# Registration Form for Insurance Company Separate Accounts Registered as Unit Investment Trusts that Offer Variable Life Insurance Policies > Briefs, arguments, decisions, and more. URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A98-7072 ## Record - **Collection:** Federal Register - **Document type:** Proposed Rule - **Published:** March 23, 1998 - **Citation:** 63 FR 13988 ## Text SUMMARY: The Securities and Exchange Commission is proposing a new Form N-6 for insurance company separate accounts that are registered as unit investment trusts and that offer variable life insurance policies. The form would be used by these separate accounts to register under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and to offer their securities under the Securities Act of 1933. For these registrants, the proposed form would replace Form N-8B-2, currently used by all unit investment trusts to register under the Investment Company Act, and Form S-6, currently used by all unit investment trusts to offer their securities under the Securities Act. The proposed form would focus prospectus disclosure on essential information that would assist an investor in deciding whether to invest in a particular variable life insurance policy. The proposed form also would minimize prospectus disclosure about technical and legal matters, improve disclosure of fees and charges, and streamline the registration process by replacing two forms that were not specifically designed for variable life insurance policies with a single form tailored to these products. DATES: Comments must be received on or before July 1, 1998. ADDRESSES: Comments should be submitted in triplicate to Jonathan G. Katz, Secretary, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549-6009. Comments also may be submitted electronically at the following E-mail address: [email protected]. All comment letters should refer to File No. S7-9-98; this file number should be included on the subject line if E-mail is used. All comments received will be available for public inspection and copying in the Commission's Public Reference Room, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20549-6009. Electronically submitted comments also will be posted on the Commission's Internet site (http://www.sec.gov). FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Keith E. Carpenter, Senior Counsel, Ethan D. Corey, Senior Counsel, Megan L. Dunphy, Attorney, Michael B. Koffler, Attorney, Susan M. Olson, Attorney, Kevin M. Kirchoff, Branch Chief, Cindy J. Rose, Chief Financial Analyst, or Susan Nash, Assistant Director, (202) 942-0670, Office of Insurance Products, Division of Investment Management, Securities and Exchange Commission, 450 Fifth Street, N.W., Mail Stop 5-6, Washington, D.C. 20549-6009. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Securities and Exchange Commission (``Commission'') is proposing for comment a new Form N-6 [17 CFR 239.17c; 17 CFR 274.11d] for insurance company separate accounts that are registered as unit investment trusts and that offer variable life insurance policies. The form would be used by these separate accounts to register under the Investment Company Act of 1940 [15 U.S.C. 80a-1 et seq.] (``Investment Company Act'') and to offer their securities under the Securities Act of 1933 [15 U.S.C. 77a et seq.] (``Securities Act''). For these registrants, the proposed form would replace Forms N- 8B-2 [17 CFR 274.12] and S-6 [17 CFR 239.16], currently used by all unit investment trusts to register under the Investment Company Act and to offer their securities under the Securities Act. The Commission also is proposing technical amendments to rules 134b, 430, 430A, 495, 496, and 497 under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.134b, 230.430, 230.430A, 230.495, 230.496, 230.497]; rules 8b-11 and 8b-12 under the Investment Company Act [17 CFR 270.8b-11, 270.8b-12]; and Form N-8B-2 [17 CFR 274.12]. Finally, the Commission is requesting comment on whether it should rescind Form N-1 [17 CFR 274.11], the registration form used by insurance company separate accounts that are registered as open-end management investment companies and that offer variable life insurance policies. Table of Contents I. Introduction and Executive Summary II. Discussion A. General Instructions B. Part A--Information in the Prospectus 1. Item 1--Front and Back Cover Pages 2. Item 2--Risk/Benefit Summary: Benefits and Risks 3. Item 3--Risk/Benefit Summary: Fee Table 4. Item 4--General Description of Registrant, Depositor, and Portfolio Companies 5. Item 5--Charges 6. Item 6--General Description of Contracts 7. Item 7--Premiums 8. Item 8--Death Benefits and Contract Values 9. Item 9--Surrenders, Partial Surrenders, and Partial Withdrawals 10. Item 10--Loans 11. Item 11--Lapse and Reinstatement 12. Item 12--Taxes 13. Item 13--Legal Proceedings 14. Item 14--Financial Statements C. Part B--Statement of Additional Information 1. Item 24--Financial Statements 2. Item 25--Performance Data 3. Item 26--Illustrations D. Part C--Other Information 1. Item 27--Exhibits 2. Item 34--Fee Representation 3. Undertaking to Update Prospectus E. Technical Rule Amendments F. Transition Period G. Form N-1 III. General Request for Comments IV. Paperwork Reduction Act V. Cost/Benefit Analysis VI. Regulatory Flexibility Act Certification VII. Statutory Authority Text of Proposed Amendments I. Introduction and Executive Summary Variable Life Insurance Variable life insurance is similar to traditional life insurance, except that the cash value and/or death benefit vary based on the investment performance of the assets in which the premium payments are invested. Under a traditional life insurance policy, premium payments are allocated to an insurer's general account and invested, consistent with state law requirements, to enable the insurer to meet its death benefit and cash value guarantees. The investment return on assets in the general account has little or no direct effect on the cash value or the death benefit received. Premium payments under a variable life policy, in contrast, are invested in an insurance company separate account, which generally is not subject to state law investment restrictions. A variable life policyholder typically is offered a variety of investment options (e.g., equity, bond, and money market mutual funds). Death benefits and cash values are directly related to performance of the separate account, although typically there is a guaranteed minimum death benefit. Variable life insurance was introduced in the early 1970s. During the years from the end of World War II to the late 1960s, there was a significant decline in the share of savings dollars invested with life insurance companies. In an effort to counteract this trend, insurers began to offer a greater variety of products, including equity-based products such as variable life [[Page 13989]] insurance.\1\ In recent years, variable life insurance has become an increasingly important segment of the insurance industry. By the end of 1996, variable life insurance accounted for almost one quarter of U.S. life insurance sales, up from 6% four years earlier.\2\ Throughout the 1990s, assets in variable life products have grown steadily, from $4.3 billion in 1990 to more than $33 billion in December 1997.\3\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \1\ SEC, Division of Investment Management, Variable Life Insurance and the Petition for the Issuance and Amendment of Exemptive Rules at 1-2 (Jan. 1973). \2\ Rybka, The Variable Life Revolution, NAVA Outlook, July/Aug. 1997, at 1. \3\ Lipper Variable Insurance Products Performance Analysis Service, Vol. I, at 190-91 (Jan. 1998). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Current Forms for Variable Life Insurance Registration A separate account funding a variable life insurance policy most commonly is registered as a unit investment trust under the Investment Company Act.\4\ Separate accounts registered as unit investment trusts are divided into sub-accounts, each of which invests in a different open-end management investment company, or mutual fund (``Portfolio Company'').\5\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \4\ Section 4(2) of the Investment Company Act defines ``unit investment trust'' as ``an investment company which (A) is organized under a trust indenture, contract of custodianship or agency, or similar instrument, (B) does not have a board of directors, and (C) issues only redeemable securities, each of which represents an undivided interest in a unit of specified securities, but does not include a voting trust.'' 15 U.S.C. 80a-4(2). \5\ An open-end management investment company is an investment company, other than a unit investment trust or face amount certificate company, that offers for sale or has outstanding any redeemable security of which it is the issuer. Section 4(3) of the Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C. 80a-4(3)]; Section 5(a)(1) of the Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C. 80a-5(a)(1)]. As an alternative to the structure described in the text, a variable life insurance separate account can be organized in a single-tier structure, as an open-end management investment company. Today, this structure is used by few, if any, variable life insurance registrants. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Both separate account unit investment trusts and the Portfolio Companies in which they invest are registered as investment companies under the Investment Company Act, and their securities are registered under the Securities Act. Investors in variable life insurance policies receive the prospectuses for both the separate account unit investment trust and the Portfolio Companies. Portfolio Companies, as mutual funds, use Form N-1A to register under the Investment Company Act and to register their shares under the Securities Act.\6\ Variable life separate accounts, as unit investment trusts, register under the Investment Company Act on Form N-8B-2 and register their securities under the Securities Act on Form S-6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \6\ 17 CFR 274.11A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Forms N-8B-2 and S-6 were designed for non-separate account unit investment trusts and were adopted before the establishment of the first separate account to fund variable life insurance policies. While much of their required disclosure is useful, the forms request some information that is not typically of consequence to a buyer of variable life insurance. More importantly, many matters that would be significant to a buyer of a variable life insurance policy are not addressed at all by the forms. Over time, the Commission staff has sought to deal with these shortcomings on a piecemeal basis by developing disclosure standards that require a description of the important features of the variable life insurance policy and the separate account. The Commission believes that these standards should be codified in a more appropriately designed form. Another shortcoming of Forms N-8B2 and S-6 is that they do not reflect fundamental improvements that the Commission has made to other investment company registration forms, such as Form N-4 for variable annuities and Form N-1A for mutual funds, which facilitate clearer and more concise disclosure to investors.\7\ As a result, variable life insurance prospectuses are often unnecessarily lengthy and complex. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \7\ Form N-1A [17 CFR 274.11A]; Form N-4 [17 CFR 274.11c]; Investment Company Act Release No. 13689 (Dec. 23, 1983) [49 FR 614] (``N-4 Proposing Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 14575 (June 14, 1985) [50 FR 26145] (``N-4 Adopting Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 12927 (Dec. 27, 1982) [48 FR 813] (``1982 N-1A Proposing Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 13436 (Aug. 12, 1983) [48 FR 37928] (``1983 N-1A Adopting Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 22528 (Feb. 27, 1997) [62 FR 10898], correction [62 FR 24160] (``1997 N-1A Proposing Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 23064 (Mar. 13, 1998) (``1998 N-1A Adopting Release''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- When Form N-4 was considered in the 1980s, the Commission indicated that it did not expect to propose separate registration forms for variable life insurance registrants until it had acquired more experience with variable life insurance policies.\8\ The Commission now believes that the benefits of its prospectus improvement initiatives should be extended to unit investment trust separate accounts that offer variable life insurance policies. These benefits include a two- part registration form, consisting of a simplified prospectus designed to contain essential information that assists an investor in making an investment decision, and a ``Statement of Additional Information'' (``SAI''), containing more extensive information and detailed discussion of matters included in the prospectus that investors could obtain upon request. They also include the use of a single integrated form for both Investment Company Act and Securities Act registration, eliminating unnecessary paperwork and duplicative reporting.\9\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \8\ N-4 Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 615, note 6. \9\ See Investment Company Release No. 10378 (Aug. 28, 1978) [43 FR 39548] (integration of Investment Company Act and Securities Act reporting and disclosure requirements in adoption of Form N-1). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Improved Communication to Investors The Commission is committed to improving the disclosure provided to variable life insurance investors. Toward that end, the Commission has developed Form N-6, which it proposes today for public comment. Unlike the current forms, proposed Form N-6 is specifically tailored to variable life insurance. The proposed requirements of the form focus on information that is essential to a decision to invest in a particular variable life insurance policy, and the form is intended to enhance the comparability of information about variable life insurance policies. The proposal seeks to promote more effective communication of information about variable life insurance policies. Today's proposal is the latest Commission action in its continuing effort and long-standing commitment to improve the quality of disclosure available to investment company investors. In 1983, the Commission introduced the innovative two-part disclosure format for mutual funds.\10\ This format was extended to variable annuities in 1985.\11\ Subsequently, the Commission adopted a number of other initiatives to improve investment company disclosure, including uniform fee tables for mutual funds and variable annuities.\12\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \10\ 1983 N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7. \11\ N-4 Adopting Release, supra note 7. \12\ Investment Company Act Release No. 16244 (Feb. 1, 1988) [53 FR 3192] (``N-1A Fee Table Adopting Release''); Investment Company Act Release No. 16766 (Jan. 23, 1989) [54 FR 4772] (``N-4 Fee Table Adopting Release''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In the past few years, the Commission has taken significant steps to improve investment company disclosure. In 1995, the Commission issued a release requesting comment on ways to improve risk disclosure and comparability of mutual fund risk levels.\13\ Today, the Commission is adopting a comprehensive revision of Form N-1A, [[Page 13990]] the mutual fund disclosure form, to provide a standardized risk/return summary at the beginning of every mutual fund prospectus, require mutual funds to prepare disclosure documents using plain English, and eliminate prospectus clutter that obscures information that is helpful to investors making an investment decision.\14\ The Commission also is adopting a new rule to permit mutual funds to provide investors with a ``profile,'' a disclosure document summarizing key information about a fund, including the fund's investment strategies, risks, performance, and fees, in a concise, standardized format. A fund that makes a profile available will be able to offer investors a choice of the amount of information that they wish to consider before making an investment decision.\15\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \13\ Investment Company Act Release No. 20974 (Mar. 29, 1995) [60 FR 17172] (``Risk Concept Release''). \14\ 1998 N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7. \15\ Rule 498 under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.498]; Investment Company Act Release No. 23065 (Mar. 13, 1998) (``Profile Adopting Release''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission's investment company disclosure initiatives are part of its broad undertaking to bring sweeping revisions to prospectus disclosure for all public companies.\16\ The Commission is committed to making all prospectuses simpler, clearer, and more useful, and to eliminating jargon and boilerplate. As part of its commitment, the Commission recently adopted rule amendments to require the use of plain English principles in drafting prospectuses and to provide other guidance on improving the readability of prospectuses.\17\ The Commission's plain English principles reflect fundamentals of clear communication and contemplate disclosure documents that: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \16\ See Levitt, Plain English in Prospectuses, N.Y. ST. B.J., Nov. 1997, at 36. \17\ See Securities Act Release No. 7497 (Jan. 28, 1998) [63 FR 6370](''Plain English Adopting Release''). The Commission adopted a plain English rule that sets out six basic principles of clear writing. Rule 421(d) under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.421(d)]. The six principles specified in the rule are: (i) Active voice; (ii) short sentences; (iii) definite, concrete everyday words; (iv) tabular presentation or ``bullet'' lists for complex material, whenever possible; (v) no legal jargon, or highly technical business terms; and (vi) no multiple negatives. As part of the plain English initiatives, the Commission plans to issue A Handbook on Plain English: How to Create Clear SEC Disclosure Documents, prepared by the Commission's Office of Investor Education and Assistance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Present information in an easily readable format; Use everyday language that investors can easily understand; and Eliminate repetition of disclosure that lengthens a document and overwhelms the investor. Goals of Proposed Form N-6 The proposed Form N-6 is another significant step to improve disclosure to investment company investors. If adopted, Form N-6 would have the following benefits. Tailored Registration Form. Proposed Form N-6 would eliminate requirements in the current registration forms that are not relevant to variable life insurance.\18\ Proposed Form N-6 also would include items that are specifically addressed to variable life insurance products, such as descriptions of contractual provisions relating to premiums, death benefits, cash values, surrenders and withdrawals, and loans.\19\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \18\ For example, Item 33 of Form N-8B-2 requires extensive disclosure about compensation of the insurer's employees. \19\ Proposed Items 7 (premiums), 8 (death benefits and cash values), 9 (surrenders and withdrawals), and 10 (loans). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Plain English. The Commission's recently adopted plain English rule would apply to the front and back cover pages and the risk/benefit summary in the variable life insurance prospectus.\20\ This should result in better, clearer disclosure to investors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \20\ Rule 421(d) under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.421(d)]. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Reducing Complex and Lengthy Prospectus Disclosure. Proposed Form N-6 would streamline variable life prospectus disclosure by adopting a two-part format consisting of a simplified prospectus, designed to contain essential information that assists an investor in making an investment decision, and an SAI, containing more extensive information and detailed discussion of matters included in the prospectus that investors could obtain upon request. Standardized Fee Information. Mutual funds and variable annuities are required to provide a uniform, tabular presentation of fees and charges that is intended to improve investor understanding of fees and charges and increase comparability. Proposed Form N-6 would impose a similar requirement on variable life insurance registrants, in order to improve the disclosure to investors of the often complex charges associated with variable life insurance policies and increase, to the greatest extent possible, the comparability of charges among policies. Integrated Disclosure Document. Proposed Form N-6 would provide variable life insurance registrants with an integrated form for Investment Company Act and Securities Act registration, eliminating unnecessary paperwork and duplicative reporting. Proposed Form N-6 is designed to promote more effective communication of information about variable life insurance policies. The proposal would advance Commission efforts to improve investment company prospectus disclosure beginning with the adoption of the two- part disclosure format for mutual funds in 1983. Proposed Form N-6, if adopted, would represent a significant step toward the Commission's goal of better, clearer, more concise disclosure for all investors. II. Discussion To make the requirements of proposed Form N-6 easy to follow, this release addresses items in the order in which they appear in the form. A. General Instructions The proposed General Instructions to Form N-6 provide guidance on the use and content of the form. They are similar to the General Instructions to Forms N-4 and N-1A. The General Instructions to Form N- 6 would consist of: (i) Definitions; (ii) Filing and Use of Form N-6; (iii) Preparation of the Registration Statement; and (iv) Incorporation by Reference. They reflect the recent amendments to Form N-1A that updated and reorganized the General Instructions to make them easier to use.\21\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \21\ General Instructions to Form N-1A; 1998 N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; 1997 N-1A Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 10919-20. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed General Instruction A would define certain terms used throughout Form N-6, providing clarity and avoiding repeated references throughout the form. Proposed General Instruction B on the filing and use of Form N-6 would incorporate the user-friendly, question-and- answer format of Form N-1A.\22\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \22\ General Instruction B of Form N-1A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed General Instruction C would provide streamlined instructions for preparing the registration statement. Like the comparable Instructions in Forms N-4 and N-1A, General Instruction C would emphasize the need to provide clear and concise prospectus disclosure.\23\ It would permit a registrant to include in its prospectus or SAI information that is not otherwise required by Form N- 6, as long as the information is not misleading and does not, because of its nature, quantity, or manner of presentation, obscure required disclosures. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \23\ General Instruction C.1(a) of Form N-1A; General Instruction I of Form N-4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Like the comparable instruction in Form N-1A, Proposed General Instruction C includes a statement of the [[Page 13991]] basic disclosure principles that underlie today's proposal.\24\ The Commission believes that applying these principles consistently when preparing variable life insurance disclosure documents will result in high quality documents that effectively communicate information to investors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \24\ 1998 N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- General Instruction C includes a set of drafting guidelines that are designed to improve prospectus disclosure. The proposed Instruction would encourage registrants to avoid cross-references in the prospectus to the SAI. Repeated cross-references to the SAI add unnecessary length and complexity to prospectuses and often preclude prospectuses from disclosing information effectively to investors. Proposed General Instruction C would clarify that the recently adopted plain English requirements of rule 421 under the Securities Act apply to a prospectus prepared on Form N-6.\25\ Rule 421(b) sets out general requirements that the entire prospectus be clear, concise, and understandable and provides guidance on how to draft prospectuses that meet this standard. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \25\ 17 CFR 230.421; Proposed General Instruction C.1.(e). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Under proposed Form N-6, a registrant would need to draft the front and back cover pages and the risk/benefit summary of a variable life insurance prospectus in accordance with the provisions of rule 421(d).\26\ In meeting these requirements, a registrant would need to use plain English principles in the organization, language, and design of these sections of its prospectus. Registrants also would be required to comply substantially with the following six principles of clear writing: --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \26\ 17 CFR 230.421(d); Proposed Items 1, 2, and 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Short sentences; Definite, concrete, everyday language; Active voice; Tabular presentation or bullet lists for complex material, whenever possible; No legal jargon or highly technical business terms; and No multiple negatives. Proposed General Instruction C would address the manner in which information should be presented when a single prospectus is used for more than one variable life insurance policy or for a policy that is sold in both the group and individual markets. Generally, registrants would be given flexibility to present the information in a format designed to communicate the information effectively. The Commission notes, however, that a single prospectus should be used for more than one variable life insurance policy, or for a policy that is sold in both the group and individual markets, only when the disclosure can be presented clearly, concisely, and in a manner that is understandable to investors. Proposed General Instruction D would address incorporation by reference in a manner similar to Form N-1A.\27\ The proposed Instruction would permit, but not require, a registrant to incorporate the SAI by reference into the prospectus. The Instruction clarifies that incorporating information by reference from the SAI is not permitted as a response to information required to be included in the prospectus. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \27\ General Instruction D of Form N-1A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Form N-4 contains an instruction permitting the form to be used for registration under the Securities Act of variable annuity contracts funded by separate accounts that would be required to be registered under the Investment Company Act as unit investment trusts except for the exclusion in Section 3(c)(11) of the Act.\28\ Proposed Form N-6 does not contain a comparable instruction because the Commission is not aware of any variable life insurance policies that are funded by separate accounts that are not registered under the Investment Company Act. Comment is requested on whether such an instruction should be included in Form N-6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \28\ General Instruction A of Form N-4; N-4 Adopting Release, supra note 7, at 26148; N-4 Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 619. Section 3(c)(11) of the Investment Company Act excludes from the definition of investment company ``any separate account the assets of which are derived solely from (A) contributions under pension or profit-sharing plans which meet the requirements of section 401 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 or the requirements for deduction of the employer's contribution under section 404(a)(2) of such Code, (B) contributions under governmental plans in connection with which interests, participations, or securities are exempted from the registration provisions of section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933 by section 3(a)(2)(C) of such Act, and (C) advances made by an insurance company in connection with the operation of such separate account.'' 15 U.S.C. 80a-3(c)(11). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- B. Part A--Information in the Prospectus 1. Item 1--Front and Back Cover Pages Proposed Item 1 contains requirements for the outside front and back cover pages of the prospectus similar to those in Form N-1A.\29\ The proposed requirements are intended to prevent ``cluttering'' the prospectus cover page and avoid repeating information contained within the prospectus. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \29\ Item 1 of Form N-1A; 1998 N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; 1997 N-1A Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 10902. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The front cover page would be required to include the names of the registrant and depositor. In addition, the registrant would be required to indicate the types of variable life insurance policies offered by the prospectus (e.g., group, individual, scheduled premium, flexible premium) and the date of the prospectus. Finally, the form would require the disclaimer pursuant to rule 481 under the Securities Act that the Commission has not approved the securities being offered or the accuracy or adequacy of the prospectus.\30\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \30\ Proposed Item 1(a). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unlike Form N-4, the cover page would not be required to state the names of the Portfolio Companies or to disclose limitations on the class or classes of purchasers to whom the policy is being offered.\31\ This disclosure would be repetitive because registrants would be required to provide the same information within the prospectus.\32\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \31\ Items 1(a) (iv) and (viii) of Form N-4. \32\ Proposed Items 4(c) and 6(f). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The proposal would consolidate disclosure about the availability of additional information on the back cover page of the prospectus. As in Form N-1A, the back cover page would include a statement that the SAI is available, without charge, on request and a telephone number that investors could use to obtain the SAI as well as other information. Registrants would be required to send the SAI within three days of receipt of a request. Registrants also would be required to indicate whether information is incorporated by reference into the prospectus and, unless the information is delivered with the prospectus, explain that it will be provided, without charge, on request. Finally, the proposal would require that the back cover page include disclosure that information about the registrant is available from the Commission and how that information may be obtained.\33\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \33\ Proposed Item 1(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Item 2--Risk/Benefit Summary: Benefits and Risks Proposed Form N-6 would require at the beginning of every prospectus a risk/benefit summary that would provide key information about a policy's risks, benefits, and fees. This information would be required to appear in a specific sequence. The risk/benefit summary is intended to respond to investors' strong preference for summary information in a standardized format.\34\ It would provide all investors [[Page 13992]] with key information about a policy in a standardized, easily accessible place. This would help investors to evaluate and compare variable life insurance policies. The proposed risk/benefit summary is consistent with the approach taken in today's amendments to Form N-1A and the release adopting the plain English rule.\35\ The Commission requests comment on the sequence requirement and whether any particular format should be required for the risk/benefit summary. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \34\ Participants in focus groups conducted on behalf of the Commission, for example, expressed strong support for summary information about mutual funds in a standardized format. In addition, in connection with an initiative to permit mutual funds to use profiles summarizing key information, many individual investors have written to the Commission about the need for concise, summary information relating to a fund. In keeping with the goal of providing key information in a standardized summary, proposed General Instruction C.3.(b) would not permit a registrant to include in the risk/benefit summary information that is not required or otherwise permitted by the items prescribing the risk/benefit summary. \35\ 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; Plain English Adopting Release, supra note 17, at 6373. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Risks associated with Portfolio Companies would be addressed in the Portfolio Companies' prospectuses and profiles, not the variable life insurance prospectus. Policies frequently offer 10 or more Portfolio Companies, and the Commission believes that a variable life insurance prospectus may become too long and complex if it includes risk information specific to each Portfolio Company. The Commission believes that investors are better served by consulting the Portfolio Company prospectus or profile for risk information relating to Portfolio Companies in which they are interested. The risk/benefit summary, however, would require a registrant to present narrative information concerning the benefits available under the policy; the allocation of premium payments to insurance coverage, investments, and charges; and the risks of purchasing a policy in a single location in the variable life prospectus. Risks to be covered would include the risks of poor investment performance, the unsuitability of variable life insurance policies as short-term savings vehicles, the risks of policy lapse, limitations on access to cash value through withdrawals, and the possibility of adverse tax consequences. Variable life insurance prospectuses generally disclose this information, particularly risk information, in the context of long, often complex descriptions of the policy. The Commission believes that the proposed narrative summary will help achieve more effective communication of risks.\36\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \36\ In 1995, the Commission issued a release requesting comment on ways to improve risk disclosure and comparability of investment company risk levels. Risk Concept Release, supra note 13. More than 75% of the individual investors commenting on the Risk Concept Release specifically favored requiring a risk summary in mutual fund prospectuses. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on the proposed narrative summary of policy benefits, allocation of premiums, and risks. Is this narrative summary necessary or helpful for variable life insurance prospectuses? Are the particular items included useful, and should other items be included? Should the risks of particular Portfolio Companies be described in the variable life insurance prospectus? 3. Item 3--Risk/Benefit Summary: Fee Table Purpose of Fee Table. Along with investment performance, fees and charges are a crucial element in determining the return that an investor will realize from any investment company. For that reason, the Commission has required a fee table in the prospectuses of both mutual funds and variable annuities.\37\ Through the fee tables, the Commission has sought to provide uniformity, simplicity, and comparability in fee disclosure.\38\ The Commission believes that clear, understandable disclosure of fees and charges is equally important to investors considering the purchase of variable life insurance and, for that reason, Item 3 of Proposed Form N-6 would extend a fee table requirement to variable life insurance. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \37\ Item 3 of Form N-1A; Item 3 of Form N-4. \38\ N-1A Fee Table Adopting Release, supra note 12, at 3194; Investment Company Act Release No. 15932 (Aug. 18, 1987) [52 FR 32018, 32019] (``N-1A Fee Table Proposing Release''). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The fees and charges associated with variable life insurance products often are quite complex for several reasons. First, the structure of fees often differs from one policy to another, making comparisons among products difficult. Second, fees typically are imposed at several levels within a variable life insurance policy, making it difficult to assess the aggregate effect of charges. For example, management and other expenses may be deducted at the Portfolio Company level, asset-based charges such as a mortality and expense risk charge may be deducted against separate account assets, and other charges, such as cost of insurance, may be assessed against a policyholder's individual cash value. Third, some variable life charges, particularly cost of insurance (i.e., the charge imposed for death benefit coverage), vary based upon the individual characteristics of the purchaser and change over the life of a policy. The complexity of variable life insurance fees and charges makes it more difficult to prescribe a standardized disclosure format than for mutual funds or variable annuities. The Commission believes, however, that this complexity also makes it particularly important that investors receive clear, understandable disclosure about this essential aspect of the investment decision. The importance of this disclosure has been heightened since the passage of the National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996 (``NSMIA''). NSMIA amended Sections 26 and 27 of the Investment Company Act to replace specific limits on the amount, type, and timing of charges that applied to variable insurance contracts with a requirement that aggregate charges be reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the insurance company.\39\ The increased flexibility to structure variable life insurance charges given to insurers by NSMIA increases the need for clear, understandable disclosure of charges.\40\ Proposed Item 3 is intended to facilitate uniformity, simplicity, and comparability of variable life insurance fees and charges, while permitting flexibility when the nature of the product requires it. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \39\ 15 U.S.C. 80a-26; 15 U.S.C. 80a-27; National Securities Markets Improvement Act of 1996, Pub. L. No. 104-290 (1996), Section 205; S. Rep. No. 293, 104th Cong., 2d Sess. 22 (1996) (``Senate Report''); H. Rep. No. 622, 104th Cong., 2d Sess. 45-46 (1996) (``House Report''). \40\ In addition, in light of NSMIA, the National Association of Securities Dealers, Inc. (``NASD'') recently filed with the Commission a proposed rule change that would eliminate the maximum sales charge limitations applicable to variable insurance contracts. SR-NASD-98-14 (filed Feb. 17, 1998) (available in the Commission's Public Reference Room). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Variable life insurance prospectuses typically have included hypothetical illustrations that reflect the effect of charges under specified assumptions and thereby serve some of the purposes of a fee table.\41\ The Commission is concerned, however, that the illustration of one or a limited number of scenarios that demonstrate the effect of policy charges on particular policyholders with particular premium payment patterns is not an adequate substitute for clear, tabular disclosure of [[Page 13993]] the level of each charge imposed by a policy.\42\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \41\ See N-1A Fee Table Adopting Release, supra note 12, at 3194; N-4 Fee Table Adopting Release, supra note 12, at 4775. \42\ See discussion of illustrations infra Section II.C.3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Further, in recent years, the Commission has observed that a number of variable life insurance registrants, on their own initiative, have added relatively simple, tabular presentations of fees and charges to their prospectuses. The Commission believes that these efforts represent a significant step toward enhanced communication with investors about fees and charges and that it is appropriate, at this time, to extend these voluntary efforts to the industry as a whole. Commenters are requested to discuss the relative merits of hypothetical illustrations and fee tables in communicating charges to investors in a manner that is clear and understandable and that facilitates comparisons from one policy to another. Fee Table Format. The proposed fee table consists of three separate sections. The first section shows policyholder transaction fees, such as sales loads, surrender charges, and transfer fees. The second section shows annual charges, excluding annual Portfolio Company operating expenses. The third section shows annual Portfolio Company operating expenses, including management fees, distribution fees, and other expenses. Comment is requested on the proposed organization of the fee table and whether it would facilitate investor understanding of fees and charges. Is some other organization preferable? Should registrants have greater flexibility to organize the presentation of charges? For each charge, the proposed table would use a four-column format to require a registrant to identify the charge, when the charge is deducted, the amount of the charge, and whether the charge is deducted from all policies or only certain policies. This format differs from that of the fee tables in Form N-1A and Form N-4, which simply require identification of the charge, with a parenthetical statement of the basis on which it is imposed, and specification of the amount of the charge. The proposed format is intended to recognize the complexity of variable life insurance charges, help investors to locate information about charges readily, and provide flexibility to registrants to describe policy charges completely. The ``Amount Deducted'' column, for example, will provide an opportunity for registrants to describe the level of a particular charge and the basis on which it is deducted, e.g., percentage of premiums, cost per $1,000 of face amount, percentage of average daily net assets. The ``Policies from Which Charge is Deducted'' column will permit registrants to identify clearly charges that apply to all policies and those that do not, e.g., charges that apply only to policyholders with a certain account value or that elect a particular death benefit option or optional rider. The Commission requests comment on the four-column format of the table. Should the information required by each of the columns be included in a variable life fee table? Is the four-column format the best means for providing this information or are there better ways for communicating this information to investors? Fee Table Requirements. The proposed fee table would require registrants to disclose all fees and charges, whether or not a specific caption is provided for a charge in the proposed fee table.\43\ The Commission believes that complete disclosure of fees and charges is appropriate. At the same time, the Commission is concerned that disclosure of fees and charges that apply to a very small proportion of policyholders could potentially overwhelm investors with information of limited relevance. The Commission therefore requests comment on whether there should be any limitations on the charges required to be disclosed in the fee table. For example, should charges be disclosed only if they apply to some minimum number or percentage of policyholders? Should all charges for optional riders, e.g., accidental death benefit, children's insurance, or guaranteed insurability, be disclosed? Should the instructions provide additional guidance on the fees that are required to be disclosed? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \43\ Instructions 2(c) and 3(e) to proposed Item 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Disclosure of the maximum charge for each item is required unless a specific instruction directs otherwise.\44\ For cost of insurance, registrants are required to disclose the minimum and maximum charges. Cost of insurance generally is a significant expense item for variable life insurance policyholders.\45\ For that reason, the Commission believes that it is important for investors to receive information about the level of this charge. The Commission recognizes, however, that this charge varies from policyholder to policyholder, based on individual characteristics such as age, sex, and risk classification, so that the charge does not readily lend itself to quantification in a table that applies to all policyholders. The Commission has proposed disclosure of the range of this charge, which could be accompanied by brief explanatory material, such as the factors that affect the level of the charge. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \44\ Instruction 1(e) to proposed Item 3. \45\ See Blease, Costs Count: A Best's Policy Reports Survey Examines the Costs Incurred with the Life Insurance Portion of Variable Universal Life Policies, BEST'S REVIEW--LIFE-HEALTH INSURANCE EDITION, Jan. 1997, at 37. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on the possible approaches to disclosure of the cost of insurance, including the range of the charge, the maximum charge, the average charge for existing policyholders, the level of the charge for a policyholder with characteristics that are fairly representative of purchasers of the policy, and line item narrative disclosure that the charge is imposed and the factors on which it is based. Commenters also are requested to address whether charges other than the cost of insurance may be quantified in the manner that would be required by the proposed fee table. If a registrant invests in multiple Portfolio Companies, the proposed fee table would require disclosure of the range of expenses for all of the Portfolio Companies.\46\ This approach is different from Form N-4, which requires separate disclosure of the expenses of each Portfolio Company.\47\ Because variable life fees and charges are complex, and because policies frequently offer 10 or more Portfolio Companies, the Commission believes that investors could be overwhelmed by information of limited relevance if the fees and charges for each Portfolio Company were separately stated in the fee table.\48\ The Commission requests comment on how Portfolio Company fees and charges should be disclosed in Form N-6. Should a range be used, as proposed; should the fees and charges for each [[Page 13994]] Portfolio Company be separately stated; or should some other approach be adopted? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \46\ Instruction 4(b) to proposed Item 3. Portfolio Company operating expenses would be required to be disclosed before expense reimbursements and fee waiver arrangements. Registrants would be permitted to disclose expenses after reimbursement or waiver in a footnote. See Instructions 4(f)(i) and (g) to proposed Item 3. This approach mirrors the approach recently adopted by the Commission in Form N-1A. Item 3 of Form N-1A; 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; 1997 Form N-1A Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 10908. \47\ Item 3 of Form N-4; Investment Company Act Release No. 16482 (July 15, 1988) [53 FR 27872, 27873-74] (``N-4 Fee Table Proposing Release''). \48\ This is less of a concern in the case of Form N-4 because the simpler, more uniform nature of variable annuity charges results in a less complex fee table. The Commission notes, however, that, in recent years, the number of investment options that is typically available in variable annuity contracts has expanded. See O'Brian and Fitzsimmons, Variable Annuities Put More Eggs In The Basket, THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, Sept. 29, 1997, at C22. For that reason, the Commission expects to reconsider the appropriate disclosure of Portfolio Company fees and charges in a variable annuity prospectus as part of a broader consideration of ways to improve communication of information to variable annuity investors. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Form N-1A does not require a mutual fund that offers its shares exclusively as investment options for variable annuity and variable life insurance contracts to include the fee table in its prospectus.\49\ The Commission intends to amend Form N-1A to require the prospectus of a mutual fund that offers its shares as investment options for variable life insurance policies to include a fee table if the Form N-6, as adopted, does not require separate disclosure of the operating expenses of each Portfolio Company. This would ensure that variable life insurance investors have access to complete information about Portfolio Company fees and expenses. The Commission requests comment on whether the exemption from the fee table requirement in Form N-1A should be eliminated for mutual funds that offer their shares as investment options for variable life insurance policies. The Commission also requests comment on whether the exemption from the fee table requirement in Form N-1A should be eliminated for mutual funds that offer their shares as investment options for variable annuity contracts if the exemption is eliminated for mutual funds that offer their shares as investment options for variable life insurance policies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \49\ Item 3 of Form N-1A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Fee Table Example. Proposed Item 3 would not require an example of the expenses that would be incurred by an investor over specified periods. This is different from the fee tables of Form N-1A and Form N- 4, both of which require such an example.\50\ Because of the individualized nature of fees and charges associated with variable life insurance, particularly the cost of insurance, the Commission believes that it would be difficult to design a single example or small number of examples that would provide a useful comparison tool for investors considering different variable life insurance policies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \50\ Item 3 of Form N-1A; Item 3(a) of Form N-4. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In amending Form N-1A, the Commission today is reiterating its belief that the fee table example provides useful information that helps a typical mutual fund investor understand and compare the expenses of different funds.\51\ The Commission concluded that expressing expense amounts solely as a percentage, as is done in the fee table, may not give the average mutual fund investor enough information to assess the likely effect of a fund's expenses on an investment in the fund. Mutual fund fees, which typically are less individualized than the fees of variable life insurance policies, may be easier to reflect in an example that has broad application. The Commission requests comment on whether a fee table example should be required by Form N-6 and, if so, what should be required by the example. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \51\ 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4. Item 4--General Description of Registrant, Depositor, and Portfolio Companies Proposed Item 4 would require a concise discussion of the organization and operation of the registrant, including the name and address of the depositor and a brief description of the registrant. This requirement is similar to, but more streamlined than, Item 5 of Form N-4. For example, Item 5 of Form N-4 requires registrants to disclose the general nature of the depositor's business, the date and form of organization of the depositor and the state in which it is organized, the name of any ultimate controlling person of the depositor and the general nature of its business, and the date and form of organization of the registrant and its classification under the Investment Company Act. Proposed Form N-6 would include this information in the SAI because it is technical information that does not appear to be essential to an investor when evaluating a particular variable life insurance policy or comparing different variable life insurance policies.\52\ The Commission requests comment on appropriate disclosure of matters relating to the general description of the registrant and depositor. For example, is any information omitted from proposed Item 4 that is essential to an investment decision? Is any information included in Item 4 that is not essential to an investment decision? --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \52\ Proposed Item 16. Cf. 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7 (moves to SAI disclosure about a fund's form and date of organization and state of incorporation). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Item 4 also would require that the prospectus briefly describe each Portfolio Company, including (i) its name; (ii) its type (e.g., money market fund, bond fund, balanced fund) or a brief statement concerning its investment objectives; and (iii) its investment adviser and any sub-adviser. Registrants would be required to state how investors may obtain a prospectus and, if available, a profile for the Portfolio Companies. Item 4 also would require a discussion of the rights of policyholders to instruct the depositor on the voting of Portfolio Company shares. Over time, many registrants have included the investment objectives of Portfolio Companies along with additional information about the investment advisers and the risks associated with the Portfolio Companies in variable life prospectuses, as well as in the Portfolio Company prospectuses. The Commission believes that including detailed information about Portfolio Companies in a variable life prospectus is redundant and conflicts with the Commission's efforts to eliminate prospectus clutter that tends to obscure information that could help an investor make a decision about purchasing a variable life insurance policy.\53\ Instruction 2 therefore would clarify that detailed Portfolio Company information is not required in the variable life insurance prospectus. In addition, if a Portfolio Company's name describes its type, the prospectus would not be required to include the Portfolio Company's type or a statement concerning its investment objectives.\54\ Commenters are asked to address whether proposed Item 4 requires sufficient information about Portfolio Companies or whether additional information should be included. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \53\ See, e.g., 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; 1997 Form N-1A Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 10900. \54\ Cf. Cova Financial Services Life Ins. Co. (pub. avail. Apr. 15, 1996) (clarifying that variable annuity separate account prospectuses need not include detailed information about Portfolio Companies). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5. Item 5--Charges Proposed Item 5 would require registrants to describe briefly all charges deducted from premiums, cash value, assets of the registrant, or any other source. These charges include sales loads, premium and other taxes, administrative and transaction charges, risk charges, contract loan charges, cost of insurance, and rider charges. Registrants would be required to indicate the source from which each charge will be deducted, and specify the amount of the charge as a percentage or dollar figure and the frequency of its deduction. Registrants also would be required to identify the recipient of any amount deducted and the consideration provided for any charge, and explain the extent to which the charge can be modified. The cost of insurance charge represents a significant expense associated with a variable life insurance policy. Instruction 2 to Item 5(a) would require a registrant to identify the factors upon which the cost of insurance [[Page 13995]] charge will be based, including the insurer's amount at risk and the expected longevity of the insureds. A registrant would be required to identify the factors reflected in the rate scale, and specify whether the mortality charges guaranteed in the contracts differ from the current charges. A registrant also would be required to identify the factors that affect the amount at risk, including investment performance, payment of premiums, and charges. If the insurer intends to use simplified underwriting or other underwriting methods that would cause healthy individuals to pay higher cost of insurance charges than they would pay if the insurance company used conventional underwriting methods, a registrant would be required to state that the cost of insurance charges are higher for healthy individuals when this method of underwriting is used. Proposed Item 5 also would require registrants to state that there are charges deducted from and expenses paid out of the assets of the Portfolio Companies that are described in the prospectuses for those companies and to disclose, if applicable, that charges will be deducted for incidental insurance benefits offered with the policy. The item also would require a statement about the registrant's expenses. If the organizational expenses of the registrant are to be paid out of its assets, the registrant would be required to disclose, if applicable, how the expenses will be amortized and the period of amortization. 6. Item 6--General Description of Contracts Proposed Item 6 would require registrants to identify all persons who have material rights under the variable life insurance policies and the nature of those rights. The item also would require a brief description of any provisions for allocation of premiums among sub- accounts of the registrant, transfer of cash value between sub- accounts, and conversion or exchange of policies for other life insurance or annuity contracts. The item also would require a brief description of the changes that can be made in the policies or the operations of the registrant by the registrant or its depositor, including (i) why a change may be made, (ii) who must approve any change, and (iii) who must be notified of any change. The instruction to Proposed Item 6(c) specifically restricts the information that must be provided to changes that would be material to a purchaser of the policies, such as a reservation of the right to deregister the registrant under the Investment Company Act. The item would require a registrant to identify any other material incidental benefits in the policies. Finally, the item would require disclosure of any limitations on the class of purchasers to whom the policies are being offered. 7. Item 7--Premiums Proposed Item 7 would require registrants to describe how to purchase a variable life insurance policy and the provisions of the policy relating to premiums. Registrants would be required to disclose the minimum initial and subsequent premiums required, any limits on the amount and frequency of premiums that will be accepted, how long investors must continue to pay premiums, and whether investors can prevent a policy from lapsing by paying a certain level of premiums. The item also would require registrants to discuss any circumstances in which (i) premiums may be required to prevent lapse and how the amount of additional premiums will be determined; (ii) a policy will not lapse if an investor does not pay a required premium; (iii) an investor may pay more in premiums than the policy requires; and (iv) the level of a policy's required premiums may change, and, if so, how the amount of the change will be determined. The item also would require disclosure of the factors that determine the amount of any required premiums, such as face amount, death benefit option, and charges and expenses. The item would require registrants to identify the premium payment plans available. Registrants would be required to include the available payment frequencies, payment mechanisms such as payroll deduction plans and preauthorized checking arrangements, and any special billing arrangements. Registrants would be required to indicate whether the premium payment plan or schedule may be changed. Registrants also would be required to explain the policy's provisions regarding premium due dates and how any grace period operates. The item would require registrants to describe any circumstances under which required premiums may be paid by means of an automatic premium loan. Finally, proposed Item 7 would require registrants to describe when sub-account assets are valued and when required premiums and additional premiums are credited to cash value. Registrants would be required to explain the basis on which premiums are credited. Registrants would be instructed to describe where premiums are held during any time period (e.g., a ``free-look'' period) in which the crediting of premiums to sub-accounts is delayed. 8. Item 8--Death Benefits and Contract Values Proposed Item 8 would require registrants to describe briefly the death benefits available under the variable life insurance policy. The prospectus would be required to disclose when insurance coverage is effective, when the death benefit is calculated and payable, how the death benefit is calculated, what forms of death benefit are available, who may choose the form of death benefit and how, what the default death benefit is, and whether the policy guarantees a minimum death benefit. Registrants also would be required to describe if and how a policyholder may increase or decrease the face amount. The item also would require registrants to explain how the investment performance of the Portfolio Companies and expenses and charges affect policy values and death benefits. 9. Item 9--Surrenders, Partial Surrenders, and Partial Withdrawals Proposed Item 9 would require registrants to describe briefly how a policyholder may surrender a policy. Registrants would be required to disclose any limits on the ability to surrender, how surrender proceeds are calculated, and when proceeds are payable. The item also would require registrants to disclose whether and under what circumstances partial surrenders and partial withdrawals are available under a policy, including the minimum and maximum amounts that may be surrendered or withdrawn and any limits on the availability of partial surrenders or partial withdrawals. The item also would require registrants to describe whether partial surrenders or partial withdrawals will affect a policy's cash value or death benefit, whether any charges will apply, and the manner in which partial surrenders and partial withdrawals will be allocated among sub-accounts. Finally, the item would require registrants to describe briefly any revocation rights (e.g., free-look provisions). Registrants would be required to describe how the amount refunded is determined, the method for crediting earnings to premiums during the free-look period, and whether investment options are limited during the free-look period (e.g., premiums must be allocated to the money market sub-account). 10. Item 10--Loans Proposed Item 10 would require registrants to describe the policy [[Page 13996]] provisions governing loans of a policy's cash value and any limits on loan availability. Registrants would be required to state the amount of interest charged on a loan and the amount of interest credited to the policy in connection with the loan. A description of loan procedures would be required, including how and when amounts borrowed are transferred out of the registrant and how and when amounts repaid are credited to the registrant. A registrant would be required to explain briefly that amounts borrowed do not participate in the registrant's investment experience and that loans can affect the policy's cash value and death benefit regardless of whether the loan is repaid. Registrants also would be required to explain that the cash surrender value and the proceeds payable on death will be reduced by the amount of any outstanding loan plus accrued interest. 11. Item 11--Lapse and Reinstatement Proposed Item 11 would require registrants to state when a policy will lapse and under what circumstances a lapsed policy may be reinstated. Registrants would be required to explain any requirements for reinstatement, including payments of charges and outstanding loans and presentation of evidence of insurability. Registrants also would be required to describe briefly any lapse options available, indicate whether any of those options is subject to limits on availability, and indicate which options will not apply unless elected and which options are default options. Registrants would be required to describe briefly the factors that will determine the amount of insurance coverage provided under the available lapse options. Registrants would be required to describe concisely how the cash value, surrender value, and death benefit will be determined upon lapse. 12. Item 12--Taxes Proposed Item 12 would require registrants to describe the material tax consequences to the policyholder and beneficiary of buying, holding, exchanging, or exercising rights under the policy. Registrants would be required to discuss the taxation of death benefit proceeds, periodic and non-periodic withdrawals, loans, and any other distribution that may be received under the policy, as well as tax benefits accorded the policy. Proposed Item 12 is intended to focus tax disclosure on the likely tax consequences to policyholders of purchasing a variable life insurance policy. The proposal is intended to elicit disclosure that is not overly lengthy or technical and that does not use jargon that is difficult for the average or typical investor to understand. 13. Item 13--Legal Proceedings Proposed Item 13 would require a registrant to describe any material pending legal proceedings, other than ordinary routine litigation incidental to the business, to which the registrant, the registrant's principal underwriter, or the depositor is a party. Registrants also would be required to include information as to legal proceedings contemplated by a governmental authority. For purposes of this item, legal proceedings are material only to the extent that they are likely to have a material adverse effect on the registrant, the ability of the principal underwriter to perform its contract with the registrant, or the ability of the depositor to perform its obligations under the policies. Proposed Item 13 would require information comparable to that required by Form N-1A and Commission forms that apply to other issuers.\55\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \55\ See Item 6(a)(3) of Form N-1A; Item 12 of Form N-2 [17 CFR 274.11a-1] (closed-end investment companies); Item 103 of Regulation S-K [17 CFR 229.103] (non-investment company issuers). See also Investment Company Act Release No. 19155 (Nov. 30, 1992) [57 FR 56862] (modifying Form N-2 to conform to Item 103). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 14. Item 14--Financial Statements Proposed Form N-6, like Form N-4, would not require financial statements of the registrant and the depositor to be included in the prospectus. Item 14, however, would require the registrant to state in the prospectus where the financial statements may be found and explain how any financial statements not in the SAI may be obtained. This requirement is similar to Item 4(c) of Form N-4. Unlike Form N-4 and Form N-1A, proposed Form N-6 would not require a registrant to include summary financial information in its prospectus.\56\ Form N-4 requires a registrant to disclose, for the last ten fiscal years and for each sub-account, the accumulation unit value at the beginning and end of each period and the number of accumulation units outstanding at the end of each period. For variable annuity contracts, the change in accumulation unit value provides a measure of performance of the registrant's sub-accounts. Because of the individual nature of variable life insurance charges, such as the cost of insurance, there does not appear to be a comparable measure of performance that is applicable to all holders of a particular variable life insurance policy.\57\ Each Portfolio Company, however, would continue to provide its own summary financial information in its prospectus.\58\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \56\ See Item 4(a) of Form N-4; Item 9 of Form N-1A. \57\ See discussion of performance data infra Section II.C.2. \58\ See Item 9 of Form N-1A. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on the appropriate location for registrant and depositor financial statements. The Commission also requests comment on whether variable life insurance registrants should be required to include summary financial information in their prospectuses. Can sub-account performance be meaningfully measured in a manner that is applicable to all holders of a particular variable life insurance policy, e.g., by reflecting Portfolio Company fees and expenses and any other charges that are uniformly applied to all policyholders? Should summary financial information of the Portfolio Companies be required to be included in the Form N-6 prospectus? C. Part B--Statement of Additional Information The SAI would provide a more detailed discussion of matters described in the prospectus as well as additional information about a fund.\59\ Many of the items are similar to the items in Part B of Forms N-4 and N-1A and therefore are not discussed in this release. Three items, however, merit separate attention. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \59\ See proposed General Instruction C.2.(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. Item 24--Financial Statements The financial statements of the registrant required by proposed Item 24 are the same as the financial statements required by Item 23 of Form N-4. The full financial statements of the registrant would be in the SAI. The only financial information for the depositor required to be in the SAI would be comparative balance sheets for the last two fiscal years and, in certain cases, a more current interim balance sheet. As with Form N-4, the other financial statements of the depositor (e.g., statement of operations and statement of changes) would be required to be included in the registration statement, but could be included in Part C rather than the SAI. These financial statements would be required to be made available to investors upon request, free of charge. The Commission believes that this would allow a shorter SAI, while still providing investors with adequate information about the solvency of the depositor. [[Page 13997]] Instruction 1 to proposed Item 24, like Instruction 1 to Item 23 of Form N-4, would provide that a depositor's financial statements may be prepared in accordance with statutory requirements if the depositor would not have to prepare financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (``GAAP'') except for use in a registration statement filed on Form N-3, N-4, or N-6.\60\ In recent years, increasing numbers of depositors have elected to prepare financial statements in accordance with GAAP for use in business transactions.\61\ In addition, when a depositor's parent company prepares financial statements on a GAAP basis, the depositor typically prepares either partial GAAP financial statements or a GAAP reporting package to be used by the parent in its consolidated financial statements. In these circumstances, Form N-6 would require full GAAP financial statements of the depositor. In those limited circumstances when GAAP financial statements are not prepared for either the depositor or its parent, or the depositor's accounts are immaterial to its parent's consolidated financial statements and, therefore, neither partial GAAP financial statements nor a GAAP reporting package is prepared by the depositor, statutory financial statements could be used in Form N-6. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \60\ GAAP is an accounting term that encompasses the conventions, rules, and practices that define accepted accounting at a particular time issued by various authoritative bodies including the Financial Accounting Standards Board (``FASB'') and the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants (``AICPA''). See Codification of Financial Reporting Policies of the SEC, Section 101. Financial statements prepared in accordance with statutory requirements, which may vary from state to state, differ from those prepared in accordance with GAAP. Statutory requirements are the basis of accounting that insurance companies use to comply with the financial reporting requirements of state insurance regulations. Regulation S-X permits financial statements for mutual life insurance companies and wholly owned stock insurance company subsidiaries of mutual life insurance companies to be prepared in accordance with statutory requirements, except when the applicable registration forms specifically provide otherwise. 17 CFR 210.1- 01(a); 17 CFR 210.7-02(b). \61\ Prior to the 1993 issuance of Interpretation 40 (``IN 40'') by FASB, many mutual life insurance companies prepared financial statements solely on a statutory basis. The FASB became aware that financial statements prepared in accordance with statutory accounting practices were often described as having been prepared in accordance with GAAP. IN 40 clarified that companies, including mutual life insurance companies, that issue financial statements described as prepared in conformity with GAAP must apply all applicable authoritative accounting pronouncements in preparing those statements. FASB Interpretation No. 40, Applicability of Generally Accepted Accounting Principles to Mutual Life Insurance and Other Enterprises (Apr. 1993). See also Financial Accounting Standards Board, Statement on Financial Accounting Standards No. 120, Accounting and Reporting by Mutual Life Insurance Enterprises and by Insurance Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Participation Contracts (Jan. 1995) (``SFAS 120'') (deferring the effective date of IN 40 and stating that mutual life insurance companies that prepare financial statements based on statutory accounting practices that differ from GAAP and distribute those financial statements to regulators should not describe the financial statements as prepared in accordance with GAAP). As a result of SFAS 120, if insurance company financial statements are not prepared in accordance with GAAP, the financial statements must include either an adverse or qualified audit opinion as to conformity with GAAP. Codification on Statements on Auditing Standards, AU Section 544 (AICPA). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Instruction 3 to proposed Item 24, like Instruction 3 to Item 23 of Form N-4, would provide that the financial statements of the depositor need not be more current than as of the end of the most recent fiscal year of the depositor. In addition, Instruction 3 would provide that if the anticipated effective date of a registration statement is within 90 days of the end of the depositor's fiscal year and audited financial statements for the fiscal year are unavailable, the financial statements of the depositor need not be more current than the close of the third quarter of the previous fiscal year.\62\ This instruction would extend to depositors of variable life insurance separate accounts the relief that is generally provided by Regulation S-X when the anticipated effective date of a filing falls within 46 to 90 days of the end of a registrant's fiscal year.\63\ The instruction codifies relief that the Commission staff has informally provided to variable annuity and variable life insurance registrants. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \62\ Third quarter financial statements would not need to be audited in these circumstances. Rule 10-01(a)(1) of Regulation S-X [17 CFR 210.10-01]. \63\ See Rule 3-12(b) of Regulation S-X [17 CFR 210.3-12] (when anticipated effective date of filing falls within 90 days subsequent to the fiscal year, the filing need not include financial statements more current than as of the end of the third fiscal quarter, unless the audited financial statements of such fiscal year are available, or the anticipated effective date falls after 45 days subsequent to the end of the fiscal year and the registrant does not meet the conditions of Rule 3-01(c)). The relief provided in Rule 3-12(b) is not available to mutual insurance companies, when the anticipated effective date falls within 46 to 90 days subsequent to the fiscal year end, because those companies do not file reports pursuant to section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, which is a condition of Rule 3-01(c). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on the requirements concerning the use of financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP and financial statements prepared in accordance with statutory requirements. The Commission also requests comment on the requirements concerning the age of financial statements. 2. Item 25--Performance Data Proposed Item 25 would require the registrant to include in the SAI an explanation of how it calculates performance data used in advertising, including how charges are reflected in the data. Registrants also would be required to provide a quotation of performance for each sub-account for which performance data is advertised. Proposed Form N-6 would not require disclosure of any historical performance information. The Commission believes that, at the present time, no method of measuring variable life insurance performance has been devised that is useful enough that its disclosure should be required. Variable life insurance performance is difficult to measure because of the complexity of the product and because policy charges and values are linked to individual characteristics of a particular investor. In addition, variable life policies provide cash value and death benefits, and both of these may be affected over time, in different ways, by policy charges and earnings. Three types of performance information are sometimes included in variable life insurance registration statements, but each has the limitations noted. Portfolio Company performance. This measure is net of investment management fees and other Portfolio Company fees and expenses, but unadjusted for fees and expenses imposed on the separate account or individual policyholders. It may be useful as a measure of Portfolio Company performance, but it significantly overstates the performance policyholders will receive after deductions for all charges. Portfolio Company performance adjusted for separate account asset-based charges. This is a hybrid measure that is net of investment management fees, other Portfolio Company fees and expenses, and separate account asset-based charges. This form of performance does not measure either Portfolio Company performance (because of the deduction of separate account asset-based charges) or the performance a policyholder will receive (because of the failure to deduct charges imposed on the individual policyholder). Illustrations of cash values and death benefits. These illustrations are based on actual investment performance of a Portfolio Company and specified assumptions about premiums and the insured individual (e.g., sex, age, rating classification). This form of performance does not have the defects of the other two, because it reflects all of the fees and charges at the Portfolio Company, separate account, and individual policyholder levels. It has very limited usefulness, however, to the many prospective investors whose proposed [[Page 13998]] premium payment patterns and individual characteristics diverge from those assumed. Proposed Form N-6 would not require performance information in the prospectus. Nothing in the proposal, however, would preclude the inclusion of historical performance information, including Portfolio Company performance information, provided that the information is not incomplete, inaccurate, or misleading and does not obscure or impede understanding of the information that is required to be included.\64\ The Commission believes, however, that Portfolio Company performance information is most appropriately included in the Portfolio Company's prospectus, where it can be considered along with the risks of investing in the Portfolio Company.\65\ Registrants should bear this in mind in determining whether it is appropriate to include Portfolio Company performance information in a Form N-6 prospectus. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \64\ Proposed General Instruction C.3.(b). \65\ See 1998 Form N-1A Adopting Release, supra note 7; 1997 Form N-1A Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 10902. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests that commenters discuss the advantages and disadvantages of various forms of variable life insurance performance information. Should any form of historical performance information be required by Form N-6? What forms of performance information should be permitted by Form N-6? Should any types of performance information be prohibited by Form N-6? 3. Item 26--Illustrations Permitted Use of Hypothetical Illustrations. Proposed Item 26 would permit, but not require, registrants to include hypothetical illustrations of a variable life insurance policy in either the prospectus or the SAI. These are tabular presentations of numbers that demonstrate how the cash value, cash surrender value, and death benefit under a policy change over time based on (i) assumed gross rates of return of the Portfolio Companies; and (ii) deduction of fees and charges for a hypothetical policyholder (e.g., a 40-year old, non- smoking male) with a specified policy face amount and premium payment pattern. Currently, variable life insurance prospectuses commonly include hypothetical illustrations using several different gross rates of return (e.g., 0%, 6%, and 12%), two different expense levels (current charges and guaranteed maximum charges), and multiple death benefit options. The Commission believes that hypothetical illustrations can enhance an investor's understanding of the mechanics of a variable life insurance policy. Illustrations of varying rates of investment return, with other elements (e.g., policy face amount, premium payment pattern, expenses, rating classification) held constant, can provide general information about the relationship among death benefits, cash values, and investment returns. Similarly, illustrations reflecting varying expense levels, with other elements held constant, can provide general information about how a policy would perform under different expense scenarios. The Commission believes, however, that there are some limits on the usefulness of hypothetical illustrations. Any particular illustration has limited relevance for most investors, because it is based on a hypothetical investor with unique characteristics of age, sex, rating classification, policy face amount, and premium payments that is different from most investors. Further, it is probably impractical to provide enough hypothetical illustrations in a variable life insurance prospectus to permit comparison shopping among variable life insurance policies by a broad range of investors, each with unique characteristics. Because of the individualized nature of variable life insurance policies and associated charges, comparison of illustrations could show one product to be more advantageous than another, but a change in the assumptions used in the illustrations could have the opposite result. Finally, hypothetical illustrations are fairly extensive tables of numbers that add complexity to a prospectus and can be difficult to understand. In light of the limited nature of hypothetical illustrations and the complexity that they can add to variable life insurance prospectuses, proposed Form N-6 would not require hypothetical illustrations. The Commission believes, however, that hypothetical illustrations can be useful tools to improve investor understanding of a variable life insurance policy when they are presented clearly and in a manner designed to help investors understand both the information presented and the limited nature of that information. For that reason, proposed Form N-6 would give a registrant the flexibility to include hypothetical illustrations in the prospectus or SAI when it believes that they would be helpful to investors. The Commission requests comment on whether hypothetical illustrations should be permitted, required, or prohibited in a variable life insurance prospectus or SAI. Requirements for Hypothetical Illustrations. Proposed Item 26 would impose requirements for any hypothetical illustrations included in the prospectus or SAI. The proposed requirements are not intended to standardize illustrations in order to permit comparison shopping because, as noted above, the Commission believes that this goal may be impractical within the bounds of a prospectus. Rather, the requirements are intended to place reasonable limits on the assumptions that may be used and discourage the presentation of misleading illustrations. Registrants would, however, remain responsible for ensuring that the illustrations are not incomplete, inaccurate, or misleading and do not, because of their nature, quantity, or manner of presentation, obscure or impede understanding of information required to be included.\66\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \66\ Proposed General Instruction C.3.(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Consistent with the Commission's commitment to the principles of plain English, illustrations would be required to be preceded by a clear and concise explanation.\67\ Similarly, headings for the illustrations would be required to contain the information necessary to identify clearly the scenario illustrated, including sex, age, rating classification, premium amount and payment schedule, face amount, and death benefit option.\68\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \67\ Proposed Item 26(a). \68\ Proposed Item 26(b). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Premium amounts used in the illustrations should not be unduly larger or smaller than the actual or expected average policy size, and ages used should be representative of actual or expected policy sales.\69\ The proposal would require that illustrations be shown for the rating classification with the greatest number of outstanding policies.\70\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \69\ Proposed Item 26(c). \70\ Proposed Item 26(d). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Item 26 would require illustrated values to be provided for policy years one through ten, for every five years beyond the tenth policy year, and for the year of policy maturity.\71\ Registrants using illustrations would be required to illustrate death benefits and cash surrender values and could also illustrate cash values. Illustrated values would be determined as of the end of the policy year.\72\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \71\ Proposed Item 26(e). \72\ Proposed Item 26(f). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Item 26 would require registrants to use gross rates of return of 0% and one other rate not exceeding [[Page 13999]] 10%. Additional gross rates of return not greater than 10% would be permitted.\73\ Currently, variable life insurance prospectuses typically use rates of 0%, 6%, and 12% in illustrations.\74\ The Commission believes that the use of two rates of return is necessary to fulfill a basic purpose of illustrations, demonstrating the effect of changing investment returns. The Commission does not believe, however, that it would be helpful to require registrants using illustrations to use more than two rates of return because of the potential for overwhelming investors with excessive quantitative information that is of limited relevance to their particular circumstances. Notwithstanding current practice, which permits illustrations at rates up to 12%, the proposal would cap the maximum permissible rate at 10%. This reflects the Commission's concern that rates above 10% may have a significant tendency to invite unrealistic investor expectations because long-term stock market returns have averaged approximately 10-11% per year and long-term returns on other asset classes have been lower. Moreover, investors may give undue weight to a 12% illustration because they may discount a 0% illustration as unrealistically low. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \73\ Proposed Item 26(g). \74\ The Commission staff has required registrants using illustrations to include a 0% illustration and has prohibited rates greater than 12%. See also NASD Conduct Rules, ``Communications with the Public About Variable Life Insurance and Variable Annuities,'' IM-2210-2(b)(5)(A)(ii) (requiring variable life insurance illustrations used for advertising and sales literature to use a rate of 0% and any other rates not greater than 12%). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission invites comment on the number of rates of return that should be required for registrants using illustrations. The Commission also invites comment on the appropriate minimum and maximum rates to be used for hypothetical illustrations. Proposed Item 26 would require that Portfolio Company management fees and other Portfolio Company charges and expenses be reflected using the arithmetic average of those charges and expenses for all available Portfolio Companies. The average would be based on Portfolio Company charges and expenses incurred during the most recent fiscal year or any materially greater amount expected to be incurred during the current fiscal year.\75\ The Commission requests comment on how Portfolio Company charges and expenses should be reflected in illustrations. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \75\ Proposed Item 26(h). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Proposed Item 26 would require that illustrations reflect both current and guaranteed maximum charges for charges not attributable to the Portfolio Companies. The proposal would require that illustrations reflect all charges deducted under the policy, as well as the timing of those charges.\76\ The Commission believes that requiring illustrations of both current and maximum guaranteed charges would be useful to investors in comparing the interaction of different rates of return and different charge levels. Commenters are requested to address how charges not attributable to the Portfolio Companies should be reflected in illustrations, including whether both current and guaranteed maximum charges should be required. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \76\ Proposed Item 26(i) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Finally, proposed Item 26 would permit additional information to be included in illustrations, provided that it is consistent with the standards of Item 26.\77\ The Commission believes this flexibility is important to permit registrants to design illustrations that are useful to investors. Comment is requested on this approach. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \77\ Proposed Item 26(j). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Commenters are requested to address the proposed requirements for the optional hypothetical illustrations. Is each of these requirements appropriate and, if not, how should it be modified? Should any of the requirements be eliminated or should others be added? Is it possible to standardize hypothetical illustrations in a manner that would facilitate comparison shopping among variable life insurance policies? Commenters who believe that hypothetical illustrations should be required, rather than permitted, also should address the criteria that they believe would be appropriate for required hypothetical illustrations. Hypothetical Illustrations Based on Historical Rates of Return. The Commission also is seeking comment on the use of hypothetical illustrations constructed using historical rates of return for the Portfolio Companies (``hypothetical historical illustrations'') rather than assumed rates of return (e.g., 0% and 10%). Some variable life insurance registrants currently include these illustrations in their prospectuses, although this practice is not widespread. Proposed Form N-6 does not specifically address hypothetical historical illustrations. The Commission has some concerns about the use of hypothetical historical illustrations. Hypothetical historical illustrations share all of the limitations of other hypothetical illustrations. They are of limited relevance to investors having characteristics other than those illustrated, they are not useful for comparison shopping, and they add complexity to the prospectus. Further, hypothetical illustrations that show a pattern of assumed returns, e.g., 0%, 5%, and 10%, can help investors understand how different rates of return affect policy performance. The actual historical rates of return illustrated in hypothetical historical illustrations, however, will not have a pattern and therefore are not useful to an investor attempting to understand how a particular change in rates might affect policy values. In addition, hypothetical historical illustrations are not a useful means for presenting past performance because they depend on the particular hypothetical policyholder, face amount, and premium payment pattern selected.\78\ Hypothetical historical illustrations also tend to invite prospective investors to assume that the cash values and death benefits presented represent the values that they can expect and may be misconstrued as projections. Finally, if a prospectus were to include a hypothetical historical illustration for each Portfolio Company, this could entail many pages of complex data. On the other hand, creating a single hypothetical historical illustration with a composite rate of return earned by all available Portfolio Companies would render the illustration of still more limited relevance to an investor who did not intend to allocate his or her investment in the manner used to determine the composite rate of return. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \78\ See discussion of performance data supra Section II.C.2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on hypothetical historical illustrations and whether they should be required, permitted, or prohibited by Form N-6. If hypothetical historical illustrations should be required or permitted, should the Commission specify any standards for their use? Personalized Illustrations. Personalized illustrations are frequently provided by insurers to prospective variable life insurance investors at the point of sale. These illustrations reflect the investor's particular circumstances, including age, sex, risk classification, proposed face amount, and expected premium payment pattern. The Commission believes that such illustrations can be a highly useful tool for investors. Unlike hypothetical prospectus illustrations, they reflect policy values based on an individual's unique characteristics and therefore can provide more relevant information for a particular investor. Further, personalized illustrations are a [[Page 14000]] potentially useful comparison shopping tool, enabling a particular investor to compare how different variable life insurance policies would operate in the investor's particular circumstances. Proposed Form N-6 does not address personalized illustrations because these are customized for individual investors, delivered at the point of sale, and not susceptible to inclusion in a prospectus. Absent Commission action, insurers may use personalized illustrations in sales literature subject to the antifraud provisions of the federal securities laws and rule 156 under the Securities Act, as long as the sales literature is preceded or accompanied by the prospectus.\79\ The antifraud provisions make it unlawful to use materially misleading sales literature in connection with the purchase or sale of investment company securities. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \79\ Section 17(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77q(a)]; Section 10(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 [15 U.S.C. 78j(b)] and Rule 10b-5 thereunder [17 CFR 240.10b-5]; Rule 156 under the Securities Act [17 CFR 230.156]; Section 34(b) of the Investment Company Act [15 U.S.C. 80a-33(b)]; Section 2(a)(10)(a) of the Securities Act [15 U.S.C. 77b(a)(10)(a)]. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Although personalized illustrations do not appear in a variable life insurance prospectus, these illustrations can be a very important part of the information communicated to prospective variable life insurance investors. For that reason, the Commission is requesting comment on personalized illustrations. Should the prospectus be required to state whether or not personalized illustrations are available? Should the Commission require variable life insurance registrants to deliver personalized illustrations to prospective investors? If not, should the Commission nonetheless prescribe requirements governing personalized illustrations for registrants that elect to use them? What, if any, requirements should the Commission prescribe for registrants using personalized illustrations? Should they be the same criteria as those that apply to hypothetical illustrations in proposed Form N-6, or should there be other requirements? The Commission also seeks comment regarding the use of Portfolio Company historical rates of return in personalized illustrations. Should the Commission address this area and, if so, how? The Commission understands that some insurers are using personalized illustrations that reflect assumed rates of return, together with the fees and charges of a single Portfolio Company rather than the arithmetic average of fees and charges for all available Portfolio Companies. In some cases, the chosen Portfolio Company may have fees and charges that are lower than the arithmetic average for all available Portfolio Companies. For example, personalized illustrations might be based on the relatively low expenses of a money market fund. As discussed above, proposed Form N-6 would require that hypothetical prospectus illustrations reflect the arithmetic average of fees and charges for all available Portfolio Companies. The proposal incorporates the Commission's view that it may be misleading to market a variable life insurance policy based on illustrations that reflect assumed rates of return and the fees and charges of a single Portfolio Company when those fees and charges are less than the arithmetic average of fees and charges for all available Portfolio Companies. For that reason, the Commission is concerned about the practice of using a single Portfolio Company's fees and charges in personalized illustrations. The Commission has directed its examinations staff to give heightened scrutiny to this issue in inspections of variable life insurance registrants. The Commission also has discussed this matter with the staff of the National Association of Securities Dealers Regulation, Inc., (``NASD Regulation'') and requested that the NASD Regulation staff consider this issue in its review of variable life insurance sales literature. Comment is requested on whether Form N-6 should address the use of personalized illustrations that reflect the fees and charges of a single available Portfolio Company. D. Part C--Other Information Part C of proposed Form N-6 would contain information in support of a variable life insurance registration statement that is not included in the prospectus or the SAI. Part C of proposed Form N-6 is based on Part C of Form N-4 and Form N-1A, modified as appropriate to variable life insurance. Certain exhibits required under proposed Item 27; proposed Item 34, the fee representation; and an undertaking required by Form N-4 but not proposed Form N-6 merit separate attention. 1. Item 27--Exhibits If illustrations are included in the registration statement as permitted by proposed Item 26, an opinion of an actuarial officer of the depositor would be required by Item 27(l). The actuarial opinion would be required to indicate that: (i) The values illustrated are consistent with the provisions of the policy and the depositor's administrative procedures; (ii) the rate structure of the policy, and the assumptions selected for the illustrations, do not result in an illustration of the relationship between premiums and benefits that is materially more favorable than for a substantial majority of other prospective policyholders; and (iii) the illustrations are based on a commonly used rating classification and premium amounts and ages appropriate for the markets in which the policy is sold. Proposed Item 27(l) would require the opinion to indicate that the rate structure and selected assumptions do not, in fact, have certain results. As an alternative, the Commission considered whether the actuary should be required to opine only that the rate structure and the selected assumptions were not intended or designed to have certain results. The Commission rejected the ``intent or design'' test because it would permit illustrations that, in fact, distort the relationship between premiums and benefits for a policy. Comment is requested on the actuarial opinion requirement, including the ``in fact'' and ``intent or design'' tests and other tests that could be used. Commenters are requested to address the ``substantial majority of other prospective policyholders'' standard in the second prong of the opinion. Should this standard be stricter (e.g., all policyholders) or less strict (e.g., majority of policyholders)? Proposed Item 27(m) would require registrants that include illustrations in their registration statements to provide one sample calculation for each item illustrated, showing how the illustrated values for the fifth policy year have been calculated. The calculation would be required to demonstrate how the annual investment returns of the sub-accounts were derived from the hypothetical gross rates of return, how charges against sub-account assets were deducted from the returns of the sub-accounts, and how the periodic deductions for policy charges were made. Finally, the exhibit would be required to describe how the calculation would differ for other years. Consistent with the approach previously announced by the Commission staff in connection with Form N-4, proposed Form N-6 would not require submission of a financial data schedule meeting the requirements of rule 483 under the Securities Act.\80\ In addition, the staff currently does not require financial data schedules in connection with filings on Form S-6 by [[Page 14001]] separate accounts offering variable life insurance policies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \80\ Sec Edgar News, Third Quarter 1996, at 3. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2. Item 34--Fee Representation NSMIA amended Sections 26 and 27 of the Investment Company Act, replacing specific limits on the amount, type, and timing of charges that applied to variable insurance contracts with a requirement that aggregate charges be reasonable.\81\ Section 26(e) of the Investment Company Act, added by NSMIA, requires that fees and charges deducted under variable insurance contracts, in the aggregate, be reasonable in relation to the services rendered, the expenses expected to be incurred, and the risks assumed by the insurance company. Section 26(e) also requires insurance companies to represent in variable insurance registration statements that the reasonableness standard of Section 26(e) is satisfied. Proposed Item 34 requests the representation required by Section 26(e). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \81\ See Senate Report, supra note 39, at 22; House Report, supra note 39, at 12, 17. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3. Undertaking to Update Prospectus Section 10(a)(3) of the Securities Act requires an issuer that is engaging in a continuous offering to update the information in its registration statement, so that the information is not more than 16 months old.\82\ Form N-4 requires a separate account registered as a unit investment trust that offers variable annuity contracts to include in Part C of its registration statement an undertaking to maintain a current prospectus for so long as payments may be accepted under the contracts.\83\ Proposed Form N-6 would not require a similar undertaking. This reflects the Commission's view that issuers of variable life insurance policies, like issuers of variable annuity contracts, are required by Section 10(a)(3) of the Securities Act to maintain a current prospectus for so long as payments may be accepted under the policies, regardless of whether new policies are being sold. The Commission believes that it is unnecessary to include in proposed Form N-6 a requirement for an undertaking similar to that in Form N-4, because this undertaking simply restates an issuer's obligation under the Securities Act. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \82\ 15 U.S.C. 77j(a)(3). \83\ Item 32(a) of Form N-4. See also N-4 Adopting Release, supra note 7, at 26155. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- E. Technical Rule Amendments The Commission is proposing technical amendments to several rules under the Securities Act and Investment Company Act to accommodate proposed Form N-6. The Commission is proposing to amend rules 134b, 430, 430A, 495, 496, and 497 under the Securities Act and rules 8b-11 and 8b-12 under the Investment Company Act to add Form N-6 to the list of forms referenced in those rules.\84\ The Commission also is proposing new rules prescribing the use of Form N-6 to register insurance company separate accounts that are registered as unit investment trusts and that offer variable life insurance policies under the Investment Company Act and to register their securities under the Securities Act.\85\ Finally, the Commission proposes to amend Form N- 8B-2 to clarify that Form N-8B-2 is not the proper form for Investment Company Act registration of insurance company separate accounts registered as unit investment trusts.\86\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \84\ 17 CFR 230.134b, 230.430, 230.430A, 230.495, 230.496, and 230.497; 17 CFR 270.8b-11 and 270.8b-12. \85\ Proposed 17 CFR 239.17c; Proposed 17 CFR 274.11d. \86\ See proposed amendments to Form N-8B-2 and 17 CFR 274.12 (prescribing Form N-8B-2). The Commission is not proposing to amend Form S-6 or 17 CFR 239.16 (prescribing Form S-6) because the form and the rule state that Form S-6 is to be used to register the securities of unit investment trusts registered on Form N-8B-2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- F. Transition Period If the Commission adopts proposed Form N-6, it would replace current Forms S-6 and N-8B-2 for registration of unit investment trust separate accounts funding variable life insurance policies. The Commission expects to provide for a transition period after the effective date of Form N-6 to give registrants sufficient time to update their registration statements or to prepare new registration statements on Form N-6. All new registration statements and post- effective amendments that are annual updates to effective registration statements filed 6 months after the effective date of Form N-6 would be required to comply with its requirements. The final compliance date for filing amendments to effective registration statements to conform with the Form N-6 requirements would be 18 months after the effective date of the form. At its option, a registrant could comply with the requirements of Form N-6 at any time after the effective date of the form. The Commission requests comment on the proposed transition period. G. Form N-1 The Commission previously prescribed Form N-1 as the registration form to be used by open-end management investment companies that are separate accounts of insurance companies for registering under the Investment Company Act and for registering their securities under the Securities Act.\87\ In 1985, Form N-1 was superseded by Form N-3 for open-end management investment companies that are separate accounts of insurance companies issuing variable annuity contracts.\88\ Currently, Form N-1 would be used only by an open-end management investment company that is a separate account of an insurance company offering variable life insurance policies.\89\ Today, virtually all separate accounts issuing variable life insurance policies are organized as unit investment trusts. For that reason, few, if any, registrants continue to use Form N-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \87\ 17 CFR 274.11; General Instruction A of Form N-1; Investment Company Act Release No. 14084 [49 FR 32058] (Aug. 7, 1984). \88\ 17 CFR 274.11b; N-4 Adopting Release, supra note 7, at 26156; N-4 Proposing Release, supra note 7, at 620. \89\ When Form N-3 was implemented, separate accounts funding variable annuity contracts were permitted to continue to use Form N- 1 if they no longer offered the contracts to new purchasers. N-4 Adopting Release, supra note 7 , at 26156. The Commission is not aware of any such variable annuity registrants that continue to use Form N-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The Commission requests comment on whether Form N-1 should be rescinded as obsolete and whether there is any continuing need for the form. Would any registrants, including any variable annuity or variable life registrants no longer offering contracts to new purchasers and using Form N-1, be affected by the rescission of Form N-1? If Form N-1 is rescinded, should the Commission prescribe another registration form for use by open-end management investment companies that are separate accounts of insurance companies issuing variable life insurance policies? If so, what form should be used for this purpose and what changes should be made to the suggested form to adapt it for this category of registrants? III. General Request for Comments The Commission requests that any interested persons submit comments on the proposed Form N-6, suggest changes (including changes to related provisions of rules and forms that the Commission is not proposing to amend), or submit comments on other matters that might affect the proposed form. Commenters suggesting alternative approaches are encouraged to submit proposed rule or form text. For purposes of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act of 1996 [5 U.S.C. 801 et seq.], the Commission also is requesting information regarding the [[Page 14002]] potential effect of proposed Form N-6 on the economy on an annual basis. Commenters should provide empirical data to support their views. IV. Paperwork Reduction Act Proposed Form N-6 contains ``collection of information'' requirements within the meaning of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (``Paperwork Reduction Act'') [44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.], and the Commission has submitted the amendments to the Office of Management and Budget (``OMB'') for review in accordance with 44 U.S.C. 3507(d) and 5 CFR 1320.11. The title for the collection of information is ``Form N-6 Under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and the Securities Act of 1933, Registration Statement of Variable Life Insurance Separate Accounts Registered as Unit Investment Trusts.'' A registration statement on proposed Form N-6 would be required to contain information the Commission has determined to be necessary or appropriate in the public interest or for the protection of investors. Forms S-6 and N-8B-2 were not designed for variable life insurance registrants and do not reflect fundamental improvements that the Commission has made to other investment company registration forms, including Forms N-1A and N-4, which facilitate clearer and more concise disclosure. If adopted, proposed Form N-6 would: Eliminate requirements in the current registration forms that are not relevant to variable life insurance and include items that are specifically addressed to variable life insurance; Streamline variable life prospectus disclosure by adopting a two-part format consisting of a simplified prospectus, designed to contain essential information, and an SAI, containing more extensive information that investors could obtain upon request; and Provide variable life insurance separate accounts a single, integrated form for Investment Company Act and Securities Act registration, eliminating unnecessary paperwork and duplicative reporting.\90\ --------------------------------------------------------------------------- \90\ See supra Section I. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- For purposes of the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Commission has estimated the hour burden and the cost burden that proposed Form N-6 would impose on variable life insurance registrants. The hour burden is the number of hours of staff time a variable life insurance registrant will use annually to comply with the requirements of proposed Form N-6. The cost burden is the annual cost of services purchased to prepare and update proposed Form N-6, such as the cost of independent auditors and outside counsel. The cost burden does not include the wages, salaries, or fees paid for the hour burden. Each of the hour burden and the cost burden are calculated for both initial registration statements on proposed Form N-6 and post-effective amendments to the form. The Commission estimates that there are approximately 200 separate accounts registered as unit investment trusts and offering variable life insurance policies that would file registration statements on proposed Form N-6. The Commission estimates that there will be as many as 50 initial registration statements on proposed Form N-6 filed annually. The Commission estimates, therefore, that approximately 250 registration statements (200 post-effective amendments plus 50 initial registration statements) will be filed on Form N-6 annually. The Commission estimates that the hour burden for preparing and filing a post-effective amendment on proposed Form N-6 will be 100 hours. Thus, the total annual hour burden for preparing and filing post-effective amendments would be 20,000 hours (200 post-effective amendments annually times 100 hours per amendment). The Commission estimates that the hour burden for preparing and filing an initial registration statement on proposed Form N-6 will be 800 hours. Thus, the annual hour burden for preparing and filing initial registration statements would be 40,000 hours (50 initial registration statements annually times 800 hours per registration statement). The total annual hour burden for proposed Form N-6, therefore, is estimated to be 60,000 hours (20,000 hours for post-effective amendments plus 40,000 hours for initial registration statements). The Commission estimates that the cost burden for preparing and filing a post-effective amendment on proposed Form N-6 will be $7,500. Thus, the total annual cost burden for preparing and filing post- effective amendments would be $1,500,000 (200 post-effective amendments annually times $7,500 per amendment). The Commission estimates that the cost burden for preparing and filing an initial registration statement on proposed Form N-6 will be $20,000. Thus, the annual cost burden for preparing and filing initial registration statements would be $1,000,000 (50 initial registration statements annually times $20,000 per registration statement). The total annual cost burden for proposed Form N-6, therefore, is estimated to be $2,500,000 ($1,500,000 for post-effective amendments plus $1,000,000 for initial registration statements). The n [Text truncated at 120,000 characters. The full text is on the page linked above.] --- Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/documents/fr%3A98-7072. Public record. Not legal advice.