Everyday on the World Wide Web there are articles telling potential annuity buyers why fixed index annuities are not right for them, but that they should look at purchasing stocks, bonds, or mutual funds instead because of their potential returns. 
A fixed index annuity is an insurance contract, not an investment. Annuities are financial vehicles that offer tax deferral, a variety of income options, and a death benefit. Stocks, bonds, and mutual funds are investments. Indexed annuities should be judged on the merits of the unique features they offer:

• Locked-in interest: A fixed index annuity’s indexed interest is locked in each year by a feature called annual reset and can never be lost due to a market downturn. In other words, any indexed interest the owner earns is protected and is not just a number on a statement.
• Timing: Whether or not a person knows exactly when they’ll retire, no one can predict how the markets will be performing at that time. For example, the S&P 500 index was negative four times over the past 10 years. What if you decided to retire during one of those negative years? As stated above, with a fixed index annuity, the accumulation value will never decrease due to market volatility. This means when a annuity owners choose to start taking income from the contract, there is a 0% chance the they will have lost any earned interest due to changes in the market.
• Lifetime income: Annuities can do one thing no other retirement planning vehicle can do: provide guaranteed lifetime income. Regardless of what strategy or formula is being used, an annuity is the only retirement vehicle that will guarantee annuity owners will never outlive their retirement savings.

Like any other financial product, there are terms and conditions usually associated with annuity contracts. An owner will generally have to keep the premium deferred for a specified period of time before receiving income payments to avoid the assessments of penalties, such as surrender charges.  Depending on the annuity selected these could be as short as 4 years.

For a safe money common sense solution visit -  www.fixedindexannuity.com

Stephen C. Goss, chief actuary of the Social Security Administration, said retirees would keep receiving their checks as usual. The problem is that payments have risen more than expected during the downturn, because jobs disappeared and people applied for benefits sooner than they had planned. At the same time, the program’s revenue has fallen sharply, because there are fewer paychecks to tax. 

Is this the Tipping Point That Results in Benefit Cuts?

Analysts have long tried to predict the year when Social Security would pay out more than it took in because they view it as a tipping point — the first step of a long, slow march to insolvency, unless Congress strengthens the program’s finances. 

“When the level of the trust fund gets to zero, you have to cut benefits,” Alan Greenspan, former chairman of the Federal Reserve Board.

Social Security’s annual report last year projected revenue would more than cover payouts until at least 2016 because economists expected a quicker, stronger recovery from the crisis. Officials foresaw an average unemployment rate of 8.2 percent in 2009 and 8.8 percent this year, though unemployment is hovering at nearly 10 percent.  

Although Social Security is often said to have a “trust fund,” the term really serves as an accounting device, to track the pay-as-you-go program’s revenue and outlays over time. Its so-called balance is, in fact, a history of its vast cash flows: the sum of all of its revenue in the past, minus all of its outlays. The balance is currently about $2.5 trillion because after the early 1980s the program had surplus revenue, year after year. 

Now that accumulated revenue will slowly start to shrink, as outlays start to exceed revenue. By law, Social Security cannot pay out more than its balance in any given year.  

A $29 Billion Shortfall This Year 

Mr. Goss, the actuary, emphasized that even the $29 billion shortfall projected for this year was small, relative to the roughly $700 billion that would flow in and out of the system. The system, he added, has a balance of about $2.5 trillion that will take decades to deplete. Mr. Goss said that large cushion could start to grow again if the economy recovers briskly.  

Indeed, the Congressional Budget Office’s projection shows the ravages of the recession easing in the next few years, with small surpluses reappearing briefly in 2014 and 2015.

 After that, demographic forces are expected to overtake the fund, as more and more baby boomers leave the work force, stop paying into the program and start collecting their benefits. At that point, outlays will exceed revenue every year, no matter how well the economy performs.

The Reconciliation Act includes a provision that expands the Medicare hospital insurance (HI) tax for high income taxpayers to cover certain forms of investment income, including annuity distributions.

The new HI tax on investment income will be imposed at a 3.8% rate. This rate coincides with a provision in the PPACA that levies an additional 0.9% HI tax on wages of certain individuals with high wage income. The 0.9% increase, when added to the existing HI tax rates on wages, brings the top combined HI tax rate (i.e., both the employee-paid and employer-paid components) on wages to 3.8%, which coincides with the 3.8% rate under the new HI tax on investment income.

It’s 2010, and the temporary, one-year repeal of the federal estate tax is in effect. The failure of Congress to either extend the 2009 estate tax rules into 2010 or enact a permanent estate tax law has created several unfortunate consequences. Here are some things you need to know to protect your family and your assets.

Facts

Both the federal estate tax and the federal generation-skipping transfer tax (a separate tax on property given to grandchildren, great-grandchildren, etc.) are repealed for 2010 (unless Congress enacts legislation to reinstate them, retroactive to January 1, 2010 or otherwise).
Both taxes are scheduled to return in 2011 at levels that applied prior to 2001; that means a $1 million exemption and a top tax rate of 55% (in 2009, the exemption was $3.5 million and the top rate was 45%).
The federal gift tax remains in effect with a $1 million lifetime exemption, and the top tax rate is 35%.
The step-up in basis rule that allowed heirs to inherit property with a fair market value as of the date of death of the decedent has been modified. For 2010, the basis for inherited property is the lesser of the decedent’s basis (carryover basis) or its fair market value on the date of death. But, $1.3 million of estate property is afforded a step-up in basis, and up to $3 million of property passing to a surviving spouse receives a step-up as well.

What’s next?

It’s anyone’s guess what Congress will do next. Some believe quick action will reinstate the taxes at 2009 levels (see above). Others believe Congress will proceed cautiously in an attempt to enact serious reform. In either case, any reinstated tax may or may not be made retroactive to January 1, 2010. Needless to say, planning under these circumstances is challenging, at best.

The fallout

If your estate plan assumed that an estate tax would be imposed in 2010, it may no longer carry out your intentions; it may not provide adequately for your spouse, and it may not meet your overall tax objectives. Here are some steps you may want to take.

See your estate planning attorney about the possible need to revise your will, trust, and other estate planning documents, especially if they include formula clauses. A formula clause expresses certain bequests in terms of fractions or percentages in order to eliminate or reduce estate taxes. You may also need to see your estate planning attorney about these documents if you live in a state that imposes its own estate and/or inheritance tax, or if your documents include multi-generational planning.
Organize your records and get your parents/grandparents to organize theirs. The modified carryover basis rules impose strict reporting requirements, including supporting documentation and penalties for noncompliance.

Stephanie in Lawrence: Nobody wants to answer my question. I was devastated by a loss of $16,000 in my variable annuity last year. If I can claim the loss on my taxes, it will give me a few dollars back but, I don’t know if it’s worth pursing. My tax accountant said to ask my financial advisor (I did) and he said to ask my tax accountant (I did). I called the company which had the annuity - they said to ask my tax accountant or my financial Advisor. I’ve done research on the internet, but I am still confused.

Here is the general opinion on the topic from annuity leaders…. BUT always get your advice from your tax preparer…

Taking the Bite Out Of Annuity Losses

Are you stuck with an annuity that’s lost more than half of its original value? You’re probably not the only one. In the last two decades, the sales volume of variable annuities has seen phenomenal growth: skyrocketing from $4.6 billion in 1987 to $128.4 billion in 2004. Unfortunately, many investors who put large sums of money into annuities while the stock market climbed towards its peak in 1999 had no sense of the large losses they were about to face.

The Fall of Variable Annuities

While many investors enjoyed the double-digit returns of the late ’90s, many also suffered through the decline that followed in the ensuing three years. From 2000 through 2003, the S&P 500 lost an average 42%. An investor who purchased a $500,000 annuity in 2000, invested primarily in large U.S. companies, could have lost over $210,000 by the end of 2003. In fact, investors lost billions, and suddenly everyone was scared to death of the stock market. The sales techniques used by variable annuity salespeople were widely criticized and regulatory agencies grew concerned about annuity misrepresentation.

Knowledge of less-than-exemplary activities in the financial industry (lack of full disclosure and falsification of variable annuities) led to the rapid education of many investors, as they learned about surrender penalties, fees and expenses and the liquidity associated with variable annuities. Then, to add insult to injury, the IRS reduced the federal capital gains rate down from 28% to 20%, and down again to the current 15%, while maintaining the ordinary income taxation of annuity profits (when withdrawn). Armed with their newfound knowledge and tormented by the large losses in their annuities, many investors were eager to shift their money out of variable annuities, but steep surrender charges made replacement tough.

So, what options are available to investors?

Options for Your Underperforming Annuity

Surrender Your Annuity: Cash out of the annuity and use your funds for another type of investment. Make sure you call the annuity company first to verify if there are any surrender charges remaining on the contract.

Are Annuity Losses Deductible?

For a non-qualified annuity loss to be tax deductible, the loss must be realized by completely cashing out or surrendering the annuity. Exchanges using the 1035 tax provision will not qualify the loss for a tax deduction; however, the new contract can maintain the original cost basis. It’s important to remember that any surrender charges that apply will not be deductible as part of the realized loss.

Example

Let’s say that Matt purchased a non-qualified annuity three years ago for $50,000. Due to poor investment performance, his annuity is now worth $40,000 and has a surrender charge of $3,000. Despite the surrender charge, Matt decides to cash out his annuity and receives a check for $37,000. Even though Matt received a check for only $37,000, his actual realized loss on the annuity is only $10,000, since the surrender charge of $3,000 cannot be counted as part of the realized loss as per IRS standards. However, even if Matt is not 59.5 years old, he will not be subject to a 10% IRS early-withdrawal penalty because this penalty is only imposed on gains.

Now that we’ve determined that Matt incurred a $10,000 realized loss, where should it be reported? Accountants have recently adopted two approaches to the reporting of this realized loss: an aggressive (many accountants favor the aggressive approach) approach and a somewhat more conservative one. The conservative approach is to include the loss as a miscellaneous itemized deduction on Schedule A, where only the part of the loss that exceeds 2% of your adjusted gross income can be reported in this case (this may also subject you to the alternative minimum tax [AMT]). The more aggressive approach would have you take the position that the loss could be considered an ordinary loss sustained during the taxable year while entering into a transaction for a profit. In this case, the loss would be entered on Line 14 “Other gains & losses” (Form 1040) of a federal tax return), and the full loss could be deducted (without AMT issues).

Conclusion

The IRS Revenue Ruling 61-201 provides a minimal amount of authority for the idea that annuity losses would be acceptable as an ordinary loss (aggressive approach), but the safe gamble is to claim it as a miscellaneous itemized deduction. Regrettably, the IRS has not given any firm guidelines as to the proper way to claim the loss. Most financial planners will take the position that an annuity loss is an ordinary loss directly reportable on the front of your federal tax form. However, it’s usually best to let your tax accountant make the call, since this is undoubtedly a questionable area that could be challenged by the IRS.

In either case, there are potential benefits to surrendering an underperforming annuity. Just be sure to consult with the annuity company prior to taking any action so that you’ll understand the charges (if any) that are involved. As always, remember to maintain a long-term perspective with your investments - you don’t want to burden yourself with an investment change today if it is not going to add value to your finances in the future.

Monthly Cap Gain-No Loss     0%                   S&P 500          -40.09%

Annual Point to Point                0%                   DJIA                -36.75%

Trigger Method                        0%                   Russell 2000     -37.82%

Monthly AVG                          0%                   NASDAQ        -38.22%

Fixed Interest               2.5%-4.5%                   1 Yr CD               2.75%

Source: Advantage Compendium, Insurance Companies and Bankrate.com  Index sponsors do not endorse index products.       

Your Index Annuities Paid Zero over the last 12 months - How much did you gain?    

Zero return is not a good long term result. However, it looks good when compared to the 40% you would have lost by staying in a market based product.   Like a mutual fund.   Zero is not that much less than a bank CD at 2.75%.

You gained in other ways:

• Peace of mind knowing your principal and any previous gains are protected from market loss.
• Gained a market advantage because many index annuities “reset” the starting point for next years gain at 40% below last year’s.
• If your annuity has a lifetime withdrawal benefit rider you gained a bump in future retirement income.

An index annuity provides gains even when standing still and is commonly referred to as a safe money place.

“After totaling up all of our investments over the last 32 years. The only retirement money we have that has increased in value are the annuity and insurance plans you recommended over the years.  Thank you.  Wish we would have stuck more in with you.”

Rick & Mary

Rush City, Minnesota

Yale University Professor Irving Fisher declared the “Dow Jones Industrial Average had reached what looks like a permanently high plateau.”

8 days later Dow drops 2%

Black Monday; October 28, 1929 Dow drops 13%

October 29, 1929 Dow drops 12%

Over the next 3 years the Dow drops 89%. 

 July 1932 Dow Jones Industrial Average is at its lowest point.

The Dow did not regain its October 16, 1929 peak until November 1954.

Took 25 years to recover 3 years of losses.

Source: The Ascent of Money by Nial Ferguson