Subject: File #: S7-14-08 : Opposing Rule 151A

October 26, 2008

To whom it may concern:

I’ve been a licensed insurance & financial services professional serving the Asian/Chinese-American communities since 1995. I am writing to you because I believe that adoption of proposed Rule 151A is one of the most absurd things to do on the part of the SEC, who would classify most indexed annuities as securities. I urge you to withdraw the proposal and put up my own proposal, not only because of its own sake, but because of de-service Rule 151A would bring to our Asian-American people as consumers and tax-payers.

The Asian-American people are hard-working people and regarded by many as the model minorities in this country. Many of them are also new immigrants trying hard to adapt to their new life here. Fixed Index products serve a unique need in helping Asian-Americans reach their financial goals by enabling them to have one safer place to put aside their long-term savings for retirement. As professionals, we, insurance & financial service pros, as well as regulatory bodies such as SEC, all exist to serve the American people and in my opinion we should do a much better job by promoting these insurance products for the benefits of our people, especially in the Asian American communities. However, due to the barriers in languages, cultures, and the overall market domination by the traditional insurance carriers whose captive agents normally don’t offer the Fixed Index Products, most Asian Americans are not even aware of the existence of these products which are definitely suitable for many of them. If Rule 151A were to be adopted, fewer professionals would be able to offer the products and the indexed annuity and indexed life insurance would basically be forced out of the Asian-American markets to a great degree, which will benefit nobody - insurance professionals, insurers and even SEC included.

In my practice, we find that many currently security-licensed professionals don’t know what fixed index annuities and index life insurance are, not to mention how they work, often because these are captive agents whose insurers as their employers don’t offer the indexed products, which resulted in misleading the consumers. I think the reason is simple: they don’t offer the products. The best way to eliminate or reduce misleading is through education first and tough sanction to the violators second under the current rule and current treatment with one new measure: I further propose that NAIC and state insurance commissioners establish a mandatory Fixed Index Products certification program for all insurance –licensed professionals who sell these products.

As always, I want to clearly state that I firmly believe that people who promote unsuitable sales and engage in misleading sales practices should be aggressively prosecuted and subject to meaningful sanctions. However, concerns about suitability, disclosure and marketing methods, however valid, are not the relevant criteria for determining whether a financial product is or is not a security. Properly structured indexed annuities do not share the same investment risk as investment products such as mutual funds and individual stocks, since with an indexed annuity the risk of a downturn in the related index rests with the issuer of the product and not the consumer.

In my opinion indexed annuities should continue to be treated as insurance products, and the state insurance regulatory structure is the appropriate means for addressing the concerns raised by the SEC. The professional organization I belong to, the National Association of Insurance and Financial Advisors, is committed to working with the NAIC and state insurance commissioners towards the goal of having every state adopt and vigorously enforce the NAIC’s model regulations on annuity suitability and disclosure. I also support NAIFA’s recommendation that a state regulatory body be designated to develop standards for indexed annuity product design so that inappropriate indexed annuity products would be prevented from reaching the marketplace.

For these reasons, I urge the SEC to withdraw the proposed rule. Thank you for your consideration of my views on this matter.

Robert Jin, CLU, LUTCF