Planners don’t have any easy time of it these
days. And if tough contract negotiations, complex
logistics and increasing scrutiny by procurement aren’t enough of a
challenge, insurance meeting planners have yet another minefield to
cross: the threat that their incentive programs will run afoul of
the watchdogs at the National Association of Securities
Dealers.
Even insurance industry planners who don’t organize incentive
sales contests must follow rules set forth by New York City-based
NASD for training and education meetings, gift giving,
entertainment expenses and record keeping.
“We follow NASD rules and regulations in that we don’t offer
tours or pay for spouse travel or give any incentive-type gifts,”
says Sharon Chapman, CMP, CMM, travel and corporate events planner
with the Berkshire Life Insurance Company of America, based in
Pittsfield, Mass. “And we do the mandatory number of hours of
business meetings throughout the day. In other words, our business
meetings are meetings.”
While Chapman is upfront about adherence to NASD requirements,
other planners contacted by M&C for this story would
not give their names for fear of attracting undue attention from
the regulatory body. Which leads to the inevitable question: Just
what or who is NASD, anyway?
An appetite for discipline
NASD isn’t a government agency; rather, it is the biggest
private-sector provider of regulatory services in the world,
working at the behest of the Securities and Exchange Commission,
the U.S. government’s regulator of securities brokers nationwide.
(A “security” is a stock certificate or bond, held as evidence of
debt or of ownership, that may be traded in a market.)
With a $500 million annual budget and 2,000 employees, NASD
oversees thousands of brokerage firms and registered securities
dealers. The organization licenses individuals and firms and writes
the rules that govern their activities. In recent years, however,
the agency has become a very aggressive disciplinarian.
“Before, it was sort of the fox guarding the chicken coup, but
now they have toughened up,” says Jonathan T. Howe, Esq., a
contributing editor of M&C and Chicago-based senior partner in
the law firm of Howe & Hutton Ltd., which specializes in
meetings, travel and hospitality law. And in this case, “toughened
up” means doling out punishment.
“NASD decided it would rather be in charge of discipline than
let the government be the sole source,” Howe continues. “Now, about
once a month, you pick up The Wall Street Journal, and there is a
full-page article about people who have been disciplined.”
For meeting planners to be subject to NASD oversight, they must
work at companies that sell variable life and annuity insurance
products. These give the investor an opportunity to gain from their
potential capital appreciation and also subject the investor to
risks from the marketplace the characteristics of a security.
To sell a security or a security-like product, “you have to be
a broker/dealer,” explains Larry Kosciulek, associate director for
investment companies regulation for NASD. “All broker/dealers in
the United States who have retail accounts have to be members of
NASD.” As a result, that agency performs federal oversight
affecting meeting planners at scores of companies nationwide.
GOLF: NASD’S FORE-LETTER WORD?
The regulators at the National Association of Securities Dealers turn a keen, Tiger Woods-like focus on golf outings, but instead of pins, they tend to see red flags at every hole on the course. While insurance planners under NASD’s purview can pay for an associated attendee’s meals, transportation and lodging (within reason) during an education meeting, golf is a definite no-no, unless attendees themselves are paying for the pleasure of putting.
In 2001, Mary L. Shapiro, NASD vice chairman, sent a reminder to members who sell variable and investment company products, complaining that some offerors of these products “sponsor trips that are laden with golf outings, cruises, tours or other entertainment, all under the umbrella of training or education meetings.”
“Of course,” Shapiro wrote, “associated persons themselves may play golf or enjoy other forms of entertainment organized by the offeror while attending these meetings, provided that the offeror does not pay for or reimburse the costs of these events.”
In other words: You can plan a game of golf for attendees, but don’t pay for any greens fees or equipment (and especially not the perk of playing with a pro), or you could wind up deep in NASD’s regulatory rough. -- B.M.L.
Variable ethics?
Unfortunately, many planners working for companies considered
broker/dealers are getting caught up in a vortex of controversy
concerning the way variable policies are sold.
According to a joint SEC/NASD report issued in June 2004, “NASD
and other regulators have received a large number of complaints
from individual investors about variable insurance products. Many
of these complaints indicate the investor was sold a variable
product without fully understanding the product, and express
concern that the product was not appropriate for them, given their
investment objectives.”
The report further explains that “high fees and surrender
charges combined with other factors” make variable insurance
products a bad choice for many investors. But such investors often
are given the hard sell because sales of variable products are
driven by high commissions for salespeople, typically above 5
percent.
That’s where the regulators and their enforcement actions
become most relevant to meeting planners. Both NASD officials and
independent lawyers agree it makes sense for insurance planners not
only to pay attention to the letter of the regulations, but also to
examine specific enforcement actions that might draw a more
distinct line than sometimes vague regulatory language.
“As lawyers, we look at what the court is going to do to
interpret a particular law,” says Jonathan Howe. “It’s the same
with regulation. You can read a rule but how is that rule being
interpreted by those doing the enforcement? What do they find and
what do they not find as objectionable?”
A look at NASD’s enforcement actions provides some answers. In
July of this year, the agency fined a Horsham, Pa.-based insurance
company $325,000 for running an inappropriate travel incentive
program for its brokers. According to NASD, the firm Hornor,
Townsend & Kent created improper incentives for brokers to sell
certain insurance products, rather than focusing on the quality of
the individual investment based upon the customer’s unique
financial needs.
“By favoring the sale of some variable life and annuity
products over others, these contests created conflicts of interest
that could undermine the broker’s obligation to recommend suitable
investments based on the needs of the customer,” noted NASD vice
chairman Mary L. Shapiro in a statement. “NASD rules are designed
to prevent such conflicts between the broker’s self-interest and
the customer’s.”
How did Hornor, Townsend & Kent run afoul of NASD? Between
2001 and 2003, the firm conducted six national and multiple branch
office sales contests designed to boost sales of specific variable
life and variable annuity products those of Penn Mutual Life rather
than a contest that promoted the sale of all products the firm
offers within the product line, as NASD requires.
The prizes offered to the broker’s sales force included weekend
getaways to Las Vegas, New Orleans and New York City; cash vouchers
for personal entertainment and education, and gift cards. The value
of these incentive awards was more than $200,000, according to the
regulators. Prizes for the branch office incentive contests
included golf trips, tickets to sports events, meals and electronic
goods like HDTV sets.
Regulators from NASD also objected to the fact that e-mails
relating to the incentive program and exchanged between 83
different employees, including the firm’s president and other
senior management, had been discarded. NASD further ruled that the
supervisory system for the entire program was inadequate, per the
agency’s rules governing non-cash compensation.
As part of its settlement with NASD, Hornor, Townsend &
Kent agreed to bar any sales contests for the sale of variable life
or annuity products for three years.
The “non-cash” factor
NASD enforcement of variable products could get even tougher.
“Variable insurance products have always been subject to the
suitability, disclosure and other requirements that apply to all
securities,” said NASD chairman and CEO Robert R. Glauber last
year. “But given the examination findings, the large number of
enforcement cases over the last couple of years and the complexity
of these products, we feel we can best protect investors by
establishing stronger, more specific rules that apply specifically
to variable annuities.”
In the meantime, insurance conference planners would do well to
scrutinize current NASD Rule 2820, which deals with agency members
who sell variable insurance products and the kind of non-cash
compensation that such companies might provide to their sales
forces. (“Non-cash compensation” is NASD’s term for merchandise,
entertainment, gifts and prizes, travel expenses, meals and
lodging, with a special emphasis on incentive contests and training
meetings.)
In 1999, NASD warned members that “increased use of non-cash
compensation for the sale of variable contracts heightens the
potential for loss of supervisory control over sales practices and
increases the perception of inappropriate practices, which may
result in a loss of investor confidence.”
Since then, NASD has overhauled its rules governing non-cash
compensation to make sure insurance industry incentive contests,
training meetings, gifts and entertainment expenses don’t adversely
affect the choice or quality of products offered to consumers.
Q&A WITH NASD’S LARRY KOSCIULEK
M&C recently spoke with Larry Kosciulek, associate director for investment companies regulation with the National Association of Securities Dealers, the organization charged with overseeing firms that market variable insurance products.
M&C: How does NASD work with the Securities and Exchange Commission in formulating regulations for meetings, training and incentive programs?
Kosciulek: The SEC is the federal government, and we’re a self-regulating organization. The SEC delegates responsibility to us to examine and investigate our members. The SEC approves all our rules.
M&C: Should meeting planners pay as much attention to enforcement actions as to the letter of the rules, which can be open to interpretation?
Kosciulek: If you want an indication of our focus, look at our enforcement actions.
M&C: Some of NASD’s regulations and notices can be difficult to understand. What can planners do to cope?
Kosciulek: They should work with their broker/dealer compliance officers. They’re on the front lines of these issues, dealing with interpretations and proposals. The terminology is too difficult for an outsider to understand.
M&C: How can planners stay up-to-date about changes?
Kosciulek: Monitor our website,
www.nasd.com. Every Wednesday we have an e-mail blast that gives running totals of issues and proposals going out.
M&C: What raises red flags for your regulators?
Kosciulek: Location and venue. As far as training meetings, we have concerns that they not become entertainment events. If it looks very expensive, that would be a red flag.
M&C: How much of a training meeting must be devoted to work-related activities? Is it inadvisable to schedule one afternoon of leisure over the course of a three-day meeting, for example?
Kosciulek: A training meeting is substantially all of a workday, and any outside entertainment cannot be provided by that training sponsor.
M&C: Can a meeting sponsor pay for a spouse to attend a training meeting?
Kosciulek: No, that would have to be on his or her dime.
M&C: Can an insurance company pay for training attendees to play golf?
Kosciulek: No.
M&C: What’s the most important thing for meeting planners to understand about sales incentive contests and trips?
Kosciulek: You can’t have a sales incentive contest that favors a product; you have to include all your products in sales contests. We’re trying to ensure that a salesperson makes a recommendation that is appropriate to an investor. The product should be sold to fulfill that customer’s needs and not because the sale may mean a boat trip for the salesperson.
M&C: Why are variable insurance products getting so much attention from regulators?
Kosciulek: Variable annuities have been around since the 1950s and variable life insurance since the 1970s. They’re attracting more attention because the growth in variable contracts has become associated with growth in the stock market, and there’s been more regulatory focus on that in the past five to 10 years. There’s certainly extra focus on conflicts in sales practices and the like.
M&C: What else should meeting planners be aware of?
Kosciulek: Pressure is increasing on broker/dealers in terms of what kinds of events they can offer, and there might be fewer conferences as a result. -- B.M.L.
Learning the ropes
All of this has not escaped the attention of Chicago-based
ICPA, an Association of Insurance and Financial Services Conference
Planners: “We included a session on NASD regulations at last year’s
annual meeting,” says Steve Bova, CAE, the association’s executive
director. “To move forward, we want to improve the educational
content.”
Indeed, at the 2004 Northeast Regional Meeting of ICPA, held at
The Sagamore in Bolton Landing, N.Y., a panel moderated by Sheryl
Krongold of Prudential Financial looked at “the gray area that lies
around rules and regulations for holding a meeting within the
financial industry. Fines and bad press have been incurred by many
financial firms who have not abided by the IRS/NASD regulations for
their meetings in the past,” according to ICPA’s program for the
event.
Among the rules most pertinent to insurance meeting planners
are those concerning record keeping, site selection and gift giving
as it relates to variable insurance products. While the following
isn’t a comprehensive listing of NASD rules, it is meant to
enlighten planners to aspects of meetings and events NASD
regulates, and how the agency applies these rules to its
members.
" Record keeping. NASD expects records to show
if non-cash compensation was received in connection with a sales
incentive program or a training and education meeting. For such
events, regulations suggest that records “should include
information demonstrating that the requirements of a training and
education meeting were complied with, including the date and
location of the meeting, the fact that attendance at the meeting is
not conditioned on the achievement of a previously specified sales
target, [and] the fact that the payment is not applied to the
expenses of guests.”
Elsewhere, regarding training meetings, NASD regulations state,
somewhat obliquely, “Members should establish a procedure so that
their records reflect that appropriate approval has been provided
to associated persons in connection with such meetings.”
" Gifts and entertainment. NASD provisions
allow the giving of gifts to sales staff so long as they do not
amount to more than $100 per year, per person. However, some items
seem to be exempt from this restriction. The NASD spending limit
doesn’t apply to “promotional items of nominal value that display
the offeror’s logo, such as golf balls, shirts, towels and
pens.”
As for when entertainment expenses go over the line, NASD’s
language again is rather vague. In addition to $100 worth of gifts
per year, the rules say an insurance company can give salespeople
“an occasional meal, ticket to a sporting event or the theater, or
comparable entertainment for persons associated with a member and,
if appropriate, their guests, which is neither so frequent nor so
extensive as to raise any question of propriety.”
For all gifts and entertainment, care should be made that their
provision is not part of an incentive program which requires the
recipient meet specific sales goals, but rather as a “recognition
of past sales or encouragement for future sales.”
" Locating training meetings. While NASD
recognizes insurance companies often pay for travel and expenses
associated with introducing salespeople to new products and
updating them on “portfolio changes or structural changes to a
current product,” it monitors such events to make sure they don’t
conflict with the interests of consumers.
For meetings associated with training a sales force to sell a
viable insurance product, the rules seem to leave a large gray
area. “The location of the meeting must be appropriate to its
purpose. A showing of appropriate purpose is demonstrated where the
location is the office of the offeror or member, or facility
located in the vicinity of such office.”
This provision is clearly open to some interpretation, as are
many NASD regulations. Legal experts caution that working with
in-house compliance officers or a legal department is de
rigueur.
“As a former president of the United States once said, it all
depends on what ‘is’ means,” says Howe. “Or, as a former Supreme
Court justice said when asked to define pornography, ‘I know it
when I see it.’ In other words, a lot of this is going to be
extremely subjective, and it makes sense to look at the decisions
or enforcement, not only the regulations.”
The rules get harder still to interpret with precision when a
company has multiple offices. “In order to address meetings where
attendees are from a number of offices in a region of the county,
the meeting may be in a regional location.”
The way NASD’s Larry Kosciulek puts it, “We haven’t drawn lines
or brought out the Rand McNally atlas, but [a training meeting]
should be in the approximate area of the office of whomever is
providing the meeting.”
Incentive sales contests
Because NASD sees a danger that incentive sales contests involving
variable insurance products might motivate salespeople to recommend
products on the basis of enticing personal incentives rather than a
desire to meet the needs of the customer, the agency pays
particular attention to such contests. Incentive programs
(considered “non-cash compensation arrangements”) are allowable
only if they meet the following four conditions:
1. Incentive rewards must be based on the
“total production of associated persons with respect to all
investment company or variable product securities distributed by
that member.” This means the sales staff has been involved with a
variety of products without putting undue emphasis on any without
regard to a customer’s needs.
2. “The credit received for each investment
company or variable contract security must be equally weighted,”
meaning each product sold has equal value toward the total points
or credits earned toward incentive prizes.
3. No unaffiliated nonmember company (that is,
a company that is neither a NASD member nor owned by or under
common control of a NASD member company) or other unaffiliated
member may directly or indirectly participate in the member’s or
nonmember’s organization of a sales incentive contest. This is a
byzantine way of saying the contest is for NASD members only.
4. NASD’s specific record-keeping requirements
must be met.