Beyond Structured Settlements

Structured Settlement Surveys - 2

The National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA), in partnership with CLM Advisors, has recently completed a three-part structured settlement survey project of senior claims executives (Part 1), claims professionals (Part 2) and plaintiff attorneys (Part 3) the results of which provide NSSTA members with marketing tools for discussions with the audiences surveyed.

Complementing NSSTA's surveys, NSSTA member and structured settlement provider Prudential recently published the results of its own 2013 survey of 400 claimants who had entered into a settlement of a physical injury or workers’ compensation claim of at least $100,000 from 2003 to 2013.

Considered together, these four surveys provide valuable insights into how key stakeholders currently view the structured settlement market. They also provide a point of reference for, and comparison with, other structured settlement market surveys several of which have been completed or updated since S2KM published this previous blog post in November 2008.

What follows are brief summaries of prior structured settlement surveys. In subsequent blog posts, S2KM will review and evaluate the most recent NSSTA and Prudential surveys.

• NSSTA 2006: Survey of Plaintiff Attorneys and Structured Settlement Recipients - This NSSTA-sponsored survey was titled: "A Study of the Structured Settlement Process Conducted on behalf of the National Structured Settlement Trade Association" and was directed by Robert E. Hoyt, the Dudley L. Moore, Jr. Chair of Insurance at the Terry College of Business at the University of Georgia. It consisted of attorneys involved in structured settlements (43 telephone surveys) and structured settlement recipients (1275 telephone and Internet surveys). Among the reported results:
  • Only 7% of personal injury settlements between $75,000 and $100,000 include structured settlements; and only 30% of personal injury settlements above $1 million included structured settlements.
  • When asked: "Whom do you prefer to use for purposes of financial planning for your clients?" , surveyed attorneys responded: trust company/department - 30%; Financial planner - 28%; Structured settlement consultant - 23%; No response - 19%.
• American General 2007: Survey about Structured Settlement Public Awareness - Sponsored by AIG American General and conducted by Esearch.com, Inc. in September 2007, this survey included 1000 U.S. participants - 80% had no connection with any personal injury case; 20% had previously been involved directly or indirectly through a family member in a personal injury case. Respondents who had no connection to a personal injury case were asked to read two hypothetical scenarios and answer questions on how they would react.Those with a direct connection to a personal injury case were not only asked to read the hypothetical scenarios, but also to answer questions based upon their real life experience. AIG's conclusion: the structured settlement industry needs to better educate Americans about structured settlements.
• J.G. Wentworth 2008: Survey of Structured Settlement Recipients - The survey consisted of 115 structured settlement recipients who had previously sold payment rights to J.G. Wentworth. The survey questions addressed both primary and secondary market issues, focusing upon the reasons the respondents: 1) first agreed to a structured settlement; and 2) then subsequently sold (transferred) some or all of their structured settlement payment rights. S2KM's prior reporting about the survey's primary market questions, responses plus related S2KM comments appears here. S2KM's prior reporting about the survey's secondary market questions, responses plus related S2KM comments appears here.
• Jeremy Babener 2009: Dissipation Legal Research Paper - Titled "Justifying the Structured Settlement Tax Subsidy: The Use of Lump Sum Settlements," this paper examines and challenges the myth of the squandering injury victim. In it, Babener refutes the existence of any published study supporting the statistic that "90% of lump sum recipients dissipate their recoveries within five years" and identifies 12 existing dissipation studies relevant to structured settlements that reach a contradictory conclusion: injury victims have no greater propensity to dissipate money than non-injury victims.
• Towers Watson 2011: "Update of U.S. Tort Cost Trends" - The 2011 update represents the 15th study of U.S. tort costs, and the most recently published, by Towers Watson. Note: a Tower Watson representative has informed S2KM it has no current plans to publish further updates. The 2011 study reported $264.6 billion of 2010 U.S. tort costs and excluded: 1) no-fault auto insurance; 2) property coverages; 3) workers compensation; 4) certain extraordinary (one time) costs. Tower Watson's 2002 study had previously translated overall tort costs in 2001 into these additional cost categories and percentages: 1) administrative costs - 21%; 2) defense costs - 14%; 3) plaintiff attorneys -19%; 4) economic loss - 22%; and 5) non-economic loss - 24%. Based on the 2011 study and utilizing Tower Watson's 2002 "best estimate" of payout percentages, S2KM has estimated that since 2011 more than $170 billion of United States tort costs annually have represented payments to injury victims and their attorneys.
• Claims & Litigation Management Alliance (CLM) 2011: "National Litigation Management Study" - This survey of litigation management executives analyzed 30 litigation-related service areas including structured settlements. Commissioned by CLM (formerly the Council on Litigation Management ) and conducted by Revere Advisory, it identified structured settlement as the "most penetrated external initiative" among 30 litigation-related service areas analyzed based upon interviews with leading litigation management executives. CLM membership includes: corporations, insurance companies, government agencies, defense attorneys and law firms plus individuals "who participate in litigation and the management thereof (Corporate Counsel; Risk, Claims and Litigation Managers; Adjusters and Service Providers etc.)."
• Daniel Durbin 2013: Survey of Structured Settlement Brokers - Durbin, a former NSSTA President and Senior Structured Settlement Sales Manager with Allstate Life, conducted an informal survey with a group of leading structured settlement brokers to obtain their input and evaluate their interest in representing a potential new structured settlement product provider. Durbin identified himself as part of an investor group of individuals including insurance executives who see underdeveloped opportunities in the structured settlement primary market. Although Durbin has not published the results of his survey, he has presented to several industry groups and stated that the survey showed the interest is high as long as the new firm is financially strong with competitive rates.
• Melissa Evola Price 2002-2015: Quarterly Reports of NSSTA Member Structured Settlement Annuity Provider Sales - Melissa Evola Price's quarterly structured settlement report, selectively distributed to NSSTA members, is now copyrighted by her company, Structured Financial Associates, Inc. (SFA). Price and SFA have granted S2KM permission to publish selected portions of her report on both S2KM's blog ("Beyond Structured Settlements") and the structured settlement wiki. Her reports include historical data from 1975-2001 which is sourced with permission from "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments" (S2P2J).  Evola Price most recently reported 2015 first quarter structured settlement annuity premium of $1,332,047,252, an increase of more than $230 million (21%) compared with the 2014 first quarter structured settlement annuity premium of $1,101,839,529.

NASP 2014 Annual Conference

The National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) celebrated its 10th annual conference November 5-6, 2014 in San Antonio, Texas with record attendance, recognition of past accomplishments and a clear existential message from its president Patricia LaBorde: "NASP exists to insure there will be a secondary structured settlement market for at least the NEXT 10 years".

NASP's 2014 educational conference followed by one week an historic NSSTA conference, which featured, for the first time, the presidents of NASP (LaBorde) and SSP (Neil Johnson) as speakers. LaBorde acknowledged this development in her opening NASP remarks stating: "we want to hear NSSTA's criticism and for the first time, they appear to want to hear ours." She expressed surprise and concern, however, about how little NSSTA members appear to understand about the secondary market including several basic misconceptions.

To underscore both NASP's "survival" theme and the need for improved education about the secondary market, LaBorde added: "there are some forces working against us right now and we need to remain diligent so our customers (structured settlement recipients who sell payment rights to NASP member companies) continue to have access to liquidity."

NASP lobbyist Jack Kelly and Executive Director Earl Nesbitt addressed some of NASP's challenges in their presentations providing legislative and case law updates respectively.

Legislative Update

Kelly reviewed structured settlement protection statute activities in Florida, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Louisiana, and Mississippi and declared NASP's 2014 state legislative lobbying a success. Kelly highlighted Florida and Wisconsin as states where NASP and NSSTA could collaborate to improve existing legislation. At the federal level, Kelly addressed H.R. 3897 and the July 23, 2014 "Consumer Protection for People with Disabilities" Congressional symposium which included a panel discussion about "factoring structured settlements".

Echoing LaBorde's comments about NSSTA, Kelly expressed his concern about "fact vs fiction" as to what happens and what benefits transfers provide for structured settlement recipients who experience unexpected or unaddressed financial needs. Emphasizing "no secondary market transaction can occur without a primary market transaction", Kelly criticized any development or activity that causes Congress to relook at IRC 130 and 104(a)(2). Speaking the morning after the 2014 election, Kelly labeled the Republican victory a political "tsunami" and the odds on new tax legislation in 2015 as a "toss up".

Case Law Update

For the uninitiated, Nesbitt prefaced his secondary market case law summary with several applicable "lessons": if you don't pay a seller the agreed amount, you will have trouble; courts take the "best interest" standard seriously; sometimes the prudent action is to dismiss a proposed transfer and move on; if you don't get what you want, don't move to another court or arbitration; words in a contract matter and words in a court order matter more; although rare in Texas, sometimes it rains (it did in San Antonio) and sometimes RSL Funding (formerly Rapid Settlements) wins cases.

Washington Square v. RSL

Among several significant cases, Nesbitt gave top billing to Washington Square v. RSL Funding wherein transfer company Washington Square (aka Imperial) sued transfer company RSL Funding in Texas for tortious interference with a transfer agreement that had not yet been approved in a final court order. The Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District, held:

• RSL was “justified” in interfering with Imperial’s proposed transfer agreement prior to court approval because obtaining a better price was in the seller's "best interest".
• Transfer agreements that have not received court approval are not enforceable on public policy grounds and therefore cannot justify legal actions for tortious interference with existing contracts.

Acknowledging this case represents a "big win" for RSL, Nesbitt also predicted "chaos" for the secondary market as rival transfer companies increasingly search court records and seek to outbid other transfer companies who are awaiting court approvals. Subsequent NASP panels of transfer attorneys and judges, as well as sidebar discussions with angry representatives of companies outbid by competitors, confirmed Nesbitt prediction and suggested a strategic marketing shift is already occurring among transfer companies.

Brenston Case

In a separate presentation, Nesbitt reviewed the Peachtree Settlement Funding v. Brenston case and its case law "progeny". In the Brenston case, the Illinois Supreme Court in December 2013 denied Peachtree's petition for review of an Illinois Appellate Court decision which found multiple Peachtree-Brenston transfer orders, which Illinois Circuit Courts had approved in accordance with the Illinois transfer statute, to be void ab initio because:

• Peachtree did not file all settlement documents with the transfer court.
• Peachtree concealed "by omission" the existence of anti-assignment provisions which the Appellate Court found "material".
• The conduct of Peachtree and it's attorney amounted to an "affirmative falsehood and a fraud upon the trial court".

An Amicus curiae brief filed by NASP with the Illinois Supreme Court stated: "Without the certainty and finality of a court order, there is no viable secondary market.... Because every structured settlement contains boilerplate language that purports to limit or restrict assignability, every Illinois court approved transfer could be subject to challenge at any time."

As NASP predicted, the denial of Peachtree's petition for review was quickly followed by Sanders v. JGWPT Holdings, a class action lawsuit, accusing JGWPT Holdings, Inc., several affiliate companies including J.G. Wentworth and Peachtree Settlement Funding, and Illinois attorney Brian Mack, of violating the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practice Act (ICFA). The case has since been removed to the Federal Court in the Southern District of Illinois with that court expected to rule on various motions and petitions in February 2015.

As a result of Brenston, according to Nesbitt:

• Many Illinois structured settlement recipients lack liquidity options because many transfer companies are avoiding the state.
• Some transfers continue to be completed in Illinois when all interested parties agree to waive existing anti-assignment language.
• Some annuity providers, however, will not waive anti-assignment provisions in Illinois cases while others evaluate them on a case-by-case basis.
• Attorneys for some annuity providers are citing Brenston to challenge transfers in other states.

Discounted PV and Applicable Federal Rate

The NCOIL State Structured Settlement Protection Model Act, which NSSTA and NASP have agreed to support, contains a definition for "discounted present value" linked to "the most recently published Applicable Federal Rate for determining the present value of an annuity, as issued by the United States Internal Revenue Service." This rate is generally higher than, and unrelated to, the discount rate actually incorporated into most structured settlement transfers. Nesbitt concluded his conference presentations with a detailed critique of NCOIL's discounted PV definition and explained why NASP believes this definition confuses rather than informs state judges.

Additional Presentations

NASP's conference featured two additional individual presentations.

Former NSSTA Deputy Executive Director Peter Arnold predicted future integration of the primary and secondary structured settlement markets. To support his prediction, Arnold reviewed NSSTA's historic attitude toward "factoring transactions." Arnold also highlighted NSSTA membership qualifications which currently prohibit members from "actively soliciting and promoting structured settlement factoring transactions to individuals who are receiving periodic payments under structured settlements."

Pery Krinsky, an ethics-based defense attorney who serves as Chairman of the Committee on Professional Discipline of the N.Y. County Lawyers' Association, spoke about legal ethics issues. He did not mention Paris & Chaiken, a New York law firm accused of falsifying court orders approving structured settlement transfers, which has reportedly retained Krinsky as outside ethics counsel for assistance with these cases.

Panel Discussions and Breakout Sessions

NASP's 2014 conference included four panel discussions and four breakout sessions (see listings below). Panel highlights and issues addressed:

• Drafting Transfer Agreements - Assigned payments vs. assigned payment rights; clients vs. sellers or annuitants relating to transfer company fiduciary responsibilities; representations and warranties; holdbacks and deductions; limited powers of attorney; testamentary agreements; arbitration provisions.
• Primary Market - NSSTA Fall conference; MSA market; primary market surveys; impact of Affordable Care Act; ELNY update; PLR-143928-13 and "hardship conversions"; settlement planning developments; re-cycled structured settlements; Bipartisan Budget Act of 2013; provider company departures; primary/secondary cooperation opportunities; best and worst business practices; annuity provider issues with transfer companies.
• Responding to Insurer Transfer Objections - Confirming his company's "good relationship" with transfer companies, Madis Smit of State Farm highlighted several insurer issues: unanticipated costs of reviewing 15 to 20 transfers per week; inadequate notice (need at least seven days); difficulty in locating some requested settlement documents; split payment problems resulting from insurer technology limitations; "three touches" constitute an insurer ideal (petition; order; notice of approval). Additional issues discussed: proposed documents from insurers that do not meet state-specific requirements; protecting public information in case filings.
• Judicial Panel - "Best interest" considerations; multiple transactions; common mistakes by petitioners; privacy issues; discount rates; independent professional advisors. The judges also were encouraged to identify questions for the audience - and did so. All three judges expressed a need and interest for additional education about the secondary market.

Alexander Hamilton Award

NASP honored James Lokey as the 2014 recipient of its Alexander Hamilton Award. Lokey completed the first transfer of structured settlement payment rights in 1986 thereby launching the secondary market. NASP has bestowed its Alexander Hamilton Award seven times "to distinguished individuals who have supported and defended the right to free alienability of property rights." NASP considers this right to be its own cornerstone and the foundation of the structured settlement factoring business.

Topics and Speakers

• Welcome Remarks - Patricia LaBorde.
• Legislative and Regulatory Developments - Jack Kelly.
• Legislative Update - Earl Nesbitt.
• Drafting Transfer Agreements - Jason Sutherland and Brian Mack.
• Hamilton Award - James Lokey.
• Integration of Primary and Secondary Markets - Peter Arnold.
• Primary Market Panel - Patrick Hindert (Moderator), Daniel Durbin, Medora Marisseau, Mark Wahlstrom.
• Ethics Issues - Pery Krinsky.
• Responding to Insurer Transfer Objections - Michael Damore (Moderator), John Shafai, John Mott, Michael Green, Steven Mastrantonio, Madis Smit.
• Break Out Sessions
  • Preparing vs.Coaching a Problem Payee - Laryssa Korduba and Elyse Strickland.
  • Addressing Judicial Concerns - Roger Dunaway and Andrew Hillman.
  • Life Contingent Issues - Michael Fasano and Dan Bonner.
  • Bankruptcy Issues - Michael Damore and Adam Zoldessy.
• Illinois Litigation and Discounted Present Value - Earl Nesbitt.
• Judicial Panel - Matthew Bracy (Moderator), Judges Lynne Parker, Patricia Summe, Travis Francis.

For S2KM reports of additional 2014 educational conferences plus eight of the nine prior NASP conferences, see the structured settlement wiki.

NSSTA 2014 Fall Educational Conference

Although David Ringler was unable to attend the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) 2014 Fall Educational Conference October 29-30 in La Jolla, California, he had an apparent impact. Ringler, NSSTA's first president, previously re-stated his original vision for NSSTA during NSSTA's 25th anniversary celebration in 2011:

"Although we do need to constantly be on the watch for legislative change, I still believe having a place where everyone and anyone can sit down with each other and discuss the issues and viewpoints regardless of beliefs is the most important reason for NSSTA. I have called it a common “talk table”, although I agree that is not exactly a very elegant term. If we can continue this tradition, there is no problem we cannot overcome."

Many industry participants, including some NSSTA members, have questioned whether NSSTA has lost sight of this original purpose and tradition. For the past several years, NSSTA's leadership has superimposed a political litmus test for membership, as well as for topics and speakers at its educational conferences. As one result, structured settlement industry participants with alternative issues, viewpoints, beliefs and educational interests have founded two other national structured settlement associations: the National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) in 1996 and the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) in 2000.

NASP and SSP Participation

Perhaps responding to Ringler's clarion call, NSSTA opened its members-only educational program in La Jolla by inviting NASP President Patricia LaBorde and SSP President Neil Johnson to speak.

LaBorde was featured on a Secondary Market Panel, moderated by John McCulloch, which also included Stephen Harris and Patrick Hindert as panelists. McCulloch's questions targeted primary market concerns such as the prevalence of secondary market transfers, consequences of transfer company advertising and secondary market discount rates. The resulting discussion captured the audience's undivided attention and hopefully will result in expanded educational dialogue between NSSTA and NASP to include shared political and business interests.

Johnson and current NSSTA President Kevin Silo jointly addressed "Industry Challenges", a panel discussion moderated by NSSTA President-elect Michael Goodman. Repeating portions of his SSP 2014 keynote speech, Johnson proposed the following solutions for achieving industry unity: 1) recognizing and accepting product diversity; 2) focusing on client and customer service; 3) identifying and pursuing permanent shared interests without necessarily agreeing on all issues; 4) engaging all perspectives to discuss industry problems and issues; 5) improving relationships among stakeholder groups; 6) promoting and practicing settlement planning not settlement selling.

Generational Change and Challenges

NSSTA and the primary structured settlement market face multiple challenges (see below) - perhaps none greater than succession. What new generation of distributors, or distribution channel(s), will emerge (and when) to replace and build upon the accomplishments of the pioneering generation (now in their 60s and 70s) who originated the structured settlement market in the late 1970s?

In addition to generating more than $140 billion of annuity premium, the legacy of NSSTA's retiring generation includes enactment of the existing structured settlement legislative framework: current IRC sections 104(a)(1) and (2) and 130 plus multiple state periodic payment of judgment statutes and (with NASP) enactment of IRC 5891 and the state protection statutes. More recently, however, NSSTA's aging leadership has focused on defense - with "protect and preserve" its principle mantra.

NSSTA attempted to addressed this generational succession issue at its Fall conference by juxtaposing panels featuring past NSSTA Presidents and "Next Generation" brokers. The impression that emerged: NSSTA and the primary market have reached an historic crossroads - with multiple stakeholders, issues and options, but no clear future direction.

Whatever next generation of NSSTA leaders emerges will face several challenges:

• Stagnant growth - Since achieving $6 billion of annual annuity sales in 2001, structured settlement premium growth has stagnated with 2013 sales totaling $5.1 billion.
• Polarized market(s) - NSSTA's leaders have been unable, and/or unwilling, to unify the structured settlement market(s) around such shared interests as: primary market growth; preservation of existing legislation; and consumer protection - which prioritizes maintaining promised periodic payments.
• Alternative business models - Can alternative structured settlement models (traditional defense vs. emerging plaintiff) continue to co-exist and collaborate?
• Complexity - Structured settlements represent a strategic product within the larger and more complex personal injury settlement planning (settlement planning) market.
• Product features - Will Pacific Life's recent private letter ruling encourage structured settlement annuity providers to expand their product offerings to include "equity-indexed" annuities and "hardship conversions"?
• Competition. Within the settlement planning market, the growth and leadership of other product and service providers has increasingly exceeded the growth and leadership of structured settlement participants.
• Success factors. To expand sales within the evolving settlement planning market, NSSTA's leaders must re-think and re-engineer historical success factors - backgrounds and skill sets; educational programs; business models; product enhancements; sales and marketing strategies.

KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT

The settlement planning market is knowledge-intense and increasingly Internet-based. To continue, and increase, their historical success within the evolving settlement planning market, NSSTA and its members must improve their knowledge management capabilities. One preliminary step is to identify and evaluate existing strategic knowledge. NSSTA and its members possess three primary types of strategic knowledge:

• Product knowledge - The "Tax Posse", the ACA summary, and even the Non-traditional Products presentation at NSSTA's Fall conference represent good examples of NSSTA's product knowledge. Perhaps more important, and more valuable, than explicit product knowledge, NSSTA members possess tacit (intuitive, experiential) knowledge of how structured settlements work. In the context of the secondary market, however, NSSTA member knowledge of its own product is arguably much weaker, and, therefore, incomplete and less valuable.
• Relationship knowledge - Much of NSSTA's Fall conference related to, and re-enforced, NSSTA's and NSSTA members' settlement planning relationship knowledge about and with: 1) plaintiff attorneys; 2) insurance associations; 3) insurance claims adjustors; 4) national consumer associations; 5) U.S. Congressional members; 6) MSA administrators; 7) SSP; and 8) NASP. In settlement planning, as in life more generally, it is not what you know but who you know that counts the most.
• Market knowledge - Compared with other settlement planning market segments, NSSTA (and NASP) appear to have developed and maintained more accurate market metrics including quarterly and annual premium and cases in total and for each member product provider. To further expand structured settlements into the settlement planning market, NSSTA and its members might begin to track additional metrics. For examples: what percentage of structured settlements are utilized to fund MSAs, SNTs and settlement trusts more generally. Which categories of structured settlement recipients are most likely to sell payment rights and why?

MARKETING INITIATIVES

NSSTA conference speakers introduced multiple new marketing initiatives including:

• "NSSTA University" - NSSTA's Debbie Sink announced a new "NSSTA University" service whereby NSSTA will partner with any member to secure CE credits for member-sponsored educational seminars or insurance claims departments or law firms.
• CLM Survey Part II - In partnership with CLM Advisors, NSSTA's Marketing Committee summarized CLM Survey Part II (claims adjustors) of an eventual three part survey project. Part I surveyed claims executives. Part III will survey plaintiff attorneys. These surveys provide NSSTA members with valuable marketing tools for discussions with the audiences surveyed.

TOPICS AND SPEAKERS

• Introduction and Welcome - Eric Vaughn.
• Industry Challenges - Michael Goodman (Moderator), Kevin Silo, Neil Johnson.
• Next Gen Brokers - Louis Masry (Moderator), Kristen Chess, Ryan Garrison, Tony Robinson.
• Financial Issues for People with Disabilities - Sally Greenberg and Mark Perriello.
• AAJ Treasurer Elect - Elise Sanguinetti.
• MSA Professional Administration - Tom Adams (Moderator), Marques Torbert, Joe Anderson.
• Affordable Care Act - Jordan Bossler.
• Past NSSTA Presidents - Moderators (Kevin Silo; Eric Vaughn); Jeff Bowers, Len Blonder, Joe Costello, Mal Deener, Dan Durbin, Randy Dyer, Dan Finn, Patrick Hindert, John Machir, Henry Strong.
• Factoring Panel - John McCulloch (Moderator), Stephen Harris, Patrick Hindert, Patricia LaBorde.
• Non-Traditional Products - Erin Muller (Moderator), John Arendt, Ryan Jandreau, Jeff Reinhold, Chris Shumate, Ravi Vaswani.
• American Insurance Association - Peter Foley.
• CLM Survey Part II - Taylor Smith, Susan Clark, Jeff Livingston.
• Tax Posse - John McCulloch, Timothy O'Driscoll, Tom Ronce.
• NSSTA CE News - Erin Muller and Debbie Sink.

Congratulations to NSSTA and conference chairperson Erin Muller for re-establishing NSSTA's tradition of educational programs featuring speakers with multiple viewpoints on industry issues "regardless of beliefs". David Ringler and other structured settlement pioneers should feel gratified - and hopeful for NSSTA's future success.

For S2KM's reports about prior NSSTA educational conferences, see the structured settlement wiki.

Primary Market Update

Structured settlement primary market annuity sales increased approximately seven (7%) percent to $5.134,380,855 in 2013 (compared with $4,819,124,617 in 2012) according to industry estimates compiled and recently published by Melissa Evola. Total 2013 structured settlement cases also increased to 26,533 from 25,038 a year earlier for an average case premium of $193,495.

The 2013 annual premium totals, however, still fall substantially short of the historic 12 month industry high ($6,226,578,725 in 2008) after consistently averaging close to $6 billion annually from 2001-2007.

Adding these 2013 results to historic U.S. structured settlement totals, S2KM estimates the following primary market metrics from 1976 thru 2013:

• Total annuity premium: $139.5 billion.
• Total structured settlement cases: 802,000
• Average annuity premium: $174,000.

Berkshire Hathaway, which re-entered the structured settlement market in 2011 following a multi-year hiatus, assumed primary market leadership by generating $1,424,306,831 of structured settlement annuity premium (28% of the industry total) during 2013.

With announced departures of Allstate and John Hancock during 2013, the U.S. structured settlement market now consists of eight annuity providers. 2013 sales results for other structured settlement annuity providers (per Evola's report) plus the rounded increase (+) or decrease (-) from comparable 2012 results:

• Pacific Life - $848,725,000 (+ $11.7 million)
• MetLife - $726,000,000 (+ $62 million)
• Amgen/USL - $587,367,753 (+ $61.3 million)
• Liberty Life - $558,106,000 (+ $147.3 million)
• Prudential Life - $548,700,000 (- $86.7 million)
• New York Life - $275,253,601 (- $47.5 million)
• Mutual of Omaha - $86,598,027 (+ $29 million)

Evola's 2013 compilation also reports an annual decrease in annuity premium for non-qualified structured settlement assignments (from $170.1 million in 2012 to $164.9 million in 2013) as a portion of the overall structured settlement numbers.

Non-qualified assignments represent transfers of periodic payment obligations that do not meet the requirements of IRC sections 130 and 104(a)(1) or (2) including deferred attorney fees. Despite earlier industry projections of a large and growing market, only two structured settlement annuity providers (AmGen and Liberty) currently offer non-qualified assignments.

Independent industry sources further report a substantial shift in recent structured settlement premium with increasing sales to fund workers compensation Medicare set-aside arrangements (WCMSAs). For S2KM's most recent analysis of structured settlements and WCMSAs, see this prior blog post.

Many industry observers continue to view the United States structured settlement primary market as a strategic, underperforming segment of the larger personal injury settlement planning market. S2KM looked at some of the related issues in a three-part 2013 blog series titled "Growing the Primary Market"

• Part 1 - Daniel Durbin's survey of primary market leaders.
• Part 2 - NSSTA and NASP 2013 Fall Conferences.
• Part 3 - NSSTA's marketing boot camp - "What business are we in?"

Structured Settlements 2013 - Primary Market

The U.S. structured settlement industry in 2013 continued to define itself into three related markets (primary, secondary and settlement planning) with the liquidations of Executive Life Insurance Company of New York (ELNY) and Reliance Insurance Company representing important industry storylines.

This blog post reviews 2013 non-ELNY and non-Reliance primary market developments - focusing on structured settlement annuity sales. Subsequent S2KM blog posts will address structured settlement developments for the 2) settlement planning and 3) secondary markets and summarize 4) ELNY and Reliance-related events.

Primary Market Premium

Primary market structured settlement annuity premium and the number of structured cases have increased slightly during 2013 compared with 2012 based upon third quarter industry results compiled by Melissa Evola. Projected 2013 annual premium totals, however, will fall substantially short of the historic 12 month industry high ($6,226,578,725 in 2008) after consistently averaging close to $6 billion annually from 2001-2007.

Evola reports 2013 third quarter primary market annuity premium of $3,736,499,370 resulting from 19,656 cases ($190,094 per case average). Comparable third quarter results for:

• 2012 - $3,565,368,323 premium from 18,706 cases ($190,600 per case).
• 2008 - $4,429,915,586 premium from 25,545 cases ($173,416 per case).

Adding these 2013 third quarter results to historic U.S. structured settlement totals, S2KM estimates the following primary market metrics from 1976 thru September 2013:

• Total annuity premium: $137.4 billion.
• Total structured settlement cases: 790,000.
• Average annuity premium: $174,000.

Individual Annuity Provider Results

Although overall 2013 third quarter results do not differ significantly from 2012, individual company production has changed dramatically per Evola's report. Berkshire Hathaway, which re-entered the market in 2011 following a multi-year hiatus, has assumed primary market leadership. Berkshire Hathaway generated $1,034,199,209 of structured settlement annuity premium (28% of the industry total) during the first nine months of 2013.

Berkshire Hathaway's structured settlement annuity premium and market share since 2011:

• 2011 - $116,458,245 annual premium (2% market share)
  • 1st - $4,976,847
  • 2nd - $11,311,378
  • 3rd - $39,880,339
  • 4th - $60,289,681
• 2012 - $824,962,720 annual premium (17% market share)
  • 1st - $97,187,721
  • 2nd - $193,222,438
  • 3rd - $181,111,553
  • 4th - $353,441,008
• 2013 - $1,034,199,209 nine months premium (28% market share)
  • 1st - $339,325,403
  • 2nd - $340,049,486
  • 3rd - $354,824,320
  • 4th - ?

With announced departures of Allstate and John Hancock during 2013, the U.S. structured settlement market now consists of eight annuity providers. Nine month 2013 sales results for other structured settlement annuity providers (per Evola's report) plus the rounded increase (+) or decrease (-) from comparable 2012 results:

• Pacific Life - $600,146,000 (- $13 million)
• MetLife - $564,000,000 (+ $57 million)
• Amgen/USL - $434,691,262 (+ $25 million)
• Liberty Life - $409,286,609 (+ $118 million)
• Prudential Life - $372,700,000 (- $124 million)
• New York Life - $192,317,226 (- $75 million)
• Mutual of Omaha - $50,407,140 (+ $8 million)

Non-Qualified Assignments

Non-qualified assignments represent transfers of periodic payment obligations that do not meet the requirements of IRC section 130. Unlike qualified assignees, non-qualified assignees are subject to income tax on the amount they receive from whatever entity assigns (or more accurately "delegates") periodic payment obligations to assignees who purchase annuities to fund obligations for claimants who do not qualify for tax exclusions under IRC section 104(a)(1) or (2) - such as employment discrimination cases or deferred attorney fees. 

Despite projections of a large and growing market, only two structured settlement annuity providers (AmGen and Liberty) currently offer non-qualified assignments. Nine month 2013 non-qualified assignment sales of $124,287,610 have declined more than $19 million compared with comparable 2012 sales totals according to Evola's report.

Growing the Primary Market

Many industry observers view the United States structured settlement primary market as a strategic, underperforming segment of the larger personal injury settlement planning market. S2KM looked at some of the related issues in a three-part 2013 blog series titled "Growing the Primary Market"

• Part 1 - Daniel Durbin's survey of primary market leaders.
• Part 2 - NSSTA and NASP 2013 Fall Conferences.
• Part 3 - NSSTA's marketing boot camp - "What business are we in?"

S2KM supplemented this analysis with a report on the developing global insurance capital standard which poses additional challenges for structured settlement annuity providers.

For S2KM's previous annual structured settlement industry reports, see the structured settlement wiki.

Growing the Primary Market - 2

The National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) and the National Association of Settlement Purchasers (NASP) share a strategic interest in the growth and vitality of the primary structured settlement market.

NSSTA and NASP have scheduled simultaneous Fall conferences in different cities which will each address (directly or indirectly) the steady, recent decline of primary market annuity premium.

NSSTA has transfigured its annual Fall Educational Conference into a members-only "Marketing Boot Camp" scheduled for November 5-6 in Dallas, Texas. The announced boot camp training agenda, "designed to help every member who attends learn how to increase the number of referrals they get from their clients and how to develop new clients", will address:

• Effective World Class Selling Behaviors for Professionals Who Sell to the Insurance Claims Industry
• The Discipline of Marketing
• Growing and Maintaining a Successful Business
• How Not to Market
• Getting New Business
• Marketing Through Social Media
• Marketing Tools
• Two Heads Are Better Than One
• How to Take an Old Book of Business and Grow It
• The Affordable Care Act

NASP's Annual Conference, scheduled for November 5-7 in Las Vegas, is open to NASP members, affiliate members and non-members. NASP's 2013 conference will feature a Primary Market Panel moderated by S2KM blog author, Patrick Hindert, with panelists:

• Daniel Hindert - Shareholder of Parsons Behle & Latimer who concentrates his legal practice on personal injury litigation for plaintiffs and defense. Daniel co-authors "Structured Settlements and Periodic Payment Judgments" (S2P2J) and has published numerous articles concerning both the primary and secondary structured settlement markets.
• Anthony Prieto, Jr. - President of Synergy Settlement Solutions who also serves on the Board of Directors of the Society of Settlement Planners. Anthony is a frequent speaker at national conferences about settlement planning issues including "re-cycled structured settlements".
• William Schemmel - Legal counsel for Western & Southern Financial Group whose subsidiaries include Integrity Life Insurance Company which previously participated as a product provider in the structured settlement primary market. William's current responsibilities include supervising Integrity's secondary market structured settlement transfers.

Questions NASP's Primary Market Panel will address:

• What are the most important current primary market issues?
• What are the most important current primary market developments?
• How large is the potential U.S. primary structured settlement market?
• Why is the primary market continuing to decline?
• What can be done to reverse this downward trend?
• What segments, if any, of the primary market are growing and what segments are declining?
• What primary market business practices, if any, create problems for the industry?
• What are "re-cycled" structured settlements?
• What impact have they had on the primary market?
• What issues do they present for the primary market?
• How active are primary market brokers in the secondary market?
• What roles do they play?
• Why haven't more structured settlement annuity providers offered commutations as alternatives to transfers?
• What problems do structured settlement transfers and transfer companies create for primary market providers?
• What current impact does the secondary market have on primary market sales and the attitude of primary market stakeholders toward structured settlements?
• What steps do you recommend to improve communication and relations more generally between primary and secondary market participants?

Handout materials for the NASP Primary Market Panel will include a new section from S2P2J Release 54 titled "Re-Cycled Structured Settlements".

Related Developments and Resources

A recent S2KM blog post, "Growing the Structured Settlement Market", highlighted a survey of structured settlement primary market leaders by Daniel Durbin addressing opportunities to jump start primary market growth.

For previous S2KM blog posts about the following related topics, see the structured settlement wiki :

• Growing the Structured Settlement Market
• Structured Settlement Metrics
• Primary and Secondary Market Surveys
• Annual Industry Reports
• NSSTA and NASP Conference Reports

Growing the Primary Market

Many industry observers view the United States structured settlement primary market as a strategic, underperforming segment of the larger personal injury settlement planning market.

Structured settlement industry surveys and Towers Watson's annual updates of "U.S. Tort Cost Trends" provide additional evidence the primary market has not yet achieved its full potential.

Using 2008 as a baseline, the primary market annuity premium has steadily declined during the past four years:

• 2008 - $6.2 billion
• 2009 - $5.4 billion
• 2010 - $5.5 billion
• 2011 - $4.97 billion
• 2012 - $4.82 billion

Sales results for the first six months of 2013 suggest structured settlement production will continue its downward trend this year - or, at least, fall far below the premium levels achieved from 2001 to 2008.

Among the explanations for this declining primary market, industry leaders frequently mention: 1) the 2008 financial crisis; 2) historically low interest rates; 3) new regulatory restrictions; 4) the Executive Life of New York (ELNY) liquidation; and 5) the departure of several product providers including: Allstate, John Hancock, Symetra and Hartford.

Although members of the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) and the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) have sought answers and proposed strategies to reverse this downward trend and grow the primary market, they have not been successful.

What is needed to grow the primary structured settlement market?

During the past few weeks, Patrick Hindert (S2KM's blog author) has participated in discussions exploring this question with a group of individuals including insurance executives who see underdeveloped opportunities in the primary structured settlement market.

One of these individuals is Daniel Durbin, a former NSSTA President and Senior Sales Manager with Allstate Life. Durbin currently is speaking with structured settlement industry leaders to obtain their input and evaluate their interest in representing a potential new product provider. In addition to conducting a broker survey, Durbin will be attending NSSTA's 2013 Fall Marketing Meeting November 5-6 in Dallas, Texas for additional one-on-one meetings.

"Members of our industry perform a vital public policy function by advocating for the financial well being of physically injured claimants", Durbin stated during a recent telephone interview. "In addition, we serve as important resources for all parties in personal injury negotiations."

"To jump start primary market growth", Durbin added: "we need new, more competitive product providers. To that end, I am contacting industry leaders to solicit their suggestions and support for my current efforts to expand and improve structured settlement product provider options."

SSP and NSSTA 2010 Annual Meetings - 9

The Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) and the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA) should be congratulated - especially immediate past-Presidents Joseph Tombs and Daniel Durbin - for excellent 2010 annual meetings.

S2KM's complete coverage of the SSP and NSSTA 2010 annual meetings is available on S2KM's structured settlement wiki.

Continuing post-meeting S2KM commentary:

• Both the SSP and NSSTA 2010 meetings occurred in Washington, D.C. at nearby hotels during the same week - May 2-7.
• Attendance at both the SSP and NSSTA meetings was good (not great) - despite the economic downturn in structured settlements.
• Approximately 10 persons attended portions of both the SSP and NSSTA meetings.
• The scheduling conflicts between SSP and NSSTA occurred primarily on the morning of May 4 - which created difficult choices for persons attending both conferences.
• Unless otherwise indicated, S2KM's comments are limited to educational programs Patrick Hindert, S2KM's Managing Director, personally attended.
• For pre-program educational listings (topics and speakers) for both the SSP and NSSTA meetings, see this prior S2KM blog post.
• S2KM opted to attend NSSTA meetings on May 4 and missed valuable SSP presentations including two Medicare set-aside arrangement (MSA) panels organized by Jason Lazarus, SSP's new President for 2010-2011.
• Both SSP and NSSTA prioritized MSAs in 2010 with four MSA educational programs - three by SSP.
• Douglas Brand, a featured SSP speaker about MSAs, has also served as the key NSSTA Director in developing NSSTA's government benefits committee and educational program.
• Joseph Tombs, SSP's 2009-2010 President, and Director of SSP's settlement planning certification program, continued SSP's educational series about "Minors Settlements" initiated by Texas attorney Phillip McCrury during the SSP 2009 annual meeting.
• As positive hallmarks of their SSP and NSSTA presidencies, both Tombs and Durbin successfully played to their personal and association strengths. For Tombs, learning, improvement, and industry growth. For Durbin, public policy, lobbying, protect and preserve during industry transition.
• As SSP President, Joseph Tombs continued and elevated SSP's excellent educational programs, including the Registered Settlement Planner Program,which Tombs developed and manages in partnership with SSP and Texas Tech University.
• Jason Lazarus, a respected knowledge leader within multiple settlement consulting communities, succeeds Tombs as SSP's President.
• SSP's educational and political strategies continue to espouse "improve and grow" - for both the structured settlement and settlement planning industries.
• Daniel Durbin led NSSTA's leadership transition from Joseph Ricci to Eric Vaughn and Peter Arnold. During this transition, NSSTA sharpened and expanded its political focus and delivered on its promise to "protect and preserve" IRC sections 130 and 104(a)(2).
• Michael Kelly succeeds Durbin as NSSTA's 2010-11 President and will be joined on the NSSTA Board of Directors by five newly (re) - elected Directors - Joseph Barnet; Len Blonder; Randy Dyer; James Ebel; and John Machir.
• Karen Meyers continues her industry role as director of NSSTA's Certified Structured Settlement Consultant (CSSC) program in partnership with the University of Notre Dame.
• Among retiring NSSTA Directors, S2KM's Managing Director Patrick Hindert, a NSSTA member, has interacted primarily with former NSSTA Directors Joseph Shannon and Douglas Brand.
• Both Shannon and Brand (and all retiring NSSTA Directors) deserve industry thanks:
  
  • Shannon served as liaison between NSSTA's Board of Directors and NSSTA's legal committee.
  • Brand served as liaison between NSSTA's Board of Directors and NSSTA's government benefit committee.
• The SSP and NSSTA 2010 annual meetings highlighted the need for new Internet-based structured settlement educational strategies and resources.
• The combined SSP and NSSTA structured settlement learning experience was overwhelming. Incredibly rich structured settlement knowledge was crammed into less than 5 days without any announced (to date) knowledge capture and/or post-conference knowledge distribution.
• Except for NSSTA references to the new NSSTA website, neither SSP nor NSSTA offered any Internet educational ideas or discussions at their 2010 annual meetings.

Post-conference leadership questions:

• How will SSP's and NSSTA's new leaders respond to industry changes, challenges and opportunities?
• Who are the young (under age 40) structured settlement industry leaders?
• When and how will SSP and NSSTA transition their educational strategies to embrace the Internet?
• What shared interests exist between SSP and NSSTA to improve and grow the structured settlement industry?

Structured Settlement Public Policy - 1

The Society of Settlement Planners (SSP) has invited Patrick Hindert, Managing Director of S2KM Limited and The Settlement Services Group (TSSG), to organize a discussion about "Structured Settlement Public Policy" for the SSP 2010 Annual Meeting May 3 in Washington, D.C.

For additional information about the SSP and NSSTA 2010 Annual Meetings, see this prior S2KM post.

S2KM's objectives:

• Improve and grow the structured settlement market.
• Promote public discussions about structured settlement public policy. S2KM has previously published a structured settlement public policy wiki featuring Joseph Dehner, Robert Wood and Jeremy Babener.
• Invite and challenge the best and brightest structured settlement knowledge experts to:
  • Attend the SSP 2010 Annual Meeting; and
  • Participate in a public discussion about structured settlement public policy.

Preliminary public policy questions - also posted on S2KM's public policy wiki.

• What is a structured settlement?
  • Google search
  • wikipedia definition
  • transaction diagram
• What does "public policy" mean generally - and specifically for structured settlements?
• Why is public policy important for structured settlements?
• Who and what defines structured settlement public policy?
• What changes have occurred in structured settlement public policy?
  • Before 1982
  • Between 1982 and 2000
  • Since 2001
• Based upon existing structured settlement public policy, what constitutes best business practices, bad business practices and illegal business practices?
• What are the most important structured settlement public policy issues?
• Does structured settlement public policy support:
  • Single claimant IRC section 468B qualified settlement funds?
  • Court-approved structured settlement factoring transactions pursuant to IRC 5891 and state structured settlement protection statutes?
  • Tax exclusions for non-physical injuries as well as physical?
  • Tax credits rather than the current tax exclusion?
• How many structured settlement recipients pay federal income taxes - or gain any financial advantage from the structured settlement tax exclusion?
• Do personal injury victims have a greater propensity to dissipate their financial resources than non-personal injury victims?
• Or, does public policy actually require and promote dissipation by injury victims and other disabled persons? For example, Medicaid asset requirements and resulting asset "pay down" strategies.
• Should the existence of the secondary market disqualify annuities as a funding option for special needs trusts?
• Does the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 apply to structured settlement annuities?
• Why should structured settlement annuities cost less than lump sum alternatives to fund Medicare set-aside arrangements (MSAs)?
• How has health care reform changed structured settlement public policy?
• Does public policy support expanded use of the Internet for marketing, communication, education and collaboration? If yes, how does the Internet and Internet public policy impact the future of structured settlements?
• How can SSP members and attendees influence structured settlement public policy?
• How can members of NSSTA, SSP, NASP, NAMSAP and NAELA better identify and promote their collaborative public policy knowledge and shared public policy interests?
• Should the structured settlement industry encourage public policy analysis and promote best business practices in the context of public policy?
• Does public policy analysis and promotion of best business practices strengthen or weaken the structured settlement industry?

For additional S2KM reporting about SSP and NSSTA, see:

• S2KM's blog post titled "SSP and NSSTA 2010 Annual Meetings" and
• S2KM's structured settlement wiki.

SSP and NSSTA 2010 Annual Meetings

This blog post begins S2KM's reporting about the 2010 Annual Meetings of the Society of Settlement Planners (SSP - May 2-4) and the National Structured Settlement Trade Association (NSSTA - May 4-6).

Patrick Hindert, S2KM's Managing Director and primary blog and wiki author, is a former Executive Director of SSP and former President of NSSTA. Hindert will attend both the SSP meeting and NSSTA meeting. Hindert will lead a discussion at the SSP 2010 annual meeting titled "Structured Settlement Public Policy". S2KM's prior reporting about SSP and NSSTA is available on S2KM's structured settlement wiki. S2KM also publishes the structured settlement public policy wiki.

SSP and NSSTA have each published their advanced educational program summaries:

SSP (May 2 - May 4) - at the Washington D.C. Marriott at Metro Center

• MSP and SCHIP Compliance - Doug Brand
• Marketing Foundations - Frank Maguire
• The Anatomy of a Life Care Plan - Paul Deutsch
• Working with Life Care Plans: an Economist's perspective - Frederick Raffa
• The AAJ Legislative View - John Bowman
• Justifying and Expanding the Structured Settlement Tax Subsidy - Jeremy Babener
• The Structured Settlement Tax Panel - Richard Risk; Michael Montemurro; Jeremy Babener; Daniel Hindert; Gregg Polsky; Brant Hellwig.
• Structured Settlement Public Policy - Patrick Hindert
• Settlement Planning for Minors - Joseph Tombs
• Growing Your Settlement Planning Practice - Mark Newton
• Litigation Update - Anthony Alfieri
• Medicare Set-Aside Panel - Doug Shaw, Jason Lazarus; Mark Popolizio
• Medicare Secondary Payer Compliance Panel - Erica Cooper; Katie Fox; Jason Lazarus; Mark Popolizio
• Medical Underwriting for Structured Settlements - Rosemary Brindamour.

NSSTA (May 4 - May 6) - at the Washington D.C. Grand Hyatt

• Opening Remarks - Dan Durbin
• Washington Legislative Update - Eric Vaughn
• Congressional Keynote - John Lewis
• NSSTA Legal Committee Update - Peter Vodola; Ilana Hanau; Craig Ulman.
• Congressional Chiefs of Staff - Debbie Curtis; Kristin Nicholson; Derek Harley; Kate Winkler; Jim Brandell;
• Congressional Luncheon - Joe Crowley;
• The Truth about Scott Rothstein - Peter Arnold
• Capital Hill Briefing - Eric Vaughn
• Capital Hill Meetings and Reception - Steny Hoyer; Bob Ethridge.
• Medical Underwriting - Rosemary Brindamour; Hilary Topalian.
• Congressional Keynote - Dave Camp
• Congressional Keynote - Pete Stark
• Ethics - Dan Clark
• The Future of NSSTA - Michael Kelly; Eric Vaughn; Joe Bornstein.
• Congressional luncheon - Peter Roskam.
• Settlement Planning - Karen Meyers; Joseph DiGangi.
• Structured Settlement Tax Issues - Rafael Gonzalez; Doug Shaw; Jessica Smythe.