Articles

A North Carolina judge on Tuesday approved the distribution of $318 million to various victims of Greg Lindberg’s financial fraud.

Judge Max O. Cogburn accepted the special master’s report for the proceeds from the sale of the Clanwilliam Group of Companies. Several lawsuits had to be dealt with before the funds could be released, a process handled by the law firm Grier Wright Martinez, serving as special masters.

“Given the impediments to the Clanwilliam closing and fearing the loss of an opportunity to provide meaningful value to Defendant’s victims in the near future,” the parties “worked together to try to find a solution that would allow the Clanwilliam transaction to close,” Cogburn’s order stated.

Clanwilliam is considered a “primary restitution asset,” as identified by the special master. How Lindberg became involved with the company is an example of the complicated web his assets present to authorities.

According to reports in the Irish press, Eli Global, Lindberg’s private equity firm, invested in Helix Health in 2014. This investment led to the creation of Clanwilliam Group. Lindberg served as a director of Triton Financial, which in turn was the sole shareholder of Clanwilliam Headquarters, the entity that owned the Clanwilliam Group name.

In November 2020, a UK-based trust, Clanwilliam Group Trust, was established to take control of Clanwilliam companies. TA Associates Management acquired Clanwilliam via a “$450 million LBO on March 13, 2025,” according to Pitchbook Data.

Clanwilliam “is a developer of healthcare software intended to serve pharmacists, acute hospitals, care homes, and private clinicians of every specialty and national healthcare organization,” Pitchbook reported.

In May 2024, Lindberg was convicted for a second time of attempting to bribe North Carolina Insurance Commissioner Mike Causey. In November, Lindberg pleaded guilty to engineering a $2 billion fraud. His guilty plea on a money laundering conspiracy charge carries a maximum 10-year sentence, the Department of Justice said.

Lindberg is helping the special master to unwind his financial empire to fulfill his restitution obligations.

The full payout

Cogburn’s order authorizes this $318 million payout:

$172,171,598 allocated to the North Carolina Insurance Companies. These entities, which include Southland National Insurance Corp., Colorado Bankers Life Insurance Co., Bankers Life Insurance Co., and Southland National Reinsurance Corp., all owned by Lindberg, were placed in rehabilitation by order of the Superior Court of Wake County, N.C.

$108,195,266 to the Bermuda Insurance Companies. To be allocated as follows (subject to approval of the Bermuda Supreme Court): $80,993,997 for Private Bankers Life and Annuity, $18,868,418 for Northstar Financial Services, $3,714,041 for Omnia, and $4,618,810 for PB Investment Holdings.

$23,520,710 to Vista Life & Casualty Reinsurance Co.

$14,112,426 to the special master. Grier Law is to be paid $245,769.50 and reimbursed for expenses of $1,103.94. Scott Avila and Paladin Management Group, the financial advisor to the special master, is to receive $1,094,108.50 and reimbursed for expenses of $954.35.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post Judge approves distribution of $318M to Greg Lindberg victims appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

Some PHL Variable policyholders are “unlikely” to ever receive their full benefits, Connecticut Insurance Commissioner Andrew Mais said in a memorandum filed Tuesday.

Mais made the admission as part of a request to amend the moratorium on benefits in place since May 2024. The moratorium helped prevent “a run on the bank,” Mais wrote, while regulators created a rehabilitation plan.

That plan, due later this year, is dependent on the outcome of an effort to sell all or parts of the PHL Variable business, Mais explained.

“However, the Rehabilitator has concluded that it is unlikely that the ultimate rehabilitation plan will provide for the full, or nearly full, payment of the benefits under certain policies,” Mais added in the 16-page memo to the court.

SWS Holdings is one of the policyholders likely to get shortchanged. SWS owns two Phoenix Generations universal life policies worth $18 million in death benefits. The company has paid more than $12 million in premiums to date, court documents say.

The policies were purchased in 2006 with the intent to fund an eventual stock purchase agreement. Friday, Judge Daniel J. Klau ruled that SWS has no right to “full-party” status in the PHL Variable rehabilitation proceedings.

Edward S. Stone, a Greenwich, Conn. attorney for SWS, ripped Mais’s office for a “lack of transparency” and for permitting PHL Variable to spiral into financial distress. Reckless reinsurance deals with Concord Re and Nassau Re went unchecked, leading PHL to become “dramatically under-reserved,” Stone noted.

Connecticut regulators “want my clients to pay $600,000 in annual premiums for an $18 million death benefit they’re never going to see, or lapse the policy,” Stone said.

The battle isn’t over, added Stone, who represented numerous Executive Life Insurance Co. of New York policyholders in a 2013 liquidation after two decades of legal wrangling.

“I will push this as far as I can, as long as my clients will have me do it,” Stone said. “And I think that they will, because people who look into this see that it’s really wrong.”

The moratorium proposal

Mais is asking the court to loosen the moratorium on PHL Variable policies to allow for more flexible distributions for universal life and fixed index annuity owners.

The rehabilitator team submitted an affidavit from Mark Stukowski, vice president and principal at Lewis & Ellis, an actuarial consulting firm. He said there are about 8,000 universal life policies, about 55% of which have death benefits at or below the $300,000 limit covered by state guaranty associations.

There are about 24,000 outstanding PHL fixed indexed annuity contracts, Stukowski said. The average account value of those contracts is $70,000. About 95% of the FIAs have account values at or below $250,000, the state guaranty limit for annuity contracts, Stukowski said.

Mais explained how policyholders can access more of their benefits. Universal life policyholders have two options under the moratorium modification:

• Reduction in the face amount of death benefits with downward premium adjustment prospectively.
• Convert policy to a claim for a fixed amount (to be determined based on adjusted surrender value) with no ongoing premium obligation.

The modification is expected to offer fixed indexed annuity owners who have not activated their income rider or are currently receiving systematic withdrawals two alternatives:

• Activate the income rider (to the extent available under the contract).
• Receive a one-time surrender-charge free distribution of the “Free Withdrawal Amount” under the contract (typically this is approximately 10% of the contract’s account value).

“The Rehabilitator understands that the Moratorium presents financial strain on certain groups of policyholders generally,” Mais wrote. “In some instances, policyholders have a need to access funds immediately. In other instances, policyholders are concerned about continuing to pay the full amount of premiums on a policy when they are uncertain as to the amount of the death benefits that will ultimately be paid.”

Comments on the modification proposal are being accepted until September. Court approval of the modification is not expected to occur until the third quarter of 2025, Mais has said.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post PHL rehabilitator: some policyholders ‘unlikely’ to ever get full benefits appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

A high-dollar policyholder has no right to “full-party” status in the PHL Variable rehabilitation proceedings, a Connecticut judge ruled Friday.

SWS Holdings owns two Phoenix Generations UL Flexible Premium Adjustable Life Insurance policies worth $18 million in death benefits, the company said in its April 16 motion to intervene. SWS has paid more than $12 million in premiums to date, the company said.

“The Policies were purchased in 2006 and they are intended to fund a stock purchase agreement under which promptly following the Insured’s death SWS Holdings is obligated to repurchase its stock beneficially owned by the Insured for the benefit of the Insured’s heirs,” the motion stated.

In May 2024, Insurance Commissioner Andrew Mais introduced a moratorium on benefits payments until a Connecticut court approves a rehabilitation plan for the financially troubled PHL Variable.

Since then, policyholders filed several legal challenges seeking to weaken the moratorium and/or intervene in the rehabilitation effort.

Judge Daniel J. Klau previously granted “limited intervenor status” to settle the legal question on whether certain policyholders had “setoff rights.” But he ruled that SWS’s motion goes too far, agreeing with Mais that the rehabilitation proceeding is “not a civil action.”

Connecticut law does not authorize the court to grant intervenor status to a nonparty with an interest in a rehabilitation proceeding, Klau wrote.

“Moreover, permitting SWS Holdings to become a full party to the proceeding, with all of the rights a party to a civil action has to engage in discovery, including possibly taking the commissioner’s deposition, would wreak havoc with the statuatory scheme that the General Assembly enacted,” Klau concluded.

‘Adversely affected’

In its motion to intervene, SWS said they have been “adversely impacted” by the Mais’s decision
to cap policyholder death benefits or policy maturity benefits at $300,000.

That decision had the effect of dividing the PHL policyholders into two camps, SWS claimed: “under the cap” policyholders who will receive payment in full under their policies, and the “over the cap” policyholders, who “will receive less than what they bargained for when they purchased their PHL insurance policies.”

SWS further argued that Mais has a conflict of interest because the moratorium order does not restrict how he uses the excess premiums paid by the company. Those dollars could be used to fund general expenses associated with the rehabilitation, including the payment of benefits to “under the cap” PHL policyholders, SWS said, and even commission payments to brokers.

Meanwhile, SWS has “no assurances that [SWS] will receive more than the Moratorium cap amount,” the motion said.

But even if the court agreed with the conflict-of-interest argument, Klau noted, the law does not empower him to remove Mais as rehabilitator.

The troubled PHL and its subsidiaries, Concord Re and Palisado Re, were put in Mais’s control after a May 20, 2024 court order. PHL issued life insurance and annuity products and related supplemental contracts to policyholders nationwide. Concord and Palisado are captive insurers whose only business is the reinsurance of PHL’s liabilities.

In his May 20, 2025 status report, Mais outlined efforts to sell or reinsure PHL books of business. Thirteen companies signed non-disclosure agreements and have access to a “virtual data room” with an actuarial appraisal report, a summary of existing reinsurance arrangements, and details regarding the PHL companies’ arrangements with third-party administrative and investment providers.

Mais recently asked the court to loosen the moratorium on PHL Variable policies to allow for more flexible distributions for universal life and fixed indexed annuity owners.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post $18M policy owner denied ‘seat at the table’ in PHL Variable rehab effort appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

An Iowa judge partially and temporarily blocked the state’s controversial law regulating pharmacy benefit managers.

The law is blocked only for the Iowa businesses that signed onto a lawsuit, District Judge Stephanie Rose ruled on Monday. Her order temporarily blocks 11 provisions in the new state law while the case proceeds through the courts.

Senate File 383 forces PBMs to reimburse pharmacies at least as much as it costs to purchase the drug, which many PBMs claim will drive up drug costs. PBMs are middlemen who work with insurance companies, drug companies, and pharmacies to negotiate drug costs.

The bipartisan bill, signed by Gov. Kim Reynolds, R-Iowa, on June 11, also prohibits PBMs from steering patients to preferred pharmacies or setting cost-sharing incentives.

The Iowa Association of Business and Industry and a coalition of four plaintiffs filed the lawsuit last month in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa.

ABI and the plaintiffs collectively argue that Iowa’s law sets up a regulatory regime that is contrary to one already passed by Congress. As a result, the Iowa law is pre-empted, or overridden, by federal law.

Further, their lawsuit claims the Iowa law is unconstitutional, as it restricts commercial free speech related to pharmacy benefits and networks. For example, it is illegal for employers to tell their employees about ways to save money, such as avoiding a $10.68 fee by using certain pharmacies, plaintiffs claim.

Rose heard arguments on Friday on the injunction request. Among the provisions that will be blocked are:

• A $10.63 dispensing fee paid by PBMs to retail pharmacies;
• A prohibition on PBMs or health benefit plans from favoring providers, including based on cost or convenience;
• A requirement that PBMs accept any pharmacy to participate in a health benefit plan so long as the pharmacy agrees to the plan’s terms, requirements and reimbursements, also known as an “any willing provider” provision;
• A prohibition on PBMs designated a prescription drug as a specialty drug to prevent an individual from accessing the drug;
• And a prohibition on creating costs greater than the same services offered through a mail order pharmacy.

‘Familiar tension’

“This case presents the familiar tension between state regulatory authority and federal preemption, complicated by the modern realities of employee benefit administration,” Rose wrote. “Iowa’s comprehensive approach to PBM regulation reflects legitimate concerns about market concentration and rural healthcare access. Yet the Constitution’s allocation of regulatory authority between state and federal governments requires careful adherence to established boundaries.”

Plaintiffs, which include the Iowa Bankers Benefit Plan, Iowa Laborers District Council Health and Welfare Fund, Des Moines Orthopaedic Surgeons, and Iowa Spring Manufacturing & Sales Co., call the bill “heavy-handed state interference” in the free market. The law will cost Iowans “tens of millions of dollars” in increased health care costs, plaintiffs claim.

Due to a recent Supreme Court ruling blocking nationwide injunctions, Rose’s ruling applies only to these plaintiffs.

PBMs continue to draw scrutiny for their business practices, which yield billions in earnings. Meanwhile, lawmakers at both the state and federal levels are seeking to lower drug prices.

The largest PBMs are affiliated with major health insurers. Express Scripts is a Cigna subsidiary, for example. Critics say PBMs operate in a shadowy middle ground, have conflict-of-interest issues and keep profit margins hidden.

A Federal Trade Commission report from earlier this year found that the “Big 3 PBMs” —Caremark Rx, Express Scripts, and OptumRx — marked up numerous specialty generic drugs dispensed at their affiliated pharmacies by thousands of percent, and many others by hundreds of percent.

Such significant markups allowed the Big 3 PBMs and their affiliated specialty pharmacies to generate more than $7.3 billion in revenue from dispensing drugs in excess of the drugs’ estimated acquisition costs from 2017-2022, the report said.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post Iowa judge grants partial injunction blocking parts of state’s PBM law appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

The Risk-Based Capital Model Governance Task Force formed this spring with a mandate to tackle the crucial, but some say outdated, RBC framework.

That effort officially launched July 3 with a task force memo requesting comments on a “proposed preliminary [RBC] principles and questions.”

RBC is a method used by regulators to ensure that insurance companies hold enough capital to support the risks they take on. It helps protect policyholders by reducing the likelihood of insurer insolvency.

Executives, as well as Wall Street analysts, prefer to operate insurance companies with an RBC ratio of 400% to 450%. But the original RBC concept dates to the 1990s and does not account for 2025 realities, said Larry Rybka in a comment letter submitted Tuesday.

“The entrance of private-equity sponsors into the insurance marketplace, combined with sophisticated reinsurance structures, has created new and material solvency risks that the current formula does not adequately capture,” wrote Rybka, chairman and CEO of Valmark Financial Group.

“This needs to be fixed because NAIC ineptitude is on full display in letting PHVL burn to the ground, and policyholders will only get the minimum state guarantee,” Rybka said in a follow-up interview.

Connecticut insurance regulators are overseeing PHL Variable following the discovery of significant financial difficulties. Insurance Commissioner Andrew Mais recently asked the court to loosen a moratorium on policyholder benefits while regulators court buyers for PHL blocks.

By the beginning of 2024, private equity firms owned approximately $700 billion in insurance assets, or 7.1% of the insurance industry, according to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners. That figure is up from 5% in 2019.

Meanwhile, U.S. life insurers have nearly doubled their ceded reserves since 2019, increasing from $710 billion to $1.3 trillion in 2023, Fitch Ratings noted in a recent report. During the same period, reserves ceded to offshore jurisdictions nearly quadrupled, exceeding $450 billion.

“Far from dispersing risks, some of these transactions concentrate it in thinly-capitalized entities that are opaque to U.S. stakeholders,” Rybka wrote. “Current RBC rules afford full credit for reinsurance recoverables irrespective of the reinsurer’s financial strength, thereby permitting capital arbitrage and the upstreaming of hard capital even as risk increases.”

‘Signalizes the priority’

The RBC task force was established in February by the NAIC. It immediately garnered attention as a serious effort.

“The fact that the [task force] has been established by the NAIC Executive Committee signalizes the priority that is being given to the risk-based capital system at the highest levels of the NAIC,” the law firm Mayer Brown wrote. “Also significant is the fact that state insurance commissioners (and not just their staff) are participating directly in the work of the task force.”

A pair of influential commissioners lead the task force: co-chairs Ohio Director of Insurance Judith French, who also chairs the influential Life Insurance and Annuities Committee, and Wisconsin Commissioner of Insurance Nathan Houdek, who also chairs the Financial Condition Committee.

Comments are being accepted through July 24 on the task force’s RBC principles and a list of 10 questions. The questions cover the gamut of risk, capital, and level of analysis.

Meanwhile, the Capital Adequacy Task Force recently considered a proposal to discourage insurers from releasing RBC figures.

Four-point plan

Rybka offers some pointed suggestions in his letter, four of them:

Stricter capital requirements for reinsured liabilities. Require higher RBC charges for liabilities ceded to reinsurers that fall into one of three categories: Not licensed in the United States, not subject to equivalent regulatory oversight, or not fully collateralized.

Enhanced transparency of reinsurance arrangements. Mandate detailed public disclosure of reinsurance counterparties, contractual terms, or any parental guarantees or side agreements.

Limits on the use of reinsurance for capital arbitrage. Adopt a clear substance-over-form test for risk transfer and deny RBC credit where that test is not met.

Appropriate capital treatment for complex credit structures. Assign higher RBC factors, or explicit capital add-ons, for exposures to below-investment-grade corporate debt held via CLOs, BDCs, and other unconsolidated vehicles.

Rybka said he does not expect the task force to adopt any of his suggestions.

“I want to be on the record pointing to the NAIC’s inaction before the next larger carrier fails,” he said. “Who knows, this letter may end up as something referenced if a crisis finally forces the federal government to intervene.”

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post New NAIC task force urged to update RBC to avoid more insurer failures appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

Matthew Motil, host of the podcast “The Cash Flow King,” was sentenced to 70 months in federal prison on Friday for orchestrating a real estate Ponzi scheme that scammed $7.3 million from at least 63 victims.

Motil, 45, of North Olmsted, Ohio, was a licensed real estate agent who owned and operated several companies from October 2017 to March 2022. He devised a scheme to defraud investors by using his podcast and other marketing tools to position himself as an expert in the field, court documents say.

Branding himself as the “Cash Flow King,” Motil produced and hosted programs which he promoted through social media and his websites. He also authored a book, “Man on Fire,” to further his credibility with investors, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Northern District of Ohio said in a news release.

Using a combination of marketing tactics, he solicited prospective investors to invest their money with him and his real estate companies as a lucrative way to generate passive income. Motil provided the victim investors with promissory notes that he claimed were secured by mortgages on properties located throughout Northeast Ohio, court documents say.

Unbeknownst to investors, he used the same properties over and over to obtain money from one victim after another, each time providing them with a promissory note purportedly secured by a mortgage. Each victim believed that they were the sole mortgage holder of the investment property and that they would be able to recover their investment through foreclosure if Motil failed to make the payments he promised, court documents say.

Ponzi scheme revealed

Motil deflected mortgage questions from investors by saying that there were long processing times. As he convinced more people to invest with him, he used those new funds to pay earlier investors to keep the Ponzi scheme going.

According to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s complaint, Motil scammed “Investor A” out of more than $577,000, “virtually all of Investor A’s life savings and retirement funds.” At one point, “Investor B” told Motil that “he needed to receive his overdue payments because he was being deployed to Afghanistan and would not be able to communicate from there.” “Victim C” was a cancer researcher in Florida.

“These victims were deceived and manipulated into handing over their hard-earned money to a shameless and selfish individual for his own benefit,” said acting U.S. Attorney Carol M. Skutnik for the Northern District of Ohio. “Our office will take action to prosecute anyone who preys on the trusting nature of others.”

Motil also used the victim investors’ money to fund his lifestyle. He funded personal expenses such as leasing a large home on Lake Erie and securing courtside seats to Cleveland Cavaliers home games. He also used the funds to pay his credit cards and financially sustain his fitness businesses.

“The 63 victims of this investment/Ponzi scheme are at the forefront of our work, and this conviction reflects our steadfast commitment to justice on their behalf,” said U.S. Secret Service Special Agent in Charge Blaine M. Forschen for the Cleveland Field Office. “Together with our federal, state, and local partners on the Secret Service Money Laundering Task Force, we will continue to protect our communities from those who exploit trust and inflict financial harm.”

Motil pleaded guilty to securities fraud and wire fraud on Sept. 5, 2024. Motil was also sentenced to serve three years of supervised release after imprisonment and pay $5,085,247.08 in restitution.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post ‘Cash Flow King’ gets 70 months in prison for $7M Ponzi scheme appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

The Federation of Americans for Consumer Choice will appeal a mixed ruling that keeps alive the Department of Labor’s fleeting attempts to reinterpret fiduciary duty.

District Judge Ed Kinkeade accepted the 2023 findings and recommendations of a U.S. magistrate judge, who concluded that portions of the DOL’s guidance under Prohibited Transaction Exemption 2020-02 exceeded the agency’s authority and were “arbitrary and capricious.”

Kinkeade’s order vacated specific rollover-related provisions, including the rule allowing a single IRA rollover to be considered the start of an ongoing fiduciary relationship.

While the ruling strikes those components from PTE 2020‑02, Kinkeade did not dismiss the DOL’s entire rule. Other portions remain in effect. With its lawsuit, FACC hoped to strike the entire rule, following the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s decision to toss out a previous 2016 fiduciary rule.

“FACC views the decision as a mixed bag because the decision guts an essential element of the guidance and thus demonstrates the guidance is flawed. However, FACC respectfully submits the Judge is wrong in failing to see that other aspects of the guidance are inconsistent with the Fifth Circuit decision,” said FACC CEO Kim O’Brien in a statement.

“FACC notes that Judge Kinkeade merely adopted the recommendations of the Magistrate Judge without further rationale but the rationale provided by the recommendations was seriously flawed and should not be allowed to stand.”

A pair of challenges

The DOL’s latest fiduciary expansion effort — titled the Retirement Security Rule — was crafted under the Biden administration to take effect in September 2024. Two lawsuits tied the rule up in two Texas courts, which granted stays in the summer of 2024.

In April, the Fifth Circuit granted the DOL 60 days to consider its stance on the latest version of the rule. Since the Trump administration took over, the DOL has not said if it will continue to appeal the lower-court rulings.

Plaintiffs in both lawsuits say that any DOL rule must adhere to precedents set by the Fifth Circuit ruling.

With that decision, a three-judge panel ruled that the 2016 rule strayed too far from the common-law definition of the term fiduciary, which hinges on the existence of a relationship of “trust and confidence” with the client. Agents who merely sell products to their clients do not have this relationship, the court concluded.

“FACC believes the time has come to resolve these issues after 15 years of legal wrangling so government resources can be better focused on helping and encouraging Americans to save for retirement,” O’Brien said. “That is what really matters, which can be best achieved by respecting the multi-faceted financial service marketplace designed to provide consumers with choices in pursuing their financial security.”

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post Trade group to appeal ‘mixed bag’ ruling on beleaguered fiduciary rule appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

The 24 million Americans who obtain health insurance through the Affordable Care Act marketplace will have to dig deeper into their pockets for coverage next year.

Insurers are proposing the highest premium increases in five years, with a median premium hike of 15%, according to an analysis for the Peterson-KFF Health System Tracker covering 19 states and the District of Columbia.

Compare this to 2025, when health insurers had a median proposed increase of 7%.

Insurers who sell coverage on the ACA exchanges are facing headwinds from two sources: rising costs and usage, and uncertainty over whether Congress will allow COVID-19-era ACA tax subsidies to expire at the end of 2025.

These are initial numbers and insurance commissioners in some states may alter requests before approval.

Still, “it’s the biggest increase we’ve seen in over five years,” said analysis co-author Cynthia Cox, a KFF vice president and director of its Program on the ACA.

Premiums will vary based on where consumers live, the type of plan they choose, and their insurer.

The KFF report said several factors are driving proposed premium increases. For example, insurers say underlying medical costs — including the use of expensive obesity drugs — will add about 8% to premiums for next year. And most insurers are also adding 4% above what they would have charged had the enhanced tax credits been renewed.

Tariffs also could be a factor in higher proposed premium, KFF said. Tariffs could drive up the cost of some drugs, medical equipment and supplies. Some insurers report that tariffs — and the uncertainty around them — are driving rate increases about 3% higher than they otherwise would be.

Future of enhanced ACA tax credits in question

A big question in all this is whether Congress decides to extend more generous tax credits first put in place during President Joe Biden’s term as part of the American Rescue Plan Act in 2021, then extended through the Inflation Reduction Act in 2022.

Those laws raised the subsidy amounts people could receive based on their household income and local premium costs and removed a cap that had barred higher earners from even partial subsidy assistance. Higher earners could still qualify for some subsidy but first had to chip in 8.5% of their household income toward the premiums.

Bigger subsidies helped fuel record enrollment in ACA plans, especially among lower-income policyholders.

But those enhanced subsidies are also costly. A permanent extension could cost $335 billion over the next decade, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

Consumers will learn their new premium prices only late in the fall, or when open enrollment for the ACA begins on Nov. 1 and they can start shopping around.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post ACA marketplace plans seeking double-digit premium increases for 2026 appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

Cerulli Associates anticipates that $124 trillion in wealth will transfer through 2048. The company notes that as the number of wealth transfers accelerates, it is important for wealth managers, asset managers, and other industry participants to follow best practices with current relationships while shifting their service and product strategies to the future profile of the high-net-worth demographic. This is according to The Cerulli Report: U.S. High-Net-Worth and Ultra-High-Net-Worth Markets 2024.

Who is getting what?

So, who will receive what in this great transfer of wealth, and when will they receive it? Overall, in the next 25 years, Cerulli projects that there are multiple demographic groups that stand to benefit from record levels of wealth transfer, said Chayce Horton, senior analyst at Cerulli. Spouses and significant others will be in line to inherit over $50T in wealth in the next 25 years, and the vast majority of this amount will be going to women.

When that wealth eventually transfers down to next-gen households, Horton said, millennials are expected to inherit the most–$46T, though most of this transferring will take place in the 2030s and 2040s. “In the next 15 years, Gen X households will be the largest recipients of intergenerational wealth transfers, while ultimately receiving nearly $40T in wealth in the next 25 years,” he said.

Helping clients transfer their wealth

And what are some of the best practices that financial advisors and wealth managers can use to prepare their current clients to pass on their wealth? Advisors play many roles in preparing their clients for intergenerational wealth transitions, Horton said. “Advisors must foster effective communication and provide in-depth education and guidance when working with clients and their families as they assess the multitude of estate planning options,” he said. “Through this process, advisors play a key role in cultivating a network of multidisciplinary experts who can assess each client’s unique needs.”

In addition, Horton said, “advisors can play a key role in preparing potential recipients of wealth with communication, education, and by providing complimentary planning services that can increase the continuity in the advisory experience across generations.”

Building successful relationships

The survey also said that millennials will be inheriting the most of any generation over the course of the next 25 years ($46 trillion). And Gen X stands to inherit the greatest portion of assets in the next 10 years, totaling $14 trillion, compared to millennials’ $8 trillion.

When asked how managers and advisors should position themselves to build successful relationships with these groups, Horton said that “the most important thing to understand is that the vast majority of wealth transfers come when the current owner passes away, and the vast majority of wealth in those scenarios goes down to their children. As the children of parents passing away are generally in their 50s and 60s – these are going to be a large cohort of wealth recipients, and this has significant implications.”

“This means that we need to rethink our definition of ‘next-gen’ to skew much older,” Horton pointed out. “And in rethinking these ideas, the industry needs to recognize that by the time a wealth transfer occurs, the recipient is likely to already have an advisory relationship.”

“With this in mind,” Horton added, “it’s not necessarily about serving one generation or another –but for the industry to think more concertedly about serving the needs of adults in their ‘sandwich’ years (40s-50s), when they are increasingly facing responsibilities for their parents while simultaneously retaining responsibility for their children. Advisors that can provide value to those in this stage will see the most benefit from the tailwinds of the great wealth transfer.”

The survey also pointed out that developing relationships with clients’ spouses or children is a top long-term growth strategy among high net worth practices, as the prospect of wealth moving from primary clients to spouses and children becomes ever more urgent. Conducting family meetings and maintaining a regular cadence of communication amongst family members is a key best practice, according to 89% of firms that were surveyed by Cerulli in 2024.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post Implementing best practices during the Great Wealth Transfer appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.

The SECURE Act changed the rules for many individuals who inherited individual retirement accounts. However, even though SECURE took effect five years ago, advisors continue to receive questions from clients about IRS regulations that complicate the rules for certain classes of IRA beneficiaries.

Jay Kautt, vice president of advanced market sales with Athene USA, discussed IRA beneficiary rules after SECURE during a recent webinar for the National Association for Fixed Annuities.

SECURE limited the ability of some inherited IRA beneficiaries to stretch their distributions from the IRA. Non-eligible designated beneficiaries and non-designated beneficiaries are restricted in their ability to stretch distributions beyond 10 years. Eligible designated beneficiaries, such as spouses, are still able to do the inherited stretch.

Kautt broke down who is eligible to stretch and who is restricted, and what advisors must know to keep IRA beneficiaries from running afoul of IRS regulations.

Five classes of beneficiaries who are eligible to stretch are spouses, individuals who are disabled at the time of the IRA holder’s death, individuals who are chronically ill at the time of the IRA holder’s death, a beneficiary who is not more than 10 years younger than the IRA holder, and minor children of the IRA holder.

Kautt described a few twists in the rules pertaining to these eligible designated beneficiaries.

A minor child can take required minimum distributions on the inherited IRA based on their life expectancy until they turn 21. After that, the 10-year rule kicks in and the entire IRA account must be emptied by the year in which they turn 31.

As for the eligibility of beneficiaries who are not more than 10 years younger than the IRA holder, beneficiaries who are older than the IRA holder are also eligible to stretch the IRA. This rule often applies when an IRA holder’s siblings inherit the account, Kautt said.

A spouse who inherits an IRA has several options available, Kautt said.

“A spouse has the unique ability to take an inherited IRA and treat it as their own; it’s as if the deceased IRA holder never existed,” he said.

The spousal beneficiary isn’t required to take RMDs from that IRA until they reach the applicable age for taking them. However, if the beneficiary is younger than age 59 ½, they are subject to a 10% penalty if they take money out of the IRA.

Looking at a hypothetical example of a 50-year-old woman who inherits her husband’s IRA, Kautt provided several options for her.

She can leave the IRA in inherited status, have access to the funds free of penalty and not have to take an RMD until the original owner would have reached his applicable age. The IRS placed no time limit on her ability to move that IRA from inherited status to her own account.

She can leave the IRA in inherited status until she turns 59 ½ and then retitle it to her own account. Kautt said there are several advantages of doing this. Now she knows exactly when RMDs start – when she turns 75. The beneficiaries of this IRA now will be primary beneficiaries and not successor beneficiaries of an inherited IRA. In addition, she is free to convert the account to a Roth IRA after she retitles it as her own. An inherited IRA cannot be converted to a Roth IRA.

Non-eligible designated beneficiaries

Anyone who is not an eligible designated beneficiary is subject to the 10-year rule, Kautt said.

The IRS changed the rules requiring certain beneficiaries to be subject to annual RMDs in years 1-9 and the 10-year rule. The final regulation issued in 2024, bifurcates the 10-year rule based on the age of the IRA holder at death. The key is the IRA holder’s required beginning date, which is April 1 of the year after the IRA holder reaches the age when their first RMD is due.

If the IRA holder died prior to their required beginning date for taking RMDs, the beneficiaries are subject to the 10-year rule, are not required to take annual RMDs but must liquidate the entire account balance by the end of the 10^th year following the IRA holder’s death. If the IRA holder died on or after the required beginning date, the beneficiaries must take annual RMDs in years one through nine, and the entire account balance must be liquidated by the end of the 10^th year following death.

One distinction pertains to beneficiaries of Roth IRAs, Kautt said. Roth IRAs do not have a required date to begin taking RMDs, therefore, beneficiaries do not have to take RMDs from the account. However, the Roth IRA account must be liquidated by the end of the 10^th year following the original account holder’s death.

Successor beneficiaries of an inherited IRA are no longer able to continue a life expectancy stretch of that IRA; they are limited to 10 years or less. If the original IRA holder died on or after Jan. 1, 2020, the successor beneficiary steps into the shoes of the inherited IRA holder and has only what is left on the original 10-year period before having to liquidate the account. If the successor beneficiary inherited the IRA from an eligible designated beneficiary, they have the full 10 years before having to liquidate the account.

Non-designated beneficiaries

Non-designated beneficiaries are charities, estates and nonqualifying trusts, Kautt said. These beneficiaries do not have a life expectancy; therefore, SECURE didn’t change the rules regarding inherited IRAs.

If the IRA holder died prior to the required beginning date, the non-designated beneficiary must liquidate the account within five years. If the IRA holder died on or after that date, the beneficiary must withdraw funds based on the “ghost” life expectancy of the original account holder.

© Entire contents copyright 2025 by InsuranceNewsNet.com Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this article may be reprinted without the expressed written consent from InsuranceNewsNet.com.

The post How SECURE changed the rules for inherited IRAs appeared first on Insurance News | InsuranceNewsNet.