Regarding: File Number SR-NASD-2004-183
As a licensed insurance professional and a marketer of variable products to the public,. I am writing to you concerning the suitability standard and principal review requirements pertaining to the sale of variable annuities contained in NASD proposed Rule 2821. Although the latest NASD proposal includes several amendments made to earlier versions of the proposal, the proposed rule's requirements are redundant, unnecessary, will provide no meaningful additional protection to consumers and will adversely impact my business. I vigorously urge the SEC to disapprove this proposal.
I have been an honest and reliable salesperson in this industry for 38 years now, and I firmly believe people who engage in misleading sales practices should be aggressively prosecuted and their livelihood should be taken away from them! The NASD, however, has failed to adequately justify the need for the proposed rule. To the contrary, the available data does not support the NASD's claims that the level of sales problems in the variable annuity marketplace calls for the adoption of the proposed rule. Unsuitable variable annuity sales made up less than .50 percent of the NASD's disciplinary actions over the last five years, and complaints about mutual funds and individual securities far outnumber those concerning variable annuities. Furthermore, the vast majority of the comments received by the NASD and SEC regarding the proposal opposed the new rule, and the NASD has not adequately responded to the concerns raised by the vast majority of commentators.
Furthermore, proposed Rule 2821 duplicates current supervision and suitability requirements that are already in place. NASD rules (including Rule 2310) already contain suitability requirements that apply to all sales of securities, including variable annuities. If regulators really want to protect consumers, appropriate enforcement of the existing suitability rule rather than adopting a new rule is the answer.
In addition, the requirement for review by a principal found in the proposed rule deviates in several significant ways from the general supervision requirements found in Rule 3010. This requirement appears to present a bias against these products, and will lead to constant second guessing of my advice and recommendations (based upon less first hand information than was available to me).
The NASD proposal is a solution in search of a problem that I believe will do much more harm than good by ultimately harming consumers by making these products less available to people who could benefit from them. For these reasons, I urge the SEC to disapprove NASD proposed Rule 2821.
Thank you reading my personal and professional views.
Jack R. Ford
Jack R. Ford, CFP, LUTCF Quality Service Provided Since 1968 Senior Agent - Principal Life, CA Insurance License # 0376134 Financial Advisor, Investment Advisor Representative, and Registered Representative
Home Office: Principal Life Insurance Company. Securities and advisory products offered through Princor Financial Services Corporation, 800/247-4123, member SIPC. Principal Life and Princor® are members of the Principal Financial Group®, Des Moines, IA 50392.
Nothing in this message is intended to constitute an Electronic signature for purposes of the Uniform Electronic Transactions Act (UETA) or the Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act ("E-Sign") unless a specific statement to the contrary is included in this message.
While this communication may be used to promote or market a transaction or an idea that is discussed in the publication, it is intended to provide general information about the subject matter covered and is provided with the understanding that The Principal is not rendering legal, accounting, or tax advice. It is not a marketed opinion and may not be used to avoid penalties under the Internal Revenue Code. You should consult with appropriate counsel or other advisors on all matters pertaining to legal, tax, or accounting obligations and requirements.