Beyond Structured Settlements

2008 ASNP Annual Meeting

The Second Annual Meeting of the Academy of Special Needs Planners (ASNP), titled "Beyond Nuts & Bolts: When Theory Meets Reality", took place March 27-29, 2008 in New Orleans. Open to non-ASNP members, ASNP's 2008 program attracted more than 100 attendees plus nine sponsors and exhibitors.

Program Chairperson Frank Johns, ASNP's founders and ASNP's staff are to be congratulated for maintaining the high educational standards ASNP established in 2007. In addition to the excellent presentations, ASNP's educational program featured detailed and valuable handout materials in hardcopy and CD ROM formats. The 2008 ASNP program was noteworthy, in part, because it offered multiple presentations highlighting settlement planning and structured settlement issues - many of which S2KM identified and recommended in S2KM's summary of ASNP's 2007 Annual Meeting.

Several ASNP program presentations featured members of the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP). In addition to Johns, SSP member presenters included Michele Whitmore, Tim Nay, Jack Meligan, Joseph Tombs, David Lillesand and this blog's author, Patrick Hindert. Several additional SSP, National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) and National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) members participated as sponsors, exhibitors and/or attendees.

Summary of the 2008 ASNP Annual Meeting

Families Helping Families - ASNP's "extra-curricular" program in New Orleans featured a social service project where 30 ASNP conference attendees assisted Families Helping Families of Southeast Louisiana repair and improve its office headquarters. Many special needs professionals have disabled family members. Their commitment to disabled persons is genuine. The ASNP work project represented a hands-on demonstration of their commitment and complemented the participation and support NSSTA and SSP provided earlier this month in Washington, D.C. for the AAPD Leadership Gala Dinner.

Special Needs Trusts for Wealthy Families - Michael Gilfix opened the ASNP Educational Program with a detailed analysis of the challenges facing special needs planners whose clients include wealthy families with disabled members. Gilfix's analysis addressed the meanings of "wealth" and "disability" in the context of public benefits as well as planning considerations to meet the cost of care and services for such clients.

Tax Considerations of Grantor vs. Non-Grantor Trusts - Vincent Russo provided a tax-oriented introduction to various trusts used in special needs planning. Russo identified drafting issues, reviewed a Fiduciary Income Tax Return (Form 1041) and highlighted a variety of "tax traps". Russo's discussion supplemented his tax presentation at the 2007 ASNP Annual Meeting.

Special Needs Financial Planning - Two financial planners, Cynthia Haddad and Sal Salvo, offered an overview of comprehensive special needs financial planning. Haddad reviewed sample case studies from a book she co-authors. Salvo discussed the role of life insurance and shared his experience of caring and planning for his own disabled child.

Secondary Life and Annuity Markets - This blog's author introduced ASNP members to life settlements, structured settlement transfers and Medicaid annuity transfers. Issues addressed included secondary market history, public policy considerations, existing laws and regulations, and reactions from the primary markets - as well as the professional responsibilities and planning options for special needs attorneys.

Prudent Investment - William Browning discussed the management role and investment duties of trustees for special needs trusts. Browning's presentation highlighted the general impact of the Uniform Prudent Investor Act (UPIA) for trustees in the context of modern portfolio theory as well as recent litigation against trustees.  Browning's presentation did not mention structured settlement annuities.

Ethical Pitfalls for Attorneys Acting as Fiduciaries - Frank Johns addressed ethical challenges special needs attorneys encounter when representing a fiduciary or serving as self-appointed fiduciaries. Johns' commentary included consideration of the ABA Model Rules of Professional Conduct, the NAELA Aspirational Standards and the ACTEC Commentaries to the Model Rules of Professional Conduct.

Difficult Trust Beneficiaries - Patricia Dudek and Cynthia Barrett shared their personal experiences and recommendations for special needs attorneys and trustees who encounter difficult trust beneficiaries including distribution authority and strategies for avoiding professional liability.

Trusts and the Funding of Tort Recoveries - Michele Whitmore reviewed the relationship of structured settlements and special needs planning from a settlement planning perspective. Whitmore summarized the history of structured settlements and highlighted various abuses including how "over-structuring" has contributed to the development of the secondary annuity market. Whitmore recommended a collaborative and plaintiff-controlled settlement planning strategy based upon damage analysis, 468B Qualified Settlement Funds, Medicare Set-Aside Arrangements and Special Needs Trusts.

Settlement Planning and Special Needs Planning - Tim Nay moderated a panel discussion featuring Jack Meligan and Joseph Tombs that highlighted collaboration opportunities for settlement planners and special needs attorneys. Meligan differentiated needs-based settlement planners from product-based structured settlement intermediaries. Meligan criticized defendants who seek to control or restrict any claimant's right to select his or her own settlement advisors and products. He summarized the mission and history of the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) and noted the recently adopted SSP Standards of Professional Conduct. Tombs outlined the SSP Registered Settlement Planner (RSP) certification program and distinguished a settlement planner from a plaintiff structured settlement broker.

Personal Injury Litigation - Evan Krame and Diedre Wachbrit offered advice and recommended guidelines for special needs attorneys who work with trial attorneys. Their presentation included advice for special needs attorneys about structured settlements and structured settlement advisors. They also identified several trust companies that currently offer special needs trust services.

Why Fiduciaries Get Sued - Richard Milstein and Frank Johns examined several areas of trustee liability and discussed special needs trust case studies that highlighted areas of greatest risk for trustees. Milstein and Johns included their own list of the top ten reasons special needs trustees are sued as well as their recommended remedies.

SSI Rules for Trust Administration - Ken Brown and David Lillesand discussed current Supplemental Security Income (SSI) rules and issues impacting the administration of special needs trusts. Brown summarized the general SSI rules for disbursements from trusts as well as specific rules relating to home ownership. Lillesand outlined the sources of SSI law and summarized trust administration and trust creation issues. Both Brown and Lillesand addressed structured settlements. According to Brown, the Social Security Administration (SSA) has identified structured settlements for future POMS but they are not currently a priority. According to Lillesand, the lack of structured settlement POMS continues to pose a risk for those claimants and their attorneys who attempt to fund special needs trusts with structured settlement annuities. If and when structured settlement POMS are drafted, Lillesand recommended the POMS should also address secondary market annuity issues.

Section 8 Housing and Special Needs Trusts - Kevin Urbatsch explained why special needs trusts and Section 8 Housing rules are not fully compatible. According to Urbatsch, some local public housing agencies (PHAs) are taking the position that every distribution from a special needs trust qualifies as income for the Section 8 recipient including distributions for medical expenses. This result can cause the elimination of a Section 8 voucher. Re-qualification for Section 8 may take months or even years.

Sponsors and Exhibitors

• MassMutual
• J.G. Wentworth
• Legal Directives
• ResCare Premier
• CORE Health Care
• MetDESK
• The Halpern Group
• First Capital Surety & Trust
• Wells Fargo

For additional information about structured settlements, see S2KM's Structured Settlement Wiki.

Structured Settlement Wiki

S2KM has published a structured settlement wiki.

S2KM's objectives and purposes:

• Publish a wiki for structured settlement professionals and stakeholders.
• Feature industry issues and knowledge leaders in web 2.0 formats.
• Encourage industry practice communities and networks to use wikis.
• Better integrate S2KM's publications with other authors, publishers and publications.

S2KM will continue to publish S2KM's blog "Beyond Structured Settlements" including future posts announcing structured settlement wiki updates.

SSP 2008 Annual Meeting - 2

The Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) hosted its 2008 Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. on March 5-7.  Approximately 75 persons attended the SSP meeting including settlement planners, special needs attorneys and annuity provider representatives. Under direction from 2007 SSP President Anthony Alfieri and Program Chairperson Jack Meligan, SSP's 2008 educational program matched the high standards of previous SSP programs.

During SSP's business meeting, SSP members:

• Adopted the "Standards of Professional Conduct for Settlement Planners"; and
• Elected new officers and directors .
  
  • SSP elected Greg Maxwell as 2008 President and Joseph Tombs as SSP Vice President.
  • SSP Directors include: Richard Bishop; Charles Derenne; Paul Lesti; Tim Nay; and Richard Risk.
  • Nay, the first-ever President of NAELA, is also the first-ever special needs attorney to serve on SSP's Board of Directors.

SSP's Educational Program

• Ethics
  • The SSP Code of Ethics (titled: "Standards of Professional Conduct for Settlement Planners") represents a multi-year SSP project initiated and managed by SSP Director and attorney Richard Risk.
    • Carl A. Pierce, distinguished professor of law at the University of Tennessee and a reporter for the latest revision of the American Bar Association's Model Rules of Professional Conduct, assisted SSP with this ethics project.
    • Pierce introduced drafts of SSP's Code of Ethics at both the 2007 and 2008 SSP Annual Meetings.
  • Frank Johns, a leading special needs attorney and settlement planning ethicist, also advised SSP on its Code of Ethics. Johns, an SSP member, delivered SSP's featured dinner address. Johns' comments focused on ethical considerations for judges, plaintiff attorneys and trustees when selecting a structured settlement or settlement planning professional. Johns' 2008 SSP presentation also featured his proposed Request for Proposal (RFP) for settlement planners. Johns first introduced his ideas for a settlement planner RFP at the 2007 Advanced Elder Law Institute.
• Tax Panel
  • Organized by structured settlement attorney and moderator Richard Risk, SSP's Tax Panel has become the best tax discussion in the structured settlement industry.
  • In addition to Risk, SSP's 2008 tax panel participants included:
    
    • Jody J. Brewster, Tax Partner with Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom;
    • Glenn F. Mackies - Tax Partner at Deloitte & Touche.
    • Michael J. Montemurro - Branch Chief at the Internal Revenue Service responsible for Income Tax and Accounting;
  • The SSP tax panel addressed several topics with single claimant 468B receiving the most attention. The structured settlement industry is waiting for written guidance from the United States Treasury Department as to whether IRC section 468B applies to single claimant cases. SSP's tax panel provided a detailed look at these single claimant 468B issues:
    • The language in IRC section 468B and existing regulations;
    • Technical and policy Issues created by the language;
    • Technical and policy arguments for and against single claimant 468B funds;
    • Impact of economic benefit on single claimant and multiple claimant 468B funds;
    • Defining single claimant and multiple claimants within IRC section 468B.
• Government Benefits -SSP devoted three presentations to government benefit issues.
  • Medicaid
    • David Lillesand, a national leader among social security and special needs trust attorneys, dropped a bombshell on the structured settlement industry at the SSP meeting.
    • Based upon Lillesand's discussions with Social Security officials including Ken Brown, Lillesand declared "inoperative" Nancy Veillon's January 31, 2006 letters to attorneys Roger Bernstein and Jay Sangerman representing the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA).
    • NSSTA's letters from SSA are inoperative, according to Lillesand, because:
      • NSSTA's letters from SSA do not represent meaningful authority inside the SSA. POMS yes. Letters no.
      • NSSTA's letters predate (by one week), and fail to address or consider, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005.
    • Lillesand said he expects the SSA to issue new POMS within the next few weeks.
    • However, the new POMS will not address structured settlements. Lillesand stated "The SSA Office of General Counsel will not approve structured settlement POMS at this time".
    • Lillesand and Ken Brown of the SSA will be featured speakers at the ASNP 2008 Annual Meeting March 27-29 in New Orleans.
    • Lillesand's 2008 SSP presentation focused on the "life or death" issue of Medicaid insurance for disabled persons - plus the challenges and risks for special needs attorneys who recommend annuities as funding and investment options.
    • Lillesand's SSP presentation, and his excellent supporting SSP paper, define serious immediate challenges for structured settlement and settlement planning professionals.
    • Lillesand's proposed solution:
      
      • A collaborative (multi-trade association) initiative focused on annuities and government benefits.
      • And specifically for Medicaid and structured settlements:
        
        • Convince SSA to draft POMS favorable to annuities and structured settlement annuities.
        • Incorporate the January 31, 2006 NSSTA letters into the POMS.
  • Medicare
    • SSP offered two presentations about Medicare.
      • One titled "Medicare Compliance - Medicare Set Asides (MSA) - Beware of the Medicare Super Lien" featured Paul K. Isaac and Benjamin M. Basista.
      • The other titled "Nuts and Bolts of Medicare Set Aside Arrangements" featured Douglas L. Shaw and Marge George-Ratz of Medivest.
    • For this author, neither SSP  Medicare presentation focused satisfactorily on annuity issues related to Medicare Set-Aside arrangements.
    • Request for future SSP and NSSTA presenters about Medicare Set-Aside arrangements:
      • Summarize in your presentations CMS Policy Memoranda addressing structured settlement annuities - especially the CMS October 15, 2004 Policy Memorandum;
      • Context the CMS structured settlement policy memoranda within Medicare legal authority generally;
      • Identify any Medicare legal authority that updates or supersedes the October 15, 2004 CMS Policy Memorandum;
      • Identify the issues, opportunities and risks for settlement planners and structured settlement professionals.
      • Recommend strategies to advance the use of annuities as part of developing government benefit legislation and regulations.
• Secondary Life and Annuity Markets
  • SSP's panel discussion titled "What Settlement Planners Need to Know about the Secondary Markets" expanded previous trade association discussions about structured settlement transfers (aka factoring).
  • This author moderated the SSP secondary market panel discussion which featured:
    • Rhonda Bentzen - a secondary market intermediary who is an honorary member of SSP and serves as Chairperson of SSP's Membership Committee.
    • Stephen R. Harris - a partner at Drinker Biddle & Reath who represents annuity providers;
    • Earl S. Nesbitt - the Executive Director of the National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) who represents factoring companies.
  • The SSP secondary market discussion offered multiple informative perspectives on this controversial topic. It also included questions by SSP members to Nesbitt for NASP members focused upon:
    • Alleged predatory advertising by factoring companies;
    • Alleged improper use of the term "structured settlement" by factoring companies;
• Nesbitt promised to communicate SSP's concerns to NASP members.
• Legislation and Litigation Update
  • 2008 SSP President Greg Maxwell provided a summary of recent legal developments impacting settlement planners and structured settlement professionals.
  • 2007 SSP President Anthony Alfieri updated a tax analysis of sexual abuse cases.
• Case Studies - SSP offered three presentations about settlement planning advice and developments.
  • Professor Joseph Tombs introduced the "Tombs' Dissipation Index" as a settlement planning tool;
  • Jack Meligan and Michele Whitmore analyzed multiple settlement planning scenarios and recommended settlement planning techniques and tools.
  • Ward Zimmerman moderated a panel discussion about negotiation tactics featuring Charles Derenne, Michele Whitmore and Jack Meligan.
• Internet Marketing
  • Mathew Hayes provided insights and strategies to improve SSP member email marketing.
  • Hayes' SSP presentation paralleled Mark Wahlstrom's marketing presentation at the NSSTA 2008 Winter Regional Meeting;
  • In this author's opinion, Hayes and Wahlstrom should expand their Internet presentations to include emerging web 2.0 technologies and tools such as blogs, wikis and podcasts.
    

For prior S2KM coverage about:

• SSP - see this S2KM blog post.
• Web 2.0 - see this S2KM blog post
• Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 - see this S2KM blog post
• Medicare, etc. Extension Act of 2007 - see this S2KM blog post.
• Secondary Life and Annuity Markets - see this S2KM blog post.

Patrick Hindert, S2KM's blog author, is a member of SSP.

Addendum 03132008

S2KM's original post above failed to report two important events from the SSP meeting:

• David Synder - SSP honored Snyder as a founding member of the Society of Settlement Planners and historic leader among settlement planners and structured settlement professionals.  Snyder recently announced the sale of his former company Delta Settlements to Michael Upchurch.
• AAPD Leadership Gala dinner - The 2008 AAPD Gala was even better than advertised and raised more than $1 million.  Both SSP and NSSTA members attended. NSSTA was an event sponsor.

West Virginia Update

The West Virginia legislature has amended and reenacted the state's current structured settlement protection statute.  According to Representative Ronald N. Walters, one of the bill's sponsors, West Virginia Governor Joe Manchin is expected to sign House Bill 4613 into law within the next few days.

The reenacted statute is noticeably different than West Virginia House Bill 4380 which S2KM previously summarized. Most significantly, the reenacted statute does not include any maximum discount rate. The original bill contained a maximum discount rate not to exceed "the current annual average percentage rate of interest on twenty year residual mortgages offered in this state, as determined by the banking commissioner." Factoring companies claimed this maximum discount rate would eliminate structured settlement transfers in West Virginia. Walters acknowledged his original intent was to do just that.

If signed into law by Governor Manchin, the amended West Virginia statute (now titled House Bill 4613) will:

• Add some consistency between West Virginia's statute, IRC section 5891 and the Model State Structured Settlement Protection Act (Model Act) by:
  • Broadening application from "an infant or an incompetent person" to anyone with structured settlement payment rights arising from a personal injury or other claim; and
  • Eliminating a $40,000 threshold amount;
• Confirm that a court may appoint a guardian ad litem for any person; and must appoint a guardian ad litem for an infant, an incompetent or a ward of the court;
• The court will award the guardian ad litem reasonable fees for representing the consumer.
• The transfer company will pay for "such attorneys' fees and costs".
• Require the guardian ad litem to:
  • Review the requisite disclosures;
  • Make an independent inquiry to determine whether the proposed transfer:
    • Is fair and reasonable;
    • In the best interests of the consumer and any dependents of the consumer;
    • Has not been attempted or accomplished before.
• Report the results of that inquiry to the court during the hearing;
• Inform the consumer about "possible adverse tax consequence to the consumer" - a responsibility the guardian ad litem and the transfer company will now jointly share in West Virginia;
• Reconfirm the current West Virginia approval standard: the consumer must now "clearly" demonstrate that
  • He or she, or his or her family, is facing a financial hardship that the transfer would alleviate and the transfer would not subject the consumer or the consumer's family to undue hardship; or
  • The transfer is in the best interest of the consumer.

Reaction from the factoring companies to the new West Virginia statute has been generally positive. According to Earl Nesbitt, Executive Director of the National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP), the amended West Virginia legislation will have a "minimal impact".

Nesbitt, however, did express concern about NSSTA's conduct (or lack thereof) in West Virginia. In Nesbitt's view, NSSTA's failure to actively lobby for the Model Act in West Virginia violated the spirit, if not the letter, of NSSTA's 2000 agreement with NASP to support the Model Act.

NSSTA representatives have refused to comment about the West Virginia legislation - except to say  "NSSTA supports the Model Act."  According to Walters, NSSTA's General Counsel Craig Ulman did contact Walters early in the process to communicate that "NSSTA supports the Model Act". Other than one telephone communication, however, Walters said he has heard nothing from NSSTA and has received no support from NSSTA. "Craig [Ulman] told me I was on my own".

In Walters' view, "the Model Act does not go far enough". According to Walters, "West Virginia's new law will provide greater protection and greater clarification plus a tougher standard" than the Model Act. Walters said he may introduce additional legislation in 2009 requiring factoring companies to have insurance licenses.  Walters, one of legislative sponsors of West Virginia's House Bills 4380 and 4613, also manages the Charleston, West Virginia office of Structured Financial Associates, Inc. (SFA). SFA is a NSSTA member although Walter individually is not.

Some of the questions NSSTA members should be asking their leaders (and themselves) about settlement transfers:

• What are NSSTA's legislative and educational objectives and strategies for settlement transfers?
• What does NSSTA mean when NSSTA says "we support the Model Act"?
• How did NSSTA support the Model Act in West Virginia?
• Is the new West Virginia statute better or worse than the Model Act:
  • For consumers?
  • For state judges?
  • For transfer companies?
• What should NSSTA members say to their clients and other structured settlement stakeholders about settlement transfers?
• What conduct by NSSTA members represents best professional practices relative to settlement transfer issues and responsibilities?

For additional information:

• West Virginia's Structured Settlement Protection Statute - see this prior S2KM blog post.
• State Structured Settlement Protection Statutes - see Chapter 16 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments"
• Secondary Life and Annuity Markets - see this prior S2KM blog post.

The King of Torts Addresses Structured Settlements

The keynote address by esteemed trial attorney Joseph Jamail (aka "The King of Torts") was one of the highlights of the NSSTA 2008 Winter Meeting.

Jamail and Jay Harvey, the immediate past-president of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association (TTLA), who also spoke at the NSSTA meeting in Austin, represent the most recent plaintiff attorneys to appear at NSSTA meetings to endorse structured settlements.

Among other endorsements from plaintiff attorneys, the King of Torts' structured settlement proclamations now appear on NSSTA's website :

• "Structured settlements provide the ultimate safeguard for settlement funds."
• "Structured settlements help lawyers protect the needy from the greedy."

The message and choreography of NSSTA's plaintiff attorney appearances and endorsements are strikingly similar. Escorted and introduced by, or featured with, their NSSTA-member structured settlement advisors (Robin Young for Joe Jamail), these trial attorneys announce their support for structured settlements and make positive, uplifting comments about the structured settlement industry. The NSSTA audience applauds - with enthusiastic standing ovations for celebrity attorneys such as the King of Torts. NSSTA allocates little or no time for questions. No controversial issues are addressed. Everyone walks away happy. NSSTA posts the positive sound bites on its website and declares a public relations victory.

NSSTA's continuing strategy to feature plaintiff attorney endorsements is understandable in the context of results from NSSTA's recent marketing study titled "A Study of the Structured Settlement Process Conducted on behalf of the National Structured Settlement Trade Association". This survey "of attorneys involved in structured settlements and structured settlement recipients" was conducted for NSSTA during 2006 and 2007 by the University of Georgia Research Center. The purpose of the study, as reported by Joseph M. Costello at the NSSTA 2007 Annual Meeting, was "to better understand the perceptions these stakeholders have of structured settlements".

Some of NSSTA's announced findings based upon research including telephone interviews with 43 plaintiff attorneys:

• 95 percent of the plaintiff attorneys surveyed said they were proponents of structured settlements;
• 75 percent said they would recommend a structured settlement in an appropriate case;
• 70 percent said they retain a structured settlement consultant;
• And yet, according to NSSTA:
  • Only 7% of personal injury settlements between $75,000 to $100,000 involve structured settlements; and only 30% of personal injury settlements over $1 million;
  • Plaintiff attorneys prefer (and presumably recommend) the following financial planning resources for their clients:
    • Trust company/department - 30%
    • Financial planner - 28%
    • Structured settlement consultant - 23%
    • No response - 19%

Among NSSTA's "lessons learned" from the survey: plaintiff attorneys are a critical point of contact for structured settlement education and marketing.

Based upon these findings, NSSTA's public relations strategy with plaintiff attorneys makes a lot of sense as a critical priority for the growth of structured settlements. Endorsements by prominent plaintiff attorneys (including especially "The King of Torts") are positive and valuable for the structured settlement industry.

To grow the structured settlement market, however, current industry stakeholders (including NSSTA, SSP, NASP and their members) need to engage attorneys in a more well-defined educational conversation about structured settlements. Targeted attorneys should include judges, mediators, special needs attorneys, trustees, guardians, defense attorneys, legislators and regulators - as well as plaintiff trial attorneys.

For plaintiff attorneys, this recommended educational conversation should address priorities S2KM previously identified in a blog post criticizing the lack of structured settlement education at the AAJ 2007 Annual Convention.

On a positive note for AAJ and structured settlements, the December 2007 issue of "Trial" magazine (the "Journal of the American Association for Justice") provides a small, but timely and related, educational step forward. The issue is titled "Find Your Way to Settlement - Smart Strategies for Your Next Case". Among many settlement articles and structured settlement advertisements, one article addresses structured settlements - Dov Apel's article: "Settling the Cerebral Palsy Case". In his article, Apel summarizes some (but far from all) of the most important structured settlement issues for plaintiff attorneys including: protecting the confidentiality of injury victims' personal medical information; and 468B qualified settlement funds.

In addition to Joseph Jamail's valuable endorsement and public relations sound bites (plus considerable annuity premium), what is the structured settlement legacy of The King of Torts? This author hopes Joseph Jamail's most important and lasting structured settlement contribution will result from his advice in Austin:

"Advocacy should be part of the practice and training of structured settlement professionals".

S2KM endorses the King of Torts' advice and further encourages:

• Continued structured settlement research and advocacy focused on injured and disabled persons;
• Continued education about structured settlement public policy and laws - including how to improve the laws and related legal processes;
• Respectful and open discussion about issues related to such research, advocacy, education and improvement.

For additional information about the role and responsibility of plaintiff attorneys in structured settlements, see Chapter 5 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments".

Addendum 01282008

Since writing and publishing this post, the author has received comments from NSSTA representatives pointing out some of NSSTA's efforts and successes in engaging plaintiff attorneys in educational dialogue about structured settlements - including what needs to improve and change.  S2KM acknowledges NSSTA's efforts to engage some of its plaintiff attorney speakers in meaningful educational dialogue. President Henry Strong, in particular, should be recognized and thanked for his questions to plaintiff attorney Webb Brennan at the NSSTA 2007 Fall Meeting.  Although this author did not attend that presentation, Strong's questions apparently resulted in valuable and frank discussion about structured settlements including problems.  That type of discussion represents a positive step in refocusing and growing the structured settlement market and should be encouraged and continued. S2KM apologizes for missing the Webb Brennan discussion and for failing to sufficiently credit NSSTA in the above post for its efforts to develop meaningful educational dialogue with plaintiff attorneys.

NSSTA 2008 Winter Regional Meeting

The National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) hosted its 2008 Winter Regional Meeting January 16-18 at the Barton Creek Resort in the Texas hill country west of Austin. Approximately 150 persons attended.

NSSTA's educational program and featured speakers highlighted some of the strategic changes impacting the structured settlement industry as well as the challenges facing NSSTA as a trade association.

Prominent NSSTA themes in Austin:

• Trial Attorneys - Historically defense-oriented, NSSTA now features prominent plaintiff attorneys at every meeting. "King of Torts" Joe Jamail was the keynote speaker in Austin. Jay Harvey, immediate past President of the Texas Trial Lawyers Association (TTLA), also spoke in Austin.
• Disabled Persons and Associations - NSSTA's new structured settlement marketing brochure features Megan O'Neil, a structured settlement recipient who works with the World Institute on Disability (WID). O'Neil was a featured speaker at NSSTA's 2007 Annual Meeting. NSSTA will be a primary sponsor of the American Association of Persons with Disabilities (AAPD) Gala Dinner March 5, 2008 in Washington, D.C. Andrew Imparato, AAPD's President, was a featured speaker at the  NSSTA 2007 Fall Regional Meeting. Imparato and AAPD promote and aspire to "empower" disabled persons which include structured settlement recipients.
• Government Benefits - NSSTA recently formed a government benefits committee which is currently co-chaired by Doug Brand and John McCulloch. In Austin, special needs attorney Pi-Yi Mayo spoke about special needs trusts and the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 while special needs attorneys Robert Sagrillo and Robert Lewis participated on a panel that addressed the Medicare secondary payer rule and the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007.
• Legal Documentation - Mike Miller and Toni Warbington repeated a presentation they made at NSSTA's 2007 Fall Meeting about the legal and practical issues associated with structured settlement legal documentation. Their presentation emphasized some of the potential legal exposures as well as recent case law.
• Legislative and Regulatory Developments - Eric Vaughn, NSSTA's lobbyist, summarized current Federal legislative developments and outlined NSSTA's political strategy including regulatory priorities and potential alliances with other trade associations. Craig Ulman, NSSTA Legal Counsel, provided a status report on Executive Life of New York.
• Marketing - NSSTA member Mark Wahlstrom, owner and host of The Settlement Channel, introduced a new email-based marketing strategy (titled "An Army of One") developed by NSSTA's Marketing Committee. As a reminder of why annuities are financially secure, Wayne Mehlman of the American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI) spoke about the solvency requirements and regulatory oversight of the Life Insurance Industry.
• Professionalism - Several NSSTA presentations addressed issues related to this topic. Lynn Courier provided an update on the Broker Relationship Initiative. Bo Short spoke about leadership. NSSTA members Mike Kelly, Teri Triplett and Will Shapiro discussed their personal strategies for maintaining and advancing their professionalism.

NSSTA's Challenges

• Leadership - With few exceptions, NSSTA's leadership currently consists of white males age 50 and over whose professional careers have been restricted to life insurance, casualty claims and traditional structured settlements. Where is the next generation of structured settlement leaders? Why aren't these future leaders attending and speaking at NSSTA meetings? What new skill sets, knowledge, experience and ideas will this new generation of leaders bring to the structured settlement industry? How will the current generation of structured settlement leaders capture and transfer their collective knowledge? How relevant and valuable is traditional structured settlement knowledge in a transitioning market with new laws and business models?
• All Things to All People - In Austin, NSSTA proposed to "represent all viewpoints and interests on all Federal and state legislative and regulatory issues" related to structured settlements. Is that possible - or even desirable? Can NSSTA successfully reconcile the competing interests of companies like AIG and associations like AAPD, WID, NAELA, AAJ, SSP, and their members, clients and constituents, on issues like single claimant 468B? Can NSSTA reconcile a "claim management" (defense controlled) structured settlement model with a "settlement planning" (plaintiff controlled) structured settlement model?
• Secondary Markets - How long, how effectively and how beneficially can NSSTA and its current leadership ignore (from an educational and professional responsibility perspective) the development of the secondary life and annuity markets? What impact will NSSTA's current strategy have upon the long-term growth of the primary structured settlement market? Have the factoring companies really stolen the "structured settlement" brand - or, alternatively, have NSSTA and its members abandoned and ignored their customers? Why not openly discuss settlement transfers at NSSTA meetings? Why not define what constitutes "best professional practices" and re-learn how to sell structured settlements in the new legal and business environment?
• Government Benefits - Both the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 and the Medicare, Medicaid and SCHIP Extension Act of 2007 are likely to have a significant impact on the future of structured settlements. Can NSSTA successfully lobby to preserve and expand the use of structured settlements to fund special needs trusts and Medicare set-aside arrangements? Which traditional structured settlement annuity features will survive? What new knowledge, skill sets, services, resources and business models are necessary for current structured settlement participants to survive and remain successful?  Is NSSTA being truthful and/or credible when they tell Congress "structured settlements enable injured victims to live ...free of reliance on government assistance"?
  
• Unauthorized Practice of Law - The traditional claim management structured settlement model encourages (and in some cases requires) intermediaries to engage in the unauthorized practice of law - specifically, the "drafting of legal documents by non-lawyers". Structured settlement legal issues, including the drafting of legal documents, become even more complex in the settlement planning model which must regularly consider issues related to Medicare, Medicaid, special needs trusts, Medicare set-aside arrangements and the secondary life and annuity markets. The most recent NSSTA Regional Meeting presentations of "All Things Considered" have addressed structured settlement legal documentation.  These educational programs represent an important and valuable start in understanding what constitutes the authorized and unauthorized practice of structured settlement law. Hopefully, NSSTA and NSSTA's Legal Committee will continue this education.
• Internet Business Transition - Can NSSTA and its members successfully transition their business to the Internet? Does NSSTA have a strategy to accomplish this objective?  How can NSSTA use web 2.0 technologies and tools to improve its education and business processes?  Does Smith Bucklin, NSSTA's new association management company, possess the necessary skill sets and experience to help NSSTA and its members with this transition?  What is the next step?

Congratulations to NSSTA, especially President Henry Strong and Educational Committee Chairman William Tocchi, for a valuable 2008 Fall Regional Meeting.  The NSSTA 2008 Annual Meeting will take place April 16-19 in La Jolla, California.

For additional S2KM blog posts about NSSTA, see NSSTA 2007 Fall Regional Meeting and incorporated links.

Structured Settlements in 2007

Happy holidays from S2KM Limited. Thank you for reading S2KM's blog during 2007. This final 2007 S2KM blog post highlights some of this year's important structured settlement developments and issues.  For additional background information, see:

• S2KM Mid-2007 Structured Settlement Report
• Structured Settlements in 2006

Industry Growth and Development

• Industry insiders are predicting final 2007 structured settlement annuity sales (qualified and non-qualified) will match or slightly exceed total 2006 production of $6.1 billion.
• Membership growth in 2007 for the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) and the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP), the primary structured settlement trade associations, also appears flat. Neither of these associations has articulated a strategy for growing the structured settlement industry.
• NSSTA replaced long-time Executive Director Randy Dyer in 2007 with association management company Smith Bucklin. NSSTA has announced it will continue a business relationship with Dyer. However, NSSTA has not yet announced Dyer's new role or responsibilities.
• Annuity provider Mass Mutual exited the structured settlement industry in 2007 joining other recent industry departures such as Genworth, Travelers and Aegon. No new annuity providers entered the structured settlement market in 2007.
• The secondary life and annuity markets continued to be controversial within the structured settlement industry in 2007. Semetra resigned from NSSTA in 2007 based in part on their disagreement with NSSTA's Bylaw Amendments related to structured settlement factoring. Neither NSSTA nor SSP allows factoring companies to join their associations.
• Although the secondary structured settlement market continues to grow in 2007, the overall pace of its growth appears to have leveled off for many, but not all, participants.
• Preliminary strategic recognition and some consolidation continued during 2007 within these overlapping markets:
  
  • Structured settlements;
  • Personal injury settlement planning;
  • Litigation funding;
  • Special needs planning;
  • Secondary insurance and annuity markets.

Legislation and Regulations    

• New York Governor Eliot Spitzer announced a $750 million "agreement in principle" for Executive Life of New York in 2007. The agreement is designed to continue paying all ELNY annuitants 100% of their benefits. The announcement represents a public relations victory for the structured settlement industry. Many questions about the agreement, however, remain unanswered. For example: the amount of contributions from indemnity (casualty) insurers who own or have assigned structured settlement annuities.
• State Medicaid Agencies are continuing to adopt annuity provisions from the Deficit Reduction Act into their state Medicaid Plans. Interpretations and applications of these new annuity rules remain inconsistent creating process bottlenecks and denials. The impact of the secondary annuity markets on Medicaid qualification remains unclear in 2007. The Social Security Administration (SSA) announced in 2007 that it will draft POMS for annuities in 2008. For additional information about the Deficit Reduction Act, see:
  • Release 41 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments";
  • Inconvenient Questions; and
  • NAELA Annuity Policy White Paper.
• 48 states have enacted structured settlement protection statutes. Overall, these statutes appear to be accomplishing their purposes and functioning with increasing certainty and efficiency. Pennsylvania's judiciary adopted Pennsyvania Rule 229.2 in 2007 tightening some rules and processes within that state's protection statute.
• The U.S. Treasury has not ruled on single claimant 468B funds in 2007.

Case Law - some of the significant 2007 cases:    

• DOJ Sovereign Immunity Defense - see "Drinker Biddle's Structured Settlement Update" for analysis of two DOJ sovereign immunity cases: Transamerica v. Settlement Capital and Continental Casualty v. United States.
• Primary Market Disclosure Case - "Pullman & Comley's Structured Settlement Insights" provided the first Internet analysis of Joseph v. The City of New York which Pullman & Comley characterizes as ""the first court opinion to analyze the requirements in structured settlement protection acts that disclosures be made when negotiating a structured settlement."
• Rapid Settlements cases challenging secondary market laws and business practices including:
  
  • Rapid v. Symetra; and
  • CNA v. Rapid Settlements

• Murphy v. IRS - Eleven months after ruling that taxing damage awards for nonphysical compensatory damages violated the United States Constitution, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has reversed itself in Murphy v. IRS by holding that the United States can tax awards for emotional distress and injury to reputation.
• Macomber v. Travelers - the parties agreed to a confidential settlement in 2007.  It is unclear what legal precedents, if any, the earlier Connecticut State Supreme Court rulings in this case will hold for current or future structured settlement litigation.
  

Educational Programs and Resources

• Both NSSTA and SSP offered certification programs in 2007.    
• S2KM attended educational programs for the following trade associations in 2007 and wrote blog posts (see links) evaluating their structured settlement educational programs:          
  
  • National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA).          
  • Society of Settlement Planners (SSP)          
  • American Association for Justice (AAJ)          
  • National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA)          
  • Academy of Special Needs Planners (ASNP)          
  • National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP)    
• The structured settlement industry continued to offer various additional educational resources in 2007:          
  
  • Blogs, podcasts, wikis and concept maps;          
    
  • Digital and hardcopy newsletters;          
    
  • Hardcopy legal textbooks.

Business Standards and Practices

• 2007 developments
  
  • Broker Relations Initiative - status report provided in this S2KM blog post.
  • SSP Ethics Project - status report provided in this S2KM blog post.
• 2007 issues:
  
  • Structured settlement public policy
  • Claim management vs. settlement planning
  • Consumer and investor protection including:
    
    • Compensation disclosure;
    • Informed consent;
    • Single claimant 468B funds;
    • Unfair claim practice legislation;
    • Fiduciary responsibilities for professional advisors.

• Additional compensation issues:
  • Rebating
  • Affinity programs
  • Secondary market transactions
• Unauthorized practice of law.

SSPA Non-Contravention Standards

State courts play an important "gatekeeper" role for structured settlement factoring transactions. IRC section 5891 imposes a 40 percent federal excise tax if a factoring transaction does not receive required state court approval. State structured settlement protection acts (SSPAs) make factoring transactions ineffective unless such transfers receive court approval.

When evaluating a proposed transfer, state courts must address these issues:

• Payee's best interest - taking into account the welfare of the payee's dependents;
• Compliance with SSPA requirements - including notice, disclosure and independent professional advice; and
• Non-contravention of applicable laws - including other statutes and court orders.

In the lead article of its Fall 2007 edition of "Structured Settlement Insights", Pullman & Comley summarizes growing judicial authority for what constitutes non-contravention of a statute or order - as well as the related issue of what information is required for a court to make a non-contravention finding.  The article distinguishes these types of non-contravention issues from contractual anti-assignment restrictions.

The Pullman & Comley newsletter article highlights:

• New Pennsylvania Rule 229.2.  Among other provisions, this judicial rule requires the "transferee" (factoring company attorney) to certify to the court "to the best of his or her knowledge, information and belief, formed after reasonable inquiry, that the transfer will comply with the requirements of the [Pennsylvania] Act and will not contravene any other applicable federal or state statute or regulation or the order of any court or administrative authority."
• Different standards established by courts in other states including Connecticut, Illinois, Indiana and Florida.
• Workers compensation laws.  Although most state workers compensation statutes prohibit or restrict assignments, both IRC sections 5891 and 130 reference and incorporate workers compensation cases.
  

For additional information:

• SSPA non-contravention standards: see Section 16.05 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments".
• Pullman & Comley: see this earlier S2KM blog post.
• Pennsylvania Rule 229.2: see this earlier S2KM blog post.

Secondary Life and Annuity Markets - 1

Recent developments related to the secondary life insurance and annuity markets should encourage several professional associations to learn more about these markets - and to provide improved education in 2008 for their members about these markets.

Responsible professional associations include:

• The National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA)
• The Society of Settlement Planners (SSP)
• The National Academy of Elder Law Attorneys (NAELA)
• The American Association for Justice (AAJ)
• The Academy of Special Needs Planners (ASNP)
• The Special Needs Alliance (SNA)

Recent secondary market developments include:

• Mealey's Conference: "Life Insurance in the Secondary Market" - Mealey's in-person conference, developed in collaboration with Drinker Biddle, is occuring December 11-12, 2007 at the Harvard Club of New York City.
• Deal Flow Media (DFM) - DFM, a publisher and educator focusing on specialty financial markets including life settlements, has announced it will enter the structured settlement market in 2008.
• A.M. Best - A.M. Best recently introduced "Best's Structured Finance Center", a web portal for the insurance-linked securities market.
• NCOIL - The National Conference of Insurance Legislators (NCOIL) adopted a Model Life Settlements Act at its most recent meeting.
  

For additional information about life settlements, see:

• Wikipedia's "life settlement" entry
  
• New York Insurance Department's "Life Settlements: Top Ten Questions".
• Deal Flow Media's "The Life Settlements Report"

For additional and related S2KM commentary, see:

• Structured Settlement Secondary Market
  • Structured Settlement Transfers
  • Settlement Transfer Update
  • Settlement Transfers - Release 39
  • How the Primary Market Views Factoring
  • NSSTA Bylaw Amendments
  • J.G. Wentworth v. Peachtree Settlement Funding
  • Settlement Transfers: Wentworth and Symetra
  • Rapid v. Symetra
  • Review of Robert Wood's article: "Structured Settlements: Factor vs.Commute".
  • See also: Chapter 16 in hardcopy "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments" written by Daniel Hindert, Joseph Dehner and Patrick Hindert.
• National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP)
  
  • 2007 Annual Meeting
  • 2006 Annual Meeting
  • NASP Wiki
• Deal Flow Media
  • Deal Flow Media structured settlement webinar
• Drinker Biddle
  • Drinker Biddle's "Structured Settlement Update"

Executive Life Of New York - 1

Was it merely coincidental that New York Governor Eliot Spitzer announced an "agreement in principle" for Executive Life of New York (ELNY) the same week "agreements in principle" unraveled for multiple high profile college football coaches? 

As college football fans are learning, "agreements in principle" are not always agreements in fact - and the devil is frequently in the details.

Governor Spitzer's publicly announced ELNY "agreement in principle" did not include many details:

• The proposed ELNY plan:
  • Is designed to continue paying all ELNY annuitants 100% of their benefits;
  • Provides protection for approximately 11,000 ELNY annuity recipients including structured settlement recipients;
  • Requires and anticipates future approval by the New York Nassau County State Supreme Court.
• Various insurers and guarantee associations have agreed to pay $650 to $750 million to fund approximately $2 billion of future ELNY payments;
• The insurers include several named liability (casualty) insurers.

Some of many unanswered questions:

• Exactly what are ELNY's current problems?
  
• What factors caused these problems?
• Who was aware of these problems and when?
  
• What issues will the ELNY plan address?
• Who will be the contributors?
  
• How much will they contribute?
• How many liability insurers will ultimately contribute?
• How much will they contribute?
• Why are the liability insurers contributing?
• What potential issues do the liability insurers' contributions create for:
  • Reinsurers;
  • Intermediaries;
  • Product providers;
    
  • Trade associations?   
    
• Will the total contributions be enough to pay ELNY's obligations?
• What are the key assumptions underlying future payment predictions?
  
• When will the ELNY plan be approved?
• Who are the parties in interest?
  
• What issues are involved in the plan approval process?
• How many of ELNY's annuities are structured settlement annuities?
• How many of ELNY's structured settlement annuities were assigned?
• Who were the assignees?
• How many ELNY annuities have already been transferred in the secondary market?
• Of these annuity transfers, how many involve structured settlement annuities?
• Will the ELNY plan honor annuity payment rights that have already been transferred in the secondary market?
• What limitations, if any, will the ELNY plan impose on the future transfer of ELNY annuity payment rights?
• What legal precedents will the ELNY plan establish for future insolvencies involving structured settlement annuities?
• What lessons should the structured settlement industry learn from ELNY?
• Is this the last chapter of the Executive Life structured settlement saga?

For historical background about Executive Life Insurance Company from a structured settlement perspective, see Section 3.05 of "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments".