{"title":"Annuities are not securities: the regulatory Island in Illinois","authors":"Michele L. Schaff, J. E. Schaff","doi":"10.1108/joic-10-2019-0055","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nDiscusses the significance of the Illinois Supreme Court ruling in Van Dyke v. White, which clarified that annuities are not securities in the state of Illinois, with a particular focus on the ramifications to insurance, brokerage and investment advisory standards of care as well as causes of action for breaches thereof.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nDescribes the Court’s ruling as it relates to the industry going forward. Does not discuss the specifics of the plaintiff’s case or history.\n\n\nFindings\nThe statutory language of Illinois’ securities laws specifically excludes annuities from the definition of securities. For this reason, the Illinois Department of Insurance has sole authority over regulating annuities, giving the Illinois Department of Securities no authority, except to the extent there is an investment advisor breach pursuant to §12(J) of the Illinois Securities Law of 1953. The industry has yet to react or adjust to the Court’s ruling, so there may be a future wave of reactions.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nAssists the reader in understanding the unique regulatory environment of annuities in Illinois, the relevant standards of care related to annuity advice and transactions, and remedies for grievances after the Illinois Supreme Court ruling in Van Dyke v. White.\n","PeriodicalId":399186,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Investment Compliance","volume":"68 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-11-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Investment Compliance","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/joic-10-2019-0055","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose
Discusses the significance of the Illinois Supreme Court ruling in Van Dyke v. White, which clarified that annuities are not securities in the state of Illinois, with a particular focus on the ramifications to insurance, brokerage and investment advisory standards of care as well as causes of action for breaches thereof.
Design/methodology/approach
Describes the Court’s ruling as it relates to the industry going forward. Does not discuss the specifics of the plaintiff’s case or history.
Findings
The statutory language of Illinois’ securities laws specifically excludes annuities from the definition of securities. For this reason, the Illinois Department of Insurance has sole authority over regulating annuities, giving the Illinois Department of Securities no authority, except to the extent there is an investment advisor breach pursuant to §12(J) of the Illinois Securities Law of 1953. The industry has yet to react or adjust to the Court’s ruling, so there may be a future wave of reactions.
Originality/value
Assists the reader in understanding the unique regulatory environment of annuities in Illinois, the relevant standards of care related to annuity advice and transactions, and remedies for grievances after the Illinois Supreme Court ruling in Van Dyke v. White.
目的讨论伊利诺伊州最高法院在Van Dyke诉White一案中的裁决的意义,该裁决澄清了年金在伊利诺伊州不属于证券,并特别关注对保险、经纪和投资咨询的注意标准的影响,以及违反这些标准的诉因。设计/方法/方法描述法院的裁决,因为它与行业的发展有关。不讨论原告案件或历史的细节。发现伊利诺伊州证券法的法定语言明确将年金排除在证券的定义之外。因此,伊利诺斯州保险部拥有监管年金的唯一权力,除了根据1953年伊利诺斯州证券法§12(J)的规定存在投资顾问违规行为的情况外,伊利诺斯州证券部没有任何权力。该行业尚未对法院的裁决做出反应或调整,因此未来可能会有一波反应。原创性/价值帮助读者理解伊利诺斯州独特的年金监管环境,与年金咨询和交易相关的护理标准,以及伊利诺斯州最高法院在Van Dyke v. White一案中作出裁决后的申诉救济。