors of the insured unless the insurance policy or a valid assignment thereof provides otherwise. Notwithstanding the foregoing, whenever the insurance, by designation or otherwise, is payable to the insured or to the insured's estate or to his or her executors, administrators, or assigns, the insurance proceeds shall become a part of the insured's estate for all purposes and shall be administered by the personal representative of the estate of the insured in accordance with the probate laws of the state in like manner as other assets of the insured's estate.

222.14 Exemption of cash surrender value of life insurance policies and annuity contracts from legal process.--

The cash surrender values of life insurance policies issued upon the lives of citizens or residents of the state and the proceeds of annuity contracts issued to citizens or residents of the state, upon whatever form, shall not in any case be liable to attachment, garnishment or legal process in favor of any creditor of the person whose life is so insured or of any creditor of the person who is the beneficiary of such annuity contract, unless the insurance policy or annuity contract was effected for the benefit of such creditor.

pricespector

More blathering Gary? I think this is usually where the arresting officer asks on a Friday night, "Do you know why I pulled you over?" Your manipulation of context has obviously been honed by years of pressuring seniors.

Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who reads this thread can see right through you and your multiple cut'n'paste lessons from the fixed annuity sales rebuttal kit. I am quite sorry for your condition. Make no mistake, it is very apparent that your actual knowledge and reasoning power is entirely elementary. Sad...really.

Thank you for correcting me on my erroneous usage of intents and purposes. You are finally correct about something. I told you I would give you credit if you did so. Thank you for your "patients" Gary. I mean, come on. How old are you?

Keep going Gary...you're quickly closing in on First Command as the largest thread in the history of Kiplinger's.

GarySpicuzza

Stockwell wrote on Page 1, Post #1 of this thread:
Where can I find listings of good annuities? How do you choose the best one for your personal situation? What are the criteria for comparison?

Stockwell, first and foremost you CANNOT get advice on these contracts from person's who:
Advise people on Insurance and Investment choices, but place no product of any kind.

The "Best" annuity is in fact a FIXED Indexed Annuity with 100% of the funds allocated to the Monthly Point-to-Point Strategy.

FIXED Indexed Annuities are THE "Perfect" Investment.

Yes indeed, Mr. Philip Client has a 1st year projected Rate of Return of 15.23% on his FIXED Indexed Annuity.

Final interest won't be calculated and credited until the End of Business on June 14th 2007.

When the final numbers are calculated I'll repost.

Click THIS LINK (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/PhilipFixedIndexedAnnuity.jpg) to see the 15.23% numbers for yourself.

This is on top of the *7% interest BONUS* that was paid upon policy issue.

[Strings Attached]
*7% interest BONUS*
[/Strings Attached]

P.S. Securities Licensed wheeler dealer salesmen CANNOT offer you these products unless their Broker-Dealer allows them.

GarySpicuzza

1_more_opai

gary, i was gonna discuss your persistent comments about the wonders of equity indexed annuities. i wanted to ask you why, if they are so wonderful and all, why they are the most litigated product on the market today. there are more lawsuits currently pending on this product that every other single security on the market .. combined.

GarySpicuzza

Open Letter to the General Public.

Click THIS LINK to read all about Equity Indexed Annuities, also known as, FIXED Indexed Annuities.

Keep in mind securities reps CANNOT offer these products to their clients UNLESS their Broker-Dealer allows them. Nor do they have any investment strategy that will out perform an Indexed Annuity WITHOUT risking your money.

Persons who proudly proclaim they:
Advise people on Insurance and Investment choices, but place no product of any kind.

Simply, don't know what they are talking about and have only a shallow, limited knowledge of these contracts.

Puck

That link goes to one of your affiliations, Gary. Mind providing a less biased source? Say, a nice university link?

1_more_opai

gary, i am sorry. i cant help myself. like price i feel absolutely compelled to respond when you say something ignorant ... to not do so would imply my agreement and thus would be hurtful to other readers.

when you said: "Keep in mind securities reps CANNOT offer these products to their clients UNLESS their Broker-Dealer allows them. Nor do they have any investment strategy that will out perform an Indexed Annuity WITHOUT risking your money." you could not be more wrong.

again, as you have BRAGGED on innumerable occasions, you are not licensed for securities. frankly, i think people would see me as an imbecile if i (who has no mechanical knowledge or abilities) would argue with a certified mechanic on mechanical issues. so, while you have NO experience, NO training, and NO licensing regarding securities, if flabbergasts me that you offer up your insight ... and your insight as an "expert" no less.

since EIA are still classified as "fixed" products, broker dealers dont come into play. ergo, what a broker dealer (a registered term, by the way) is moot. in fact, as you are a perfect example ... you have NO broker dealer yet you offer EIA.

now, on to my second point ... specifically on Equity Indexed (anythings, like annuity or universal life). if these products are so good, why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale? two of these companies are Mass Mutual and New York Life. NY Life sells more insurance every single year than any other company, yet they wont offer this product? do you think that Mass Mutual and NY Life want to lose market share by not being competitive? no, their internal analysis shows them to be defective in the extreme. both of these companies came out several years ago saying no to this product. they believed that they were too complicated FOR CLIENTS, too restrictive TO CLIENTS, and not in the clients best interest. they also predicted that EIA and EIUL would be the next class action lawsuit. well, you may argue that they arent too complicated or too restrictive, or have other flaws, but these and other major insurers were right about the lawsuits. for me, that gives them credibility. you have not earned any credibility in this matter.

now you have the SEC and NASD and dozens and dozens of state departments of insurance reviewing these products.

GarySpicuzza

Let's get BTTT:
Attorneys, Lawsuits and Annuities II

Click THIS LINK to read ALL about Attorneys, Lawsuits and Annuities.

Wake me up for closing arguments!

Gary D. Spicuzza
NOT an Attorney-at-Law

1_more_opai

ouch! gary, you got me with that stunning retort.

GarySpicuzza

1MO's post above was copied and pasted BELOW in its entirety to PREVENT this useful idiot from editing its words.

Let the autopsy begin.....
1MO wrote:
since EIA are still classified as "fixed" products, broker dealers dont come into play. ergo, what a broker dealer (a registered term, by the way) is moot. in fact, as you are a perfect example ... you have NO broker dealer yet you offer EIA.
Registered securities representatives are under the control of their Broker-Dealer. End of Story.

Yes, it's TRUE as you correctly state....in fact, as you are a perfect example ... you have NO broker dealer yet you offer EIA.

Yes, I actively participate in the Solicitation and Procurement of FIXED Indexed Annuities, also known as, an Equity Indexed Annuity, BECAUSE they are an Insurance Product.

One DOES NOT NEED a "Broker-Dealer" to offer Insurance Products to the General Public.

One must have an INSURANCE LICENSE issued by the Florida Department of Financial Services before one can actively participate in the Solicitation and Procurement of FIXED Indexed Annuities or ANY other form of Insurance.

End of Story.

1MO goes on to claim:
if these products are so good, why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale?
This statement is FACTUALLY FALSE.

Click THIS LINK (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/full_list/index.html) to see where Mass Mutual and New York Life rank amoung the 100 LARGEST Companies in the world.

Click THIS LINK (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/snapshots/2282.html) to see the Industry: Insurance: Life, Health (stock) LARGEST Insurance Companies in the WORLD.

Mass Mutual and New York Life didn't break into the top 21.

1_more_opai you are nothing more than a smear merchant.

You are in fact a disgrace to the Financial Services Industry.

That is why you hide behind your Internet anonymouse persona.

More autopsy later.

I have clients to meet with all day.

Best regards,

Gary D. Spicuzza,
Primary Agent-in-Charge

__________________________________________________________/
gary, i am sorry. i cant help myself. like price i feel absolutely compelled to respond when you say something ignorant ... to not do so would imply my agreement and thus would be hurtful to other readers.

when you said:
Quote:
"Keep in mind securities reps CANNOT offer these products to their clients UNLESS their Broker-Dealer allows them. Nor do they have any investment strategy that will out perform an Indexed Annuity WITHOUT risking your money."

you could not be more wrong.

again, as you have BRAGGED on innumerable occasions, you are not licensed for securities. frankly, i think people would see me as an imbecile if i (who has no mechanical knowledge or abilities) would argue with a certified mechanic on mechanical issues. so, while you have NO experience, NO training, and NO licensing regarding securities, if flabbergasts me that you offer up your insight ... and your insight as an "expert" no less.

since EIA are still classified as "fixed" products, broker dealers dont come into play. ergo, what a broker dealer (a registered term, by the way) is moot. in fact, as you are a perfect example ... you have NO broker dealer yet you offer EIA.

now, on to my second point ... specifically on Equity Indexed (anythings, like annuity or universal life). if these products are so good, why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale? two of these companies are Mass Mutual and New York Life. NY Life sells more insurance every single year than any other company, yet they wont offer this product? do you think that Mass Mutual and NY Life want to lose market share by not being competitive? no, their internal analysis shows them to be defective in the extreme. both of these companies came out several years ago saying no to this product. they believed that they were too complicated FOR CLIENTS, too restrictive TO CLIENTS, and not in the clients best interest. they also predicted that EIA and EIUL would be the next class action lawsuit. well, you may argue that they arent too complicated or too restrictive, or have other flaws, but these and other major insurers were right about the lawsuits. for me, that gives them credibility. you have not earned any credibility in this matter.

now you have the SEC and NASD and dozens and dozens of state departments of insurance reviewing these products.

pricespector

Gary,

I hate to rain on your "Top 21" parade (not really), but that list is of STOCK insurance companies. Mass mutual and NY Life are MUTUAL companies and wouldn't be found anywhere on one of those lists. You knew that there is a difference right?

1_more_opai

price, it is kinda rude to expect gary to understand anything about wheeler dealer securities ... after all, stocks are securities. ie. "STOCK" Company.

and; to be ... er, FAIR: i didnt say NY Life nor Mass Mutual were the LARGEST companies in the world. or in the country. what i did say was: NY Life sells more insurance every single year than any other company... which is FACTUALLY true. even MORE impressive is that they are a fairly smallish firm. that speaks even LOUDER about the quality of what they do. of course, since we are talking about life insurance, i mean life insurance. not extended warranty insurance on your car or ANYTHING else.

rank in sales - name of company - rank on fortune list - earnings revenue

1New York Life Insurance (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/937.html) 78 - 28,365.1
2TIAA-CREF (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/1312.html) 80 - 26,756.8
3Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/839.html) 90 - 24,863.4
4Northwestern Mutual (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/1880.html) 112 - 20,726.2
5Guardian Life of America (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/593.html) 257 - 9,693.7
6Thrivent Financial for Lutherans (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/40.html) 370 - 6,164.6
7Western & Southern Financial (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/3807.html) 460 - 4,838.1
8Mutual of Omaha Ins. (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/913.html) 489 - 4,497.6
9CUNA Mutual Group (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/386.html) 667 - 2,891.9
10National Life Group (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune500/2007/snapshots/4248.html) 786 - 2,309

in other words, this dinky little corner convenience store sells more every day than the big ol walmart across the street.

gary, can you really disagree with my point? which was, by the way, that a broker dealer has NOTHING WHATSOEVER to do with the sale of indexed annuities. which is what you were wrong about before you started being wrong about something totally unrelated.

p.s. i like walmart - no offense Sam!

Dingobiscuit

My money's with Gary disagreeing somehow, but that is just a hunch.

cape cod Bob

If you look at the top mutual company's NY Lif is #5 and Mass mutual is # 6 I believe. So right up there for top companies! Stock companies a different list as Price mentioned.
Just an observer! and yes I too bet there might be more from Gary!

1_more_opai

CCB, not to be contrarian or anything ... but my list posted above shows NY Life as #1 and Mass Mutual as #3. by the way, mass mutual is not too happy about being down to 3 after NW Mutual (another stellar company by the way).

if you look at the TOP 4 their yearly earnings are the same as or more than all of the other top 5 through 10 companies combined.

as a final note (be on notice: infomercial starts here) i wouldnt purchase insurance from any company not on this list and in all fairness i wouldnt purchase it from any but the top 4.

cape cod Bob

I can see what you referenced, sorry about that but I was just looking at Gary's page that he highlighted for Year '06 to see what he was talking about. Then I looked to see what Price was referring to and so when I was On this page I noticed the Mutual companies listed and that is what I referenced, but really didn't pay much attention to it being for '06. But I just checked your reference which is for '07 and I stand corrected. NY LIfe , TIAA Cref, and Mass Mutual!
You be contrarian....

GarySpicuzza

Okay, it's time to play with my Internet anonymouse artificial persons.

1MO wrote:
now, on to my second point ... specifically on Equity Indexed (anythings, like annuity or universal life). if these products are so good, why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale? two of these companies are Mass Mutual and New York Life.
With 1MO's factually false statement above it claims Mass Mutual and New York Life are two of "the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world"

I could be, wrong butt, my understanding of the common use of the word WORLD wouldn't limit one to the United States or to "just" mutual insurance companies.

ZERO_MO then states on its next post:
and; to be ... er, FAIR: i didnt say NY Life nor Mass Mutual were the LARGEST companies in the world. or in the country.

Once AGAIN - 1_more_opai - doesn't have its facts nor the law on its side so it resorts to obfuscation. Changes the parameters of what it said and attempts to rehabilitate itself time and time again after being impeached with its own words.

Click THIS LINK (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/full_list/index.html) to see where Mass Mutual and New York Life rank amoung the 100 LARGEST Companies in the world.

Pay close attention to just "who" are the Insurance Companies ranked with the "other" LARGEST companies in the WORLD and then ask yourself. Do they offer FIXED Indexed Annuities to their clients?
I'll answer that because 1MO doesn't know the answer is, YES.

What's that?
What about Mass Mutual and New York Life's rank?
Ya can't find 'em?
Really?

Maybe it's because they are NOT two of the LARGEST insurance companies in the WORLD.

1MO, please keep posting.
I can't wait to get you in Court.

Click THIS LINK (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/Renegade.mp3) for 1_more_opai's Official Theme Song.

Oh Mama, I'm in fear for my life from the long arm of the law
Law man has put an end to my running and I'm so far from my home
The jig is up, the news is out
They finally found me
The renegade who had it made
Retrieved for a bounty
Never more to go astray
This'll be the end today
Of the wanted man

Oh Mama, I've been years on the lam and had a high price on my head
Lawman said 'Get him dead or alive' and it's for sure he'll see me dead
Dear Mama I can hear you cryin', you're so scared and all alone
Hangman is comin' down from the gallows and I don't have very long

The jig is up, the news is out
They finally found me
The renegade who had it made
Retrieved for a bounty
Never more to go astray
The judge'll have revenge today
On the wanted man

Oh Mama, I'm in fear for my life from the long arm of the law
Law man has put an end to my running and I'm so far from my home

The jig is up, the news is out
They finally found me
The renegade who had it made
Retrieved for a bounty
Never more to go astray
This'll be the end today
Of the wanted man

1_more_opai

gary, in this case you have me ... sort of.

i did in fact say: why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale? two of these companies are Mass Mutual and New York Life. NY Life sells more insurance every single year than any other company, yet they wont offer this product?

as you saw by the link you provided (and that CCB referenced) these two insurance companies are on the global 500 list (#6 and #8) and i think by any indication that ranks them largest in the world IN THEIR INDUSTRY! http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/industries/Insurance_Life_Health_mutual/1.html

if you want to split hairs the VAST MAJORITY of the largest companies in the world dont sell EIA either ... like exxon, valero, berkshire hathaway .... because they dont sell insurance or annuities at all.

but of those in the business, few of the TOP COMPANIES in the INDUSTRY sell them and fewer still of the TOP COMPANIES in the INDUSTRY and in AMERICA sell them. and in fairness, i have addressed MUTUAL companies as i have explained again and again.

1_more_opai

preemptive strike on gary:

when i mean largest, i mean largest by revenue.
NOT: How big their building is, Not how many employees they have, Not if you can see them from the international space station with the unaided eye.

when i say most, i mean most life insurance approved applications
NOT: who has the most agents, Not who has the most offices, Not who has the most people who do not have wheeler dealer security licenses.

when i say insurance, i mean companies that deal in the placement of LIFE insurance.
NOT: Cat and Dog Health Insurance, Not Banking Products, NOT Property and Casualty Insurance, Not Travel Insurance to Las Vegas.

when i say in the world, i really meant "our little world of America" but still stand by the statement of "in the world".
BUT NOT: all the companies in the world - just those who deal with the topic at hand. i find it incredulous (as i find most of your comments) that you would compare revenues from Life or Annuity Sales made by NY Life or MM against revenue earnings by exxon for petrochemical production (and the thousands of other business dealings they have).

please understand, that as disgraceful and uneducated as i am; i am at a loss to list ALL of the "Not's" that you might come up with. if you are about to "debunk" my points and you feel your tendons stretching to the breaking point ... then you are probably dealing with a "Not".

if, on the other hand, you are about to make a comment about a company that places the most amount of life insurance (or annuities) in the world (especially America) and that garners its revenue primarily from these two products (in other words a LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY), then i welcome your comments. i would be even MORE interested in anything you have to say about MUTUAL insurance companies.

as you (probably dont but should) know, mutual companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their policy holders who are OWNERS of the company. stock companies have fiduciary responsibilities to their STOCK HOLDERS who are OWNERS of the company.

so, when a MUTUAL company says, "This is bad Joo-Joo (meaning equity indexed products)." they are saying it is bad for their clients (who own the company). when a stock company says, "This is bad ... it is only bad FOR THE COMPANY." a stock company can still offer a BAD product to customers for the GOOD of the company.

GarySpicuzza

Mr. Huddleston,

Thank you.

I thought when I first posted on your forum it was a General Information Forum for the public to get information regarding important topics from Professionals who are actively engaged in the business of Financial Services. I certainly WAS NOT expecting to be ambushed by "other" Insurance Agents whose only claim to ultimate "Professionalism" is the fact they are also "securities licensed" and "in their mind" that fact alone makes them a TRUE "Professional."

Mr. 1_more_opai's biography in his profile is laughable on its face.

"Biography:
i advise people on insurance and investment choices. i place no product of any kind."

That's like a criminal defense lawyer saying, I advise people who have been charged with crimes on their legal rights but
I try no cases of any kind.

I leave THAT to the sleazy criminal defense lawyers.

An incongruent and preposterous position to say the least.

Not to mention the, "i place no product of any kind." may be an absolute TRUE statement.
However, he DOES have a commission sharing arrangement with the person who will be the writing agent on the products he recommends.

Now those are the FACTS of this business and the game the so called FEE ONLY adivsors play.
That "Annuity" thread got out of hand when I exposed the hypocrisy.

Best regards,
Gary D. Spicuzza

pricespector

Not to mention the, "i place no product of any kind." may be an absolute TRUE statement.However, he DOES have a commission sharing arrangement with the person who will be the writing agent on the products he recommends.

Now those are the FACTS of this business and the game the so called FEE ONLY adivsors play.Gary, you must realize that this is a blatant error on your part, and an outright lie to the public. This is NOT how fee-only works. There is NO commission-sharing arrangement.

In fact, it is a requirement by law that IF you provide referrals, you must provide at least three names to the client. And even IF referrals are given, a client is most likely to be referred to specific company or product, NOT a specific agent. Why is this so? It is to make it absolutely clear that there is NO commission sharing, a violation for which a fee-only planner could be severely penalized and/or stripped of designation.

Besides, I believe 1MO is neither fee-only, nor an agent. I believe 1MO is part of management/partner. Not that you can understand the differences between the three.

Puck

Oh God.

Gary now reminds me of a boyfriend I used to have in college, who framed every event in his life as if it were a movie. For example, he once came out of a store to find a dent in his car. As he was telling me this story, he said, "so, I came out of the store and saw...well, let's just say if this had been a movie, this scene would be called 'The Shocking Discovery'."

Now I feel very sorry for Gary, who can't turn on his Classic Rock radio station, without thinking of theme music for the posters on this thread. Wonder what he'll choose for me?!??! May I suggest Steve Miller Band, because it is absolutely true that I speak of the pompatus of love.

1_more_opai

gosh! gary ... you really simply A S S T O U N D me!

first and to be absolutely clear. i place NO product of ANY KIND WHATSOEVER. i do NOT earn (in any possible definition) a single penny nor share in a single penny of commission in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. and to attempt to be even clearer ... i have NO COMMISSION SHARING AGREEMENT with anyone. in fact, no one who places a product i may recommend even gives me a free meal as a thank you for the work i may have done. the agents who place products i recommend do not give me a "little bonus" for my help and if they offered they know i would turn it down cause we have had these discussions beforehand.

it truly amazes me that you have the gall to tell me what i do for a living and how i do it - and you dont even know if i am male or female, white or black, young or old. but you offer yourself as the foremost expert on me. A S S T O U N D E D!

secondly, you A S S T O U N D me yet again with your whining to MrS. Huddleston (heck, you didnt even know Mr. Huddleston was a SHE). i will be honest and admit that SHE has told me to cool my jets before because i can be "terse" (see my newly minted disclaimer below). but if there has ever been a more insulting and innapropriate poster on this forum before you, i cant recall them! you call people names. (see your own note to MR. Huddleston). you lie (or are so grossly uninformed about your own profession as to almost be criminal (see your last post to MR. Huddleston). you THREATEN people (remember the whole "I see you" claims you made on being able to track people with their IP addresses. and then, finally, you have made many people believe that you are involved in insurance AND securities fraud. NOTE: i said "BELIEVE" and though i know you were reported to regulatory agencies for THEM to investigate, i am not accusing. just pointing out irregularities based on your own posts.

anyway, it A S S T O U N D S me that you of all people write a complaint letter.

blixet

thanks, puck! I had totally forgotten about "puppetutes (pompatus) of love", how's that for "pizmotality"? ;)

Sturgbe

Gary,

Let's back up a little to your comment about IA's. Here it is:

"Keep in mind securities reps CANNOT offer these products to their clients UNLESS their Broker-Dealer allows them. Nor do they have any investment strategy that will out perform an Indexed Annuity WITHOUT risking your money".

The second part of that paragraph is false and misleading. You should be horsewhipped for making that statement.

Since no one knows how the "markets" will perform or in what fashion, it is impossible to know what crediting method will work best under an IA. That said, what happens to an IA Gary, if the "market loses money every year for the length of that contract (5,7,9 etc...)? We all know they will receive the guaranteed floor of that particular contract...right?

Gary, which IA do you sell the most of? What is the guaranteed minimum return on this product? What IA has the best "floor" in case of poor markets? None of those IA's will out-perform a MYGA or traditional annuity under a bad market. The client did NOT have to risk their money in either of those "investments".

True or false Gary.

1_more_opai

sometimes i almost feel .... sorry ... for gary.

almost.

how would i feel if i had a thread of HUNDREDS of posts with 7000 reads about how much i didnt know about my business? egads!

GarySpicuzza

BTTT: Annuities

There is no sense in replying to non-sense and since I'm the only real person on this board who actually knows the inner workings of annuities I will just simply continue with my self-promotion.

Obviously Kiplinger's doesn't care otherwise Cameron would have clicked the "Ban" button long ago.

PLEASE, Dear Friends and anonymouse enemies. If you want me to answer a specific question I have no problem doing so, butt, I don't have the time nor the desire to bother with more than about one post per day.

I actively participate in the Solicitation and Procurement of Life Insurance Policies and Annuity Contracts and those activties are more important to me than emasculating no-name Insurance Agents who claim:

1MO wrote:
first and to be absolutely clear. i place NO product of ANY KIND WHATSOEVER. i do NOT earn (in any possible definition) a single penny nor share in a single penny of commission in ANY WAY WHATSOEVER. and to attempt to be even clearer ... i have NO COMMISSION SHARING AGREEMENT with anyone. in fact, no one who places a product i may recommend even gives me a free meal as a thank you for the work i may have done. the agents who place products i recommend do not give me a "little bonus" for my help and if they offered they know i would turn it down cause we have had these discussions beforehand.

Please keep posting 1_more_opai.

Pricespector the word "emasculating" means:
1. to castrate.
2. to deprive of strength or vigor; weaken.
3. deprived of or lacking strength or vigor; effeminate.

Click THIS LINK (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/Renegade.mp3) for 1MO's Official Theme Song.

By the way, do ya think just maybe, 1MO, Pricspector and James K. Blankenship are ALL one and the same person?

Use of language and viseral reactions coupled with the same lack of knowledge of the subject matter is quite telling.

I'm quite certain 1MO and Blankenship actually DO advise clients on Insurance and Investments butt place NO PRODUCT themselves.

There posted messages on this forum are written documents that speak for themselves.

1MO you can't even see the freight train that's coming for your rule #9 violation. Oh and listen carefully to that Styx tune, Renegade. It is purposefully DIRECTED at YOU personally.

Its coming.

PLEASE KEEP POSTING.

Edit: Fixed broken link.

1_more_opai

uh oh, not the dreaded "rule 9".

oh my gosh ... please, anything but that!!!

Puck

By the way, do ya think just maybe, 1MO, Pricspector and James K. Blankenship are ALL one and the same person?

Impossible. The writing styles and use of diction and word-choice is too distinct. Any English major can tell you that.

1_more_opai

Blimey! You go girl!

((Previously a Major in the English army).

jims money

Why the uncertainty? I mean everyone knows a simple check of the IP address reveals all.

pricespector

An English Major and a Major in the English Army? Very clever. Puck and 1MO must be the same person as well. Too many common threads to be a coincidence.

Puck

The politics thread won't bear out that conclusion, Price! :D

Sturgbe

Gary,

Can a traditional fixed annuity or MYGA ever out-perform an Indexed Annuity?

We all know that Gary will dodge this question so I will answer for him. The answer is...YES! No market risk involved either.

For the record, your annuity knowledge is very average...at best. You claim annuities are the best transfer vehicles. You claim IA's are the "BEST" investments, and you didn't realize a fixed annuity may actually out-perform an IA. You have zero knowledge of VA's but you have no problem replacing them. Not a great track record.

Are there any people out there who are reading these posts that would actually hire this guy as their advisor? Anyone????

Puck

Buehler? Buehler?

pricespector

(Sound of breeze and leaves rustling...a lonely cricket in the distance)...

SADALE

As I see it, he's basically already told everyone here who hires him...like the 67 year old client of his - little old ladies, seniors, i.e. people whom he feels to be easy marks, and is able to scare into believing the one product he sells is an absolute cure all. It’s typical annuity abuse.

He calls himself a “financial planner” on his little digital imaging wrestling page, however, can anyone here actually imagine him pitching his expansive "planning expertise" to anyone with even the most modest of needs? It seems to me nobody other than a senior could hire him – he speaks only of, and very narrowly at that, wealth preservation & transfer. Never mind the fact that the CFP Board of Standards identifies the 6 key areas of financial planning as retirement, investment, education, taxes, risk management, and estate planning. What can this guy actually do for say a 40 year old professional, with a wife and 4 kids with actual planning needs? Seems to me the only thing he could do, ethically, is refer him to someone who actually is a financial planner – hopefully before that potential client laughs in his face. I wonder if he ever defers to a real planner, or if he simply targets seniors for annuity business.

1_more_opai

gary, i know you are presently getting raked over the coals on several issues that you have been found wrong about, but a page previously i asked you a specific question. here it is again for your convenience:

GarySpicuzza

Seniors over the age of 70 buy Fixed Annuities because...

There are three main reasons Seniors over the age of 70 transfer the bulk of their cash into Fixed Annuities, either traditional Fixed Annuities or Fixed Indexed Annuities.

#1 reason is to EXEMPT the cash asset from legal process pursuant to Florida Statute, 222.14 (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0222/SEC14.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0222->Section%2014#0222.14)
Click here (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0222/SEC14.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0222->Section%2014#0222.14) to read the Florida Law exempting annuities from lawsuit judgments.

#2 reason is to facilitate wealth transfer to their children, grandchildren or other loved ones DIRECTLY by way of annuity contract beneficiary designation thus avoiding attorney fees and costs of the Probate Court System.

Click here (http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes/index.cfm?App_mode=Display_Statute&Search_String=&URL=Ch0733/SEC6171.HTM&Title=->2006->Ch0733->Section%206171#0733.6171) to read, Florida Statute 733.6171, Compensation of Attorney for the Personal Representative, for yourself. This is the amount of money your children will have to pay an attorney to transfer your home and cash to your beneficiaries under your Last Will & Testament based on the Inventory Value of your Estate.

#3 reason is Risk Protection. By age 70 Seniors have generally made all the money they’re going to make and the preservation of the cash asset becomes more important than chasing impossible earnings in the market.

A Fixed Annuity is the place to put your money after you’ve made your money.

Further, current life expectancy is 77 years. Seniors age 70 and above would NEVER recover from a market loss in stocks, junk bonds or mutual funds of 25% or more.

The charts below illustrate this point and really need no explanation.

RISK PROTECTION (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FixedAnnuityRiskProtection.gif)

Impossible Market Returns (http://wsm.ezsitedesigner.com/share/scrapbook/12/127233/FixedAnnuity-vs-ImpossibleReturns.gif)

GarySpicuzza

Mr. 1_more_opai,

Thank you for asking.

IF you knew ANYTHING about the Florida Department of Insurance.

Division of Insurance Fraud

THEN you would KNOW that:
The investigations of the division are confidential while ongoing.

NOBODY "knows" about their ongoing investigations.

However, I DID advise them that James K. Blankenship, *CFB; Pricespector, *CFB and 1_more_opai, *CFB are ALL ONE AND THE SAME PERSON on the Kiplinger's Estate Planning Forum.

1MO, you have been hoisted by your own petard and are simply too damn ARROGANT to even recognize the LEGAL TRAIN WRECK you are soon to be the focus. Court records are Public Records.

You can rest assured I WILL keep the good people of Kiplinger's FULLY informed on this thread.

Please keep posting as you truely are a Certified Financial Buffoon.

The word "Petard" means:

1.) hoist by or with one's own petard, hurt, ruined, or destroyed by the very device or plot one had intended for another.

Best regards,
Gary D. Spicuzza

Primary Agent-in-Charge
The Trust Group
2435 U.S. Hwy 19
Suite 140
Holiday, FL 34691

Office Phone: 727-945-8599
E-mail: cic7@juno.com

Source LINKY. (http://www.fldfs.com/fraud/)

Welcome to the Division of Insurance Fraud

DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF THE UNIT

The Division of Insurance Fraud is the law enforcement arm of the Department of Financial Services responsible for investigating crimes associated with insurance claim fraud, insurance premium fraud, workers’ compensation claim fraud, workers’ compensation premium avoidance and diversions, insurer insolvency fraud, unauthorized insurance entity fraud, and insurance agent crimes. The criminal investigators of the Division of Insurance Fraud also investigate viatical application fraud, defalcations of escrow funds held in trust by title insurance firms, and non-Medicaid related health care fraud.

The division receives approximately 13,000 case referrals annually from insurance companies, insurance regulators, other law enforcement agencies, and citizens. Florida’s Division of Insurance Fraud now arrests approximately 800 offenders each year and is directly responsible for annual court-awarded restitution to insurance fraud victims at an average of $102,265,780. Florida’s Division of Insurance Fraud has been recognized by the Coalition Against Insurance Fraud as the nationwide leader in referring fraud cases to prosecution since 2003.

PROGRAM RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE UNIT

· The division has the responsibility of receiving insurance fraud referrals, now totaling approximately 13,000 per year. These referrals are primarily from the insurance industry, since insurers and licensees are required to refer suspected fraud to the Division of Insurance Fraud. Once referrals are received, they are evaluated by crime intelligence analysts for pattern and trend analysis and directed to investigative supervisors who then assign the matters for investigation, by priority, as resources allow.

· The division must efficiently and effectively investigate criminal violations referred to it using its allocated resources. This requires sworn investigators to engage in investigative practices including; interviewing witnesses and subjects, interrogating suspects and persons of interest, conducting fixed and mobile surveillances, obtaining and executing search warrants, obtaining and managing oral intercept warrants, obtaining subpoenas for financial records and other records, utilizing mobile tracking tools, tracing monetary transactions, and making both probable cause (warrantless) arrests and warrant arrests. Crime Intelligence Analysts and sworn investigators also prepare demonstrative evidence (demonstrative evidence is evidence that illustrates or helps explain oral testimony, or recreates a tangible thing, occurrence, or event) and exhibits for presentation in court. Crime Intelligence Analysts and sworn investigators also testify in depositions and before state and federal courts.

· The division operates a monetary reward program for the reporting of fraud. The program has issued rewards totaling $94,000 since 2001.

· The division reviews and maintains anti-fraud plans and Special Investigative Unit (SIU) descriptions submitted by insurers as mandated by statute and Florida Administrative Code.

· The division maintains a “designated employee” database to facilitate the legitimate information sharing of anti-fraud information among insurers to combat insurance fraud and identify fraud trends and offenders. “Designated employees” of insurers are allowed to disclose information to one another and are afforded statutory immunity in doing so.

· The division delivers ongoing training to its certified law enforcement investigators to comply with mandatory retraining requirements and to update and enhance investigative skills.

· The division is required to maintain and update training records and report disciplinary matters involving its certified law enforcement investigators to the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission.

· The division performs intelligence analyses related to its criminal investigations and has access to other confidential law enforcement databases. The division is responsible for maintaining records of usage of such databases.

· The division coordinates and provides staff support for the Florida Workers’ Compensation Fraud Task Force.

SUPERVISORY RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE UNIT

The Division of Insurance Fraud is authorized 128 sworn law enforcement positions to investigate insurance fraud, supported by 43 non-sworn positions, including crime intelligence analysts, administrative secretaries and other professional support occupations.

· The Division Director provides command supervision, coordination and control of the Division of Insurance Fraud and its statewide field offices. Additionally, the Director oversees all operations of the division and is accountable for the conduct, productivity and performance of all subunits within the division.

· The Director supervises the Bureau Chief of the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation Fraud, the Law Enforcement Program Administrator of the Office of Professional Standards, and the North Florida and South Florida law enforcement commanders. The Director also supervises a Senior Attorney who serves as the division’s legal advisor.

· The North Florida and South Florida law enforcement commanders hold the official rank of Law Enforcement Major and oversee the North and South areas of the state, respectively. Their duties include collectively supervising five regional captains in five geographic regions. The North Florida law enforcement commander also supervises the Administrative Section (General Headquarters) of the Division.

· The Bureau Chief of Workers’ Compensation Fraud coordinates all workers’ compensation fraud investigative efforts and coordinates the Florida Workers’ Compensation Fraud Task Force. This bureau chief also immediately supervises the Public Employee Fraud Unit and coordinates unauthorized entity investigative efforts undertaken by the division.

· Five regional Law Enforcement Captains oversee the operations of 11 statewide field offices. Within these regions are 17 squads, each supervised by a Law Enforcement Lieutenant.

· A Law Enforcement Captain located in General Headquarters coordinates all training efforts, equipment upkeep and disbursement, fleet management, and emergency response operations.

· A Law Enforcement Program Administrator conducts law enforcement internal affairs investigations as assigned by the Inspector General, and conducts field inspections of statewide offices and operations. The Law Enforcement Program Administrator also manages policy development for the division and represents the division in collective bargaining negotiations with the Police Benevolent Association.

MAJOR INITIATIVES/WORK IN PROGRESS

· The investigations of the division are confidential while ongoing. However, there are major investigations taking place in the Hillsborough, Pinellas, Orange, Duval, Broward and Miami-Dade areas addressing personal injury protection (PIP) fraud. Large-scale workers’ compensation premium fraud cases are being worked in Duval and Palm Beach counties.

Click THIS LINK (http://www.fldfs.com/fraud/) to read the balance.

*Certified Financial Buffoon

Puck

However, I DID advise them that James K. Blankenship, *CFB; Pricespector, *CFB and 1_more_opai, *CFB are ALL ONE AND THE SAME PERSON on the Kiplinger's Estate Planning Forum.

SNORT! You made me spit milk out my nose! You really need to warn people if you intend to be funny. Nasal milk-spitting can be dangerous, yanno.

GarySpicuzza

I've said it before.

NOBODY is "Anonymous" on the Internet.

From: <Jim@BFPonline.com>
To: <cic7@juno.com>
Date: Mon, 7 May 2007 09:49:35 -0500
Subject: Remove libel
Message-ID: <00a101c790b6$ee999a40$0401a8c0@d2lly111>
Reply-To: <Jim@BFPonline.com><1_more_opai@BFonline.com>
Received: from mx20.nyc.untd.com (mx20.nyc.untd.com [10.140.24.80])
by maildeliver13.lax.untd.com with SMTP id AABDD8REWAC2X6SA
for <cic7@juno.com> (sender <bfponlin@bfponline.com>);
Mon, 7 May 2007 07:49:56 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mail.speednet.com (mail.dtnspeed.net [207.252.121.15])
by mx20.nyc.untd.com with SMTP id AABDD8REVAJTNNH2
for <cic7@juno.com> (sender <1_more_opai@bfonline.com><bfponlin@bfponline.com>);
Mon, 7 May 2007 07:49:55 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 28504 invoked by uid 510); 7 May 2007 14:49:54 -0000
Received: from 72.2.162.254 by smtp-2.speednet.com (envelope-from <bfponlin@bfponline.com>, uid 502) with qmail-scanner-2.01st
(clamdscan: 0.88.7/2342. spamassassin: 3.1.3. perlscan: 2.01st.
Clear:RC:1(72.2.162.254):.
Processed in 0.065985 secs); 07 May 2007 14:49:31 -0000
Received: from unknown (HELO D2LLY111) (72.2.162.254)
by mail.speednet.com with SMTP; 7 May 2007 14:49:54 -0000
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook, Build 10.0.6822
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-UNTD-Peer-Info: 207.252.121.15|mail.dtnspeed.net|mail.speednet.com|bfponlin@bfponline.com
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MAIL-INFO: 1700e4ade4e1a0e1c0f9a9c0b050f134842910f9d909014481f529e93da5e9441091812084e984e0d46459c0
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
Organization: Blankenship Financial Planning
Sender: "Jim Blankenship" <bfponlin@bfponline.com><1_more_opai@bfonline.com>
X-ContentStamp: 18:9:488246290
Return-Path: <1_more_opai@bfonline.com><bfponlin@bfponline.com>
X-UNTD-UBE: -1
Importance: Normal
Thread-Index: AceQtuzl/HK2oVSJTyyZlMXIUdPUeg==
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3028

Best regards to:1MO

Dingobiscuit

Gary,

What is the point of that quoted section? Look at this from your quote:

<1_more_opai@bfonline.com><bfponlin@bfponline.com>

bfonline.com is not even an active domain. Where did you get these sources?

http://bfonline.com/

Nothing in your post truely links those three (1MO, Pricespector, Blankenship) together, especially with no explanation on your part.

Puck

The MOST that you MIGHT have proven is that those three people work together in the same organization, or if bpfponline.com is a service provider, that they all have signed up with the same service provider. You have not proven that they are one and the same person. Rather, considering the misspellings Dingo pointed out, it's much more likely that these identifying lines have been falsified. It's incredibly easy to falsify an email header. In fact, for completely legal reasons, I have done so myself in the past.

1_more_opai

at the risk of violating the terms of use on this site; i feel compelled to call you (Gary Spicuzza) a liar.

however, i have absolutely NO idea where you get the Sender: "Jim Blankenship" <bfponlin@bfponline.com><1_more_opai@bfonline.com> line in your previous post. i believe that puck and dingo are correct in that it is an ATTEMPT to fabricate a relationship that does not exist between myself and jim.

it is an ATTEMPT because you didnt get the domain the same in your ATTEMPT to fabricate a relationship. jim's real domain is bfPonline where as my falsified domain is shown as bfonline. the proof here is in the INTENTION to falsify ... no person would opt to have such a closely affiliated domain name for like about a dozen reasons. i believe that BFPonline.com stands for Blankenship Financial Planning Online. what the heck does BFonline stand for?

Gary, you have lied before with your "i can see your IP address" threats. you have been reported to both federal and state investigative units for fraud and theft from seniors. you have consistently proven you have no concept about the business in which you are involved (the fee only fiasco). and now again you are found to be making up evidence to support another lie - one that is so easy to spot that the Sergeant at Arms at the local Lion's Club could prosecute in a court of law.

what boggles my mind is how a person of your low moral character can make it as far along in life as you have. i truly feel pity for that young man we see in the wrestling videos. the path of a moral life will truly be an uphill climb for him with no decent role model to use as a guide.

1_more_opai

quasi final post regarding gary spicuzza:

gary, i think the 240+ posts here speak for themselves. as a result i no longer feel the need to comment on your threats and allegations. while i reserve the right to correct qross errors on specific subject matter about which you may opine, i feel it is prudent to cease responding to your egregious postings. they irritate me to the point where it lowers my level of dialog and discourse. while i called you names (that were quite justified) in my previous post, i think to do so is against what i strive to provide on these forums. so, we are done.

with one minor exception. i remain interested in hearing the results of the investigation by the regulatory bodies about your possible fraudulent actions. i have no tie with the state of florida in any way, shape, or form ... but it would be nice to see they take their responsibilities seriously.

as a result, in response to any post you write to me or even in which you reference me, my only response will be to inquire about the status of the ongoing investigations into your business practices and insurance and annuity product placements.

GarySpicuzza

1_more_opai, pricespector and James K. Blankenship are ALL
One and the same person on Kiplinger's Estate Planning Forum

1MO wrote:
you have consistently proven you have no concept about the business in which you are involved
Let's repost some of 1_more_opai's infamously LAUGHABLE statements.

Speak for yourself. Not all of us are insurance agents. Some of us are fee-only financial planners.

GarySpicuzza wrote:
Pricespector, I'll reply to you later. I have to finish the paperwork on the Variable Annuity I replaced yesterday.

1MO, not knowing a client can 1035 exchange ANY annuity for another annuity and ANY Insurance Agent can replace a RISKY variable annuity with a SAFE Fixed Annuity then writes:
not to be a compliance guy or anything, but i think this is a POTENTIAL big NO-NO.

correct me if i am wrong, but you are not allowed to even say the word "variable" in front of a client much less talk about a specific product.

this is exactly the reasoning why so many reputable companies disagree with "agents" selling EIA

Well let me clue in this Priceless Clueless, CFB.

Section 1035 of the Internal Revenue Code
Title 26 — Internal Revenue Code ("IRC")
Sub Title A — Income Taxes
Chapter 1 — Normal Taxes and Surtaxes
Subchapter O — Gain or Loss on Disposition of Property
Part III — Common Non-Taxable Exchanges

(3) an annuity contract for an annuity contract.

When JB writes, (this is exactly the reasoning why so many reputable companies disagree with "agents" selling EIA).... I just about wet my pants LAUGHING OUT LOUD.

ONLY an Insurance Agent can sell an Equity Indexed Annuity more accurately described as a FIXED Indexed Annuity. The LARGEST and MOST reputable Insurance Companies in the WORLD offer the BEST Fixed Indexed Annuities on the market. These products are sold by Life Insurance Agents ONLY.

1MO writes:
by the way, isnt it ironic that a LAYPERSON can get on here and say all the misinformed and uninformed comments they want about any security or insurance product and it is just fine. however, someone who is licensed is about to get seriously spanked for it. THAT is why you go to a professional - there is accountability.

This comes from an "Anonymous" Internet artificial persona who then writes:
finally, i am not an insurance agent - though i do hold licenses for life and health. in other words, i do not sell any policies.
Hmmmmm, sounds EXACTLY like something James K. Blankenship has said.
In 1MO profile it proclaims "i advise people on insurance and investment choices. i place no product of any kind.
I don't know, maybe its a Blankenship wannabe?

But the absolute Best of the Best writing of this Certified Financial Buffoon was when he claimed:
now, on to my second point ... specifically on Equity Indexed (anythings, like annuity or universal life). if these products are so good, why is it that the largest and most renowned insurance companies in the world prohibit their sale? two of these companies are Mass Mutual and New York Life.

Now that statement absolutely verifies this ONE of THREE MO's doesn't have a clue about whom the BIG BOYS are in Financial Services Industry.

Let's review:
Click THIS LINK (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2006/snapshots/2282.html) to see the Industry: Insurance: Life, Health (stock) LARGEST Insurance Companies in the WORLD.

1MO, who are the "other" two MO's....Larry and Curly?

Of course that comparison would be an insult to the 3 stooges.

1 of 3 MO's BEFORE you post anymore defamation you might want to call, attorney Steve Moore's office at 727-395-9300.

Perfect Pennmanship Patti usually answers the phone. Ask to speak to Karen, Steve's legal secretary, tell her Gary Spicuzza referred you.

Ask Karen if Gary Spicuzza has any problem with filing lawsuits against any person or corporation who surely and most definitely NEEDS a LAWSUIT ATTITUTE ADJUSTMENT.

Kiplinger's WILL NOT in any way be involved EXCEPT for discovery.

Mr. Blankenship,
WELCOME to the real world.
NOT the theoretical "text book" fanatasy land.

This is what happens to persons, meaning, Adult Human Beings who:
Violate Rule #9.

Best regards,
Gary D. Spicuzza