NAIFA CEO Speaks Out: Presidential Election's Crucial Impact on Life Insurance

In a life insurance policy you can borrow against it, income tax free, and then obviously it can get passed on income tax free to the next generation if and when you pass away. What type of provisions, are all those on the chopping table? All of them? They all are. How could something so easily unwind? Almost all those provisions expire in 2025. Some of them expire in 2026 and 2027, but they all expire if there's not action taken. Would you even say if these expired, everybody that had annuities and insurance and this is the way that this was set up, do you envision that it's grandfathered in and then just going forward or is it unknown at this point? We gave them stats and studies and showed how harmful this was, again, to the very people that the DOL was saying they were trying to protect. And yet it was like a check the box exercise. They just listened to the commentary and said, thank you very much. No questions. You're gone. And the very people that these regulators believe that they were protecting and looking after were the very people that they were harming. You're creating more friction and you're eliminating the products in the marketplace. And how does eliminating some of the players and taking out competition help? A major consequence of this election is going to be what happens with the federal tax code. If the Republican nominee gets elected, he has pledged that he's not only going to extend them, he's going to make some additional cuts so that there's more tax savings. And then the Democratic side is basically going to let the most of the major provisions within the tax cuts and jobs act expire. How am I not hearing about this from like every single person that I'm talking to, including the insurance companies? Kevin Mayhew, the president and CEO of NAIFA, welcome. Welcome to the show. Thank you very much. Appreciate you having me. It is. It's an honor to have have you here. I would love for you to break down like why NAIFA is one of the most important organizations. If you are in the life insurance space or if you're a financial professional, NAIFA is an organization that you for sure have heard of and why it's important that we continue to support in the work that you're doing. So my hope is that that gets across. But I also like you are on Capitol Hill seeing what's going on. This is a very politically charged year this year for obvious reasons. And I just want to hear like what's going on, what are the things that we need to be aware of when it comes to life insurance space? And you've agreed to come on our show a couple of times a year to give us the scoop. And for that, I'm just very grateful. And thank you for making time. My pleasure. And thank you again for having me. And thank you for everybody who's who's watching this and listening. This is an election year, like you mentioned, and elections do have consequences and different depending upon who controls the White House and who to control, what party controls, what chambers of Congress really makes a big difference as to what gets done or doesn't get done in Washington, D.C. Same thing happens at the state level around the country as well. But, you know, being a presidential election year, I guess everybody's much more focused on what's going on in our nation's capital, you know, and there's a with so much turmoil that's taken place in this cycle in particular, you know, just over the past week or so with what's happened with the attempted assassination of the Republican nominee and the Democratic incumbent deciding he's going to step out of the race and then trying to figure out again, is it going to be the vice president who's going to get Democratic support or will it be something else? And will there be a change coming up at the convention? There's a lot up in the air. And with what happens at the top of the ticket, that tends to impact down ballot races. So very frequently, if a presidential candidate for a certain party does well in a state, the folks that are also running for the Senate, if there is an election for the Senate in their state, as well as those running for Congress, tend to tie a little more with how that that goes for the presidential ticket. So we could see with the Senate right now being as tightly divided as it is and the margin in the House being the smallest majority margin we've had in decades, what really happens with the presidential race could impact whether the Republicans or the Democrats control either the Senate and or the House. And, you know, if you get the trifecta where you get a party, whichever one it is, that controls the House, the Senate and the presidency, you can get a lot done. But if you get a divided government where you've got one party that controls at least one chamber in Congress or controls the presidency in both chambers of Congress run by the different party, then you have a ripe opportunity for either just pure division and gridlock and things getting stalled or you have an opportunity for compromise. And we'll see what happens with us now. You know, unfortunately, over the past several years, there's been this prevailing culture in Washington, D.C., where there's not nearly as much dialogue, conversation and compromise. It tends to be my side or nothing on both sides of the aisle. And candidly, you know, I don't think that's healthy. But, you know, one of the things that we, you know, in NAIFA, we're not partisan, you know, we're out there to make sure every American has the right insurance and financial products they need to live a financially secure life. And if you've got people in either party and in either chamber that are going to back that, we're going to back them. And if you've got folks that, you know, don't quite see it that way and aren't going to help enable the private sector and good trusted advisors to help clients put in the right financial plan, then we're not going to back them. And that's regardless of the Republican or Democrat. We just want good people that can help empower Americans to be financially secure. So a ton going on and there's going to be a ton of things up in the air, I think, as you look at the polls over the course of the next few months before we get to the election in November, they're going to go up and down. And then you're going to have to also figure out what happens with those individual Senate and House races, since the margins are so thin for both parties in both chambers. So I'm sure it's going to be a very interesting next few months. I know the word lobbyist is kind of a dirty word. Sometimes when you think of like lobbyists, no one knows who the lobbyists are, but no one wants to be a lobbyist. But is it is it fair to say that you guys are the largest lobbyists on the national and state level when it comes to representing financial security for all? And then when it comes to that, are we talking insurance products? Like how do you put the scope or framework of what NIFA represents? And what are some of the talking points that you guys are making sure to mention at the at the at the D.C. level and then at the state level? Well, great questions. So NIFA is the oldest and largest professional association in the entire financial services space. You know, we've we're one hundred and thirty four years old, founded in Boston back in 1890, and we have a presence in all 50 state houses around the country. And we have a member in every single congressional district across the United States. What that does is it allows us to impact public policy at the state level and then also at the federal level. You know, so our NIFA chapters, whether they be a state chapter or thirty five cases around the country, we also have a local chapter in a metro market. They'll go to their state capital. They'll participate in their legislative sessions. They'll meet with their state insurance commissioner. They'll meet with other folks that are involved in regulating securities. They'll meet with the governing committees that oversee financial services and both their state house or assembly and their state Senate. They'll also work with the governor and the attorney general in each state, again, to make sure that the right environment takes place so that advisors can do what they do best. And that's really help educate their clients and general consumers about the need for life insurance and other protection products and to put together the right plan so that they can be financially secured throughout their life. And so what we do is, you know, NIFA used to be back when we were founded in 1890, we were the National Association of Life Underwriters or NALU. And really back then, people were life insurance professionals and they focused on selling life insurance. But what's happened over time is that folks have understood that financial security is more than just life insurance. It also is long term care, disability, it's college savings plans, it's savings for retirement and having the right plan put together there. There's a lot of different components of helping people get to where they need to be. And so we represent or at least we do our best to represent that entire gamut. And we look at what the different proposals that are coming up and the state houses all across the country monitor what goes on in all 50 states, as well as what regulations are being considered again by the bureaucrats in all 50 states. And then we do that same thing in Washington, D.C. And we work to make sure that the voice of financial professionals is well represented against the right legislative and regulatory environment is there so that they can best serve their clients. This is a just a plea to you if you're watching this or listening to this and you are a professional, I would highly encourage, highly, highly, highly encourage you to be involved in NAIFA and get involved. We'll have a link down below, Kevin, so you'll hook us up with the right call to action. And and just like it really does mean the world. And and if everyone was like, hey, we're not going to we're not going to care about that. Someone else will take care of it. I'm just going to do my thing. What we would find is a lot of things that you guys fight for the industry and our profession would would go away. And some of the things like we'll talk about when it comes to regulations and when it comes to tax consequences and when it comes to insurances, like we can talk about that. But this has consequences if we're not going to rally behind that. So not that you came on for a commercial, but is there anything you would like to mention as it relates to like if people are interested in learning more, where they should. What what should their next step be? One hundred percent. Listen, there's strength in numbers. And the louder your voice, the more impactful you can be. We would love to have every financial professional be involved in NAFA. You know, the more voices, the more people that are involved, the more impactful we can be in shaping and influencing public policy. And there are a lot of folks out there. And this happens in every industry. So it's not unique to financial services where folks are like, like you said, Caleb, someone else will handle this. It'll just get done. You can't count on that because when politicians, both at the state and federal level, consider things, whoever's speaking louder and who's in their face, I mean, in a good way, talking to them about the issues and why things are important. Those are the audiences and those are the topics that tend to get their attention. And if people don't speak up or they don't have enough voices out there so that the voice is effectively heard, then policy tends to go in the way that doesn't advantage those groups. You know, you've heard the saying, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Right. And that's exactly what happens in all forms of lobbying. And there are lots of active coalitions and associations and groups out there that for some reason don't see the real value that advisors give every single day for their clients. And they want to do things like regulate and put fiduciary standards in place. They really want to shift things so that the state runs insurance programs and other financial services and individuals and companies and the free market enterprise does not. And those things we think are just bad. We want to provide more access and more choice and more opportunity. And the best way we can do that is by having more people involved and lend their voices to the cause. So, again, I just encourage you to check out the NAFA website. If you're not a member, see what we're all about. But you can go to NAFA.org join and and find out how to become a member and how to participate. And if you are a NAFA member, first of all, thank you for your contributions to the larger industry, to the profession and most importantly, to the 90 million American families that we serve. But also there's ways you can get deeper engaged if you've got the time and desire to do so through advocacy messages, through videos, through other ways that we can help effectively using today's technology, get the word to more policymakers. And we're working on creative ways to do that every single day. Let's let's look at the national and then let's go to the state. I want to hear what's currently going on as we speak and what has happened in the past couple of years and some of the consequences. I know that there was there's a state in particular that passed some really scary things as it relates to life insurance and taxation that you guys were all over. And there's a couple of things we can we can go a couple of different directions. I know that NAFA is bipartisan. I've been on Capitol Hill with you guys and it's we're sharing stories and it's like you're meeting with Republicans and Democrats. And it's been it's I would say all of my experiences were really good because no one's going to be like, no, what you guys do is not helpful because majority of politicians, I would imagine there's there's benefits to an advisor. But there does seem to be that it tends to be and I'll say it so you don't have to. But it seems like the Republicans are more pro our industry and less regulation. And it seems like the Democrats are more of like, I don't know what they're talking points are, but like, hey, they almost see the financial professional as taking advantage or and so they almost want to put together like these regulations. And in their mind will be like, well, more regulation, make sure that there's a better service. But the thing that they might not be saying is more regulation just takes out a ton of people and we're already not serving America to the level that we should be. And and so why is more regulation the solution? So I don't again, that's a talking point that you can talk about. But then I also know that you were telling me about some of the things upcoming and something doesn't get renewed. It could affect the tax benefits that we that we have on life insurance. I would love to talk about for the consumer, but then also for the financial professional and just talk about some of the things that are going on on the national and state level that we should be aware of. Hey, it's Caleb Williams here. I'm just interrupting this video quickly to invite you to check out our and asset vault. You may have been there. We've actually read revamping it. And if you are somebody that wants to learn more about his life insurance, right fit for me. Does this and asset makes sense? Like, does this actually help me be more efficient? We've put together a 10 minute documentary style video that I can test a really, really good job giving the history why the and asset different setups and designs that we use. And then we have an and asset vault that gives like case studies, calculators, handbooks, and so much more. We are here to serve you, whether it's a conversation, whether it's education or the video. So make sure to go check out and asset dot com slash vault. Learn more. Yeah, absolutely. And and you packed a lot in there, but you're spot on. You know, there are some in every state capital, but I'll talk generically about our nation's capital. There's a bureaucratic class of folks that stay with agencies kind of no matter who's in charge, you know, who's the president and what's going on in Congress, unless Congress votes to defund something. And they they tend to think that they know better how to serve Americans than, you know, the people do themselves. And so when they get an administration in place that is friendly towards amping up regulation, they'll take advantage of that and then they'll resurface ideas that were candidly failed and defeated in the past and bring them back up. So an issue of, you know, part of that case in point is the Department of Labor with this fiduciary only standard that they've put in place in a final rule. You and a bunch of our advisors that are watching or listening today may realize or may remember that just a few years back, back in 2017, NAFA, the American Council of Life Insurers and others took the Department of Labor to court and sued over that rule because we said not only is it beyond your statutory authority granted by Congress for you to enact this rule, but on top of it, it's going to cause great economic harm to American families. And what we saw when that rule was in place for the eight or nine months it was before the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals invalidated it and tossed the rule out in its entirety. What we did see is exactly what we predicted we would see. Lower and middle income Americans did not have access to professionals that could help them put together a financial plan. And so people were buying less financial products, life insurance and otherwise, that can help them live a financially secure life. And the very people that these regulators believe that they were protecting and looking after were the very people that they were harming because of it. If you're a person of higher wealth, you can go out and pay for somebody to put together a plan for you, and they will assume that responsibility because they're taking on that fiduciary duty, but they're going to charge you a premium for it. And that's great if that's the model that the consumer wants to use, but you've got a lot of folks that just don't have that much money and paying via a commission model just makes a lot more economic sense for them to at least start putting the building blocks in place so that they're financially secure in life. But the liability is just too high to do that on a lot of these, you know, premiums that are lower in value. And so companies were saying, we're going to get out of the space altogether. And then consumers were denied choice and opportunity. And many lower and middle-income Americans just simply lost the opportunity to get the right stuff in place for their financial plan. And that's what we're trying to stop from happening again. So they basically took the 2016 Department of Labor fiduciary rule, rehashed it, actually I think made it worse, and then reenacted it and put it in place despite, of course, testimony that I gave directly to the Department of Labor and to the White House Office of Management and Budget that our members gave directly. We gave them stats and studies and showed how harmful this was, again, to the very people that the DOL was saying they were trying to protect. And yet it was like a check-the-box exercise. They just listened to the commentary and said, thank you very much. No questions. You're gone. Check the box. We've met with key constituents. And then they put in place this rule. So we're back at it. We're suing again in the Fifth Circuit in North Texas. And I think we're going to get the same outcome we did last time, because not one word of statutory authority has changed for the department over that time. The shame is, is that what they say they want to accomplish, we've already kind of put in place the right structure to do that. You know, we worked with the Securities and Exchange Commission, which does have the authority to do this. Fully endorsed it, worked hand-in-hand with them, and came up with a workable solution to make sure, again, the best interests of Americans are being looked after every day. And then we worked with the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, the NAIC, to come up with their annuity best interest model that we've now seen adopted in more than 45 states. It's more than 90% of Americans are already covered by these enhanced standards. There's no need for the Department of Labor's rule, and all it's going to do is displace people from getting insurance. And that's just, well, annuity products. It's just a bad idea, and NAIF has got your back, whether it comes to, again, regulations while they're being formed. On Capitol Hill, if we do something about it on the legislative front, and then if we need to, we'll use the third branch of government to see things get repealed. Why does the whole commission products have such a bad rap? Because it definitely seems like, if I could boil it down, what it sounds like is there's certain people that say, it's impossible to do the right thing because you guys get paid a commission. But what's interesting, and again, I'll say this so you don't have to, you're telling me that you take one test, and that test makes you a fiduciary, and now you're... There's certain things that I look at, and the same thing is I can look at a hundred different fiduciaries, Kevin, and they could give a hundred different outcomes and advice. And so it's almost like I see it as you're creating more friction, and you're eliminating the products in the marketplace, and how does eliminating some of the players and taking out competition help? How does that help? The free market's saying, if you want to do a fee on the annuities, there's options. There's literally options for all these things, and again, like you said, what you're doing with high regulation is you're just eliminating people to not want to work with middle class, lower class, especially when you start putting these negative, what could happen if you screw up? It's like, why would I take the risk, serve middle class America, when if they catch me doing something, now all my business is up in jeopardy? Again, all these things are like, probably we're speaking to the choir, but what's their argument? I want to see both sides. Is there something that they're making that you're like, you have a valid point, and that's why you guys are coming together with the NIC best interest concept of like, you have a point, so this is how our compromise. I don't really know why they're continuing to push this, except for the fact that there's some diehard, I don't want to use the wrong word here, bureaucrats in the Department of Labor particularly, that just believe that you can't trust financial advisors, and the way to do it is to put this strict liability type standard on them, if they're going to help serve folks, but all that does, like you said, is it eliminates choice, it drives people out of the marketplace, and then you have people that are not financially prepared when the time comes, and it's a real shame. What they'll point to occasionally, and even you've probably heard some very vocal members of the U.S. Senate, one from Massachusetts particularly, likes to bring up stories about how their constituents have been sold a product or something that they really didn't need, et cetera, and we're like, well, that was covered by the suitability standard, and occasionally and everything, you get people to make mistakes, but you've got remedies on how to fix that. You don't need to sit back and block access and take away choice, because what the fiduciary rule is, it's really not a fiduciary rule, it's a fiduciary only rule. It takes away your opportunity to do business in a different way, and all that's going to do is drive out advisors from the market, and it's going to make Americans be in a position where they just don't have the right products in place, and they're not financially prepared for life. So it's a real shame. Let's move on to the consumer side. There's a lot of people that watch this that are pro-insurance, pro-annuities, and it's my understanding that we take some things for granted, like let's take life insurance tax benefits. When set up and used properly, some of the best benefits out there. Talk to me about your view of that, and then talk to me about some of the consequences that in the future that could change those benefits, and we can pontificate and speculate based on some of the things that you're seeing in states and on the Capitol. Thanks for bringing that up. We talked about how elections have consequences, and a major consequence of this election is going to be what happens with the federal tax cut. You might remember back in 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed into law, and that gave tax treatment to a variety of things, including not taxing of inside buildup, tax treatment on a ton of things that impact every American through the financial services industry. In fact, when you look at the top 10 revenue generating items that Congress can consider to extend their current tax status or amend it, meaning either lower it or get rid of it or enhance it, to make a change to it, six of the 10 largest ones are directly related to the financial services industry. When there's programs that the federal government wants to fund, they do one of two things. They either deficit spend, which I would argue is bad for the economy because we've gotten to the point that interest on our debt now exceeds what we spend on defense spending, but on top of that, it's tax generation. And so only the federal government could think of something that they will call, if they don't tax you, they call it an expenditure. And I'm like, how is that an expenditure to not tax somebody? But they do. They call it an expenditure. But six of the 10 largest tax expenditures are related to our space. And so the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, when that was put in place in 2017, it was done through a process called reconciliation. And so all the key provisions had to expire and most of them expire in 2025. So if Congress and the White House don't take action, they go away. So it's going to take an affirmative vote of Congress and the signature of the president to extend many of those tax cuts past 2025. And so the current tax treatment that many of the products that your listeners either purchase or make available to consumers would be given a different tax treatment if the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, or at least those key provisions of it, aren't renewed past 2025. So an awful lot's out there that can impact everybody's pocketbook and ability to save. Is the main thing on the table the tax deferral? Like in a life insurance policy, that's like a permanent policy and an annuity that the growth grows tax deferred. And meaning you don't have to pay tax on all the growth each year, which is advantageous. And then in a life insurance policy, you can borrow against it, income tax free. And then obviously it can get passed on income tax free to the next generation if and when you pass away. What type of provisions? Are all those on the chopping table, all of them? They all are. The corporate tax rate is on the table. The premium tax credit rules under the Affordable Care Act, those are on the table. Private placement life insurance is on the table. The 199A deduction that, of course, advisors take advantage of is on the table. Estate planning, the death tax, what happens when people pass away, that's on the table. Other wealth taxes, including some of these provisions to tax people that make a certain income level, at a higher level, that's on the table. All those topics are on the table. But is tax deferral in a life insurance policy? It's on the table. Wow. The thing that is a little bit shocking is within the life insurance, as far as I can remember, has always been, has always experienced tax treatment. And obviously when the modified endowment contract came about, was that 1988 or 1986 with Tamra, that got changed and now a modified endowment contract experiences different tax advantages than a properly structured life insurance. So when you mentioned this, it almost seemed like how could something so easily unwind? And that's where I just wanted to clarify. But you're saying all those things, including tax deferred growth in these insurance products and the income tax-free death benefit is on the table to expire if there's not someone that can do something about it. Yeah. So almost all those provisions expire in 2025. Some of them expire in 2026 and 2027, but they all expire if there's not action taken. So the vast majority of that battle will be in 2025, and maybe all of it will be in 2025 in some sort of an enhanced tax package. If the Republican nominee gets elected, he has pledged that he's not only going to extend them, he's going to make some additional cuts so that there's more tax savings. And then the Democratic side is basically going to let most of the major provisions within the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act expire. So it really does depend on who gets to be in the White House, but also who controls each chamber of commerce, I'm sorry, of Congress is going to have a huge say because it takes all three to make law. You've got to pass the House, the Senate, and get the president to sign it unless you've got a two-thirds vote in both chambers that can override the president. And a two-thirds vote is not going to happen in either chamber. So you really got to get all three to work together. And that's also why, like you talked about earlier, about having more people engaged in the process, become a member, help out. When we send out an action alert, it takes literally 30 seconds to respond to it. Click on it, you type in your information, your zip code, and all that. And it sends things that are customized out to both your U.S. senators and your member of Congress. More voices like that, again, the wheel gets squeaky, and the squeaky wheel gets to grease. And then it's more likely if we have a lot of folks, again, helping educate policymakers about what these real practical impacts would be, if these parts of the tax code are not extended, it'll better help them understand that. And they'll look for other sources of revenue instead of ours. It's more like if you're being chased by a bear, having them find another target instead of you is a better thing to do. And so we definitely have our hands full in 2025. One of the reasons for just, you could say, tax expenditure, which is messed up that they use that word, but it's true. It's like, OK, we're getting less revenue. But you have to ask, I should want to give tax benefits to things that help our country. And the biggest argument of why life insurance should be income tax-free is because if no one had life insurance, it would be a crazy high strain on Social Security and the government. So the fact that private companies are saying, we are literally taking this crisis risk off your hands is why U.S. government's like, yes, we will give you an income tax, we'll give you that tax benefit because you are able to manage that risk better. It would cost us more to do that even if we got that revenue. The same thing goes with annuities. You're telling me right now when we are, we're like a third world country when it comes to our retirement plans and all. And so, and you're saying a great option would be let's make those financial security products even less attractive. Doesn't make any sense to me. And the same thing goes with like DI disability payments. Like right now you can't get 100% of your paycheck in like a disability, but the payment comes income tax-free. And so you can have maybe 60%, but it makes up a big portion, especially when you factor in taxes. And all that seems to be, it just, for me, it just doesn't, my hope would be even if the Democrats won, that there would be some people that say, hey, listen, like let's not throw everything else because this stuff has consequences and they're pretty big. I have another follow-up question, but is there anything else that you want to say to that? Yeah. I mean, one, I think that we should run you either for the Senate or you should be a cabinet member because you're spot on. But two, I mean, it's not like, again, this isn't, it isn't a partisan issue per se. It's just a who is in charge issue per se. So we do have plenty of Democrats in both chambers that are pro-retirement savings and want to ensure opportunities. But we've also got some other people that don't quite understand the fact that advisors are there to help and people only make the right moves and do the right financial planning when they're motivated to do so. When someone talks to them about the importance of doing it and they're not going to get that on their own with that advice. So there is a major disconnect out there. And, you know, there are some that believe that there are some in different sectors or not sectors, sections, I guess, that do want people to become more reliable on or rely more on the government to take care of them. And we don't believe that. We believe that people should, you know, the private sector is here to help. The private sector can provide the right financial solutions and people should be able to provide for themselves by doing the right planning and having a good advisor to help them put together that plan. I mean, I I'm a big fan of life insurance, especially, and it becomes a lot less attractive if you lose tax benefits for that person for you, the grandfather in like so back in, you know, when they changed the rules, everyone that had a modified endowment contract did get grandfathered in on what their contract said. Obviously, this is uncharted waters. But historically, would you even say if these expired, everybody that had annuities and insurance and this is the way that this was set up, do you envision that it's grandfathered in and then just going forward? Or is it is it unknown at this point? It's definitely unknown. I would envision the prior policies would be grandfathered in because that's the way government tends to do things. They tend to make an effective date and then it's moving forward from the effective date. But that's not guaranteed. So we would we would definitely still need to work on that if they were to expire. OK, next question is, is the how IRAs are tax deferred of like are we talking SEP IRAs, Roth IRAs are pretty much anything tax related, all kind of bundled up in this whole thing? Well, they're bundled up in part of it. One of the other tax expenditures on the list is the tax treatment given to IRAs. And so there was a a big thought about what we're going to do is force people to go into, I think, no, it was ratification. And there was a proposal just a few years ago that would force everyone to go into a Roth style IRA. And, you know, I personally love Roth IRAs. I think they're amazing. And I think that everybody can afford it. You should do a Roth IRA. And even if you mean you put a little less in to take advantage of it, I think the net over time is going to be much greater. But again, it was eliminating choice. It was you couldn't do a traditional IRA. It was you would have to do a Roth IRA because it was a cash grab. It was get the revenue now as opposed to get it later when they start to withdraw it over time. Luckily, that went away. And the House at that time was under Republican control. And the Senate was under Democratic control. But we we still got that that that proposal quashed. But that was on the table just a few years ago. Yeah. Well, and again, I don't I don't want to sound too dramatic, but a lot coming down the pipe. Obviously, everything's up for grab. Historically, like the government, they grandfather people in. That's what they've done historically. But then again, there can be things that get get changed. But this would be big, big, big. And unfortunately, it doesn't sound like I'm trying to think the silver lining like, Caleb, what would be the benefit of this stuff happening? And I I'm just a pretty I'm not pro like, hey, let's just eliminate choices. And oh, like anyone that's gone to the DMV more than once in their life is not like, yeah, these this is the system that we should. This would be great if the DMV ran everything like my my health insurance, my life insurance, my I knew it like it just, you know, it's my my personal opinion. I don't speak for anyone but myself. But overall, I appreciate you sharing this, because when we had this conversation, I was like, Kevin, I'm in the space. I would like to think I'm pretty connected. How are you? How am I not hearing about this from like every single person that I'm talking to, including the insurance companies? And so this this just goes to the fact that sometimes we can stay in our bubble. Sometimes we can just focus on our current what we're working on. But we don't realize that there's people making decisions that don't have a clue or a fraction of the knowledge that we're in day in day out that really could affect not just our livelihood, but affect our clients and future clients. Because anyone that's working with you currently, they may be good. But like the people going forward, can you imagine eliminating all the benefit? Like, it just becomes less attractive. And it's and it's not like, oh, people are super sad. Like, we're making people millionaires every day because of our amazing system. No, like you could look at the way that we have our system set up and say we're failing. And just just an event session for Caleb. So appreciate you listening. Yeah, well, we've got like, like, like, I think your your core sentiment there is, you know, we as a country are dramatically underinsured. You know, you get some people that have no insurance whatsoever. I'm shocked. And I run across these people occasionally. And so I can say, what, there's more insurance than just auto? I'm like, are you serious? I mean, and these are like young families, you know, a husband and wife that have, you know, got two young kids. And there's there's no thought, the thought it just hasn't even gotten in their head about having, you know, life insurance there to take care of your surviving spouse and your children should you pass away. And, you know, then you talk about it. They're like, oh, well, that that makes sense. But they need to have advisors that could talk to them about it and help steer them to making the right decisions so that they are financially prepared. And without that, it would be a bad thing for our country. Is there anything else going on at the state level or the capital that level that should we should be aware of or would it would be beneficial for us to be aware? Yeah, well, states are very clever. And, you know, just when you think you've gotten a bad idea under control somewhere, it'll pop up somewhere else. And so you've got you've got 51 different governmental entities to keep an eye on, the big dog in D.C., but then in all 50 state capitals. And when something passes in one state and it goes into effect, other states say, oh, well, that was clever. You know, Washington State just did this thing with long term care insurance. Maybe we should do it, too. And then the same concept pops up even when the concept hasn't even had time to see what the results are, because it just happened like during the last legislative session. And so we stay on top of that every day. We've got NAVA has a lobbyist engaged in all 50 state capitals. We stay on top of what's going on, both regulatory wise, as well as legislatively in all 50 states. And then we go in and we help educate folks as to why a public policy decision is a bad one. Like the PRO Act is something that pops up sometimes on the federal scene. But that's basically taking away the independent contractor status for financial professionals and others. But it would impact financial professionals. California was considering that. And we actually got a carve out to remove the financial services industry, because if what you want to do is do that for Uber drivers and folks like that, and if that's what they want, that's fine. But for our members, they don't want that at all. And so we had to create a carve out. But we do that every year, every state legislative session. We, of course, do that educating the insurance commissioners and others. Our relationship with the NAIC, again, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, really gives us a great ed with those policymakers at the state level. And they see the fact that NAIFA and our advisor members can be great resources and great sounding boards when they're considering what they're going to do in terms of regulation. And so we stay, we work with them and work in lockstep. We try to find workable solutions to the issues that pop up and show them that, hey, we really are partners in helping every American achieve financial security. So let's work together to do it right. Kevin, I want to thank you so much for taking time to be on the show. I remember when you came to my event three years ago, and you had to speak for a room of a little over 100 people. And it was incredible for you to show up. And you've always believed in what we're up to. And you've just been an amazing friend. Taken me to the Grand Ole Opry most recently when you come in at Nashville. And so I just appreciate you doing this with me. And I want to just say to those of you listening or watching, if you have questions about your state or what's happening in the news or what's going on, please comment or reach out to myself. Because this won't be the last time that Kevin comes on. And my hope is that if you're not involved with NAIFA, you get involved. And let me know about that. Because it just would make me feel good. So that's number one. But then number two, that we can be the place where people go to check in what's happening. Because I know there's some of the things that you mentioned about the tax thing coming down. That's going to be new to many people that watch this or listen to this. And it's like the greatest sales pitch to why we need to be involved in organizations like NAIFA. Because you guys are going to bat for us. You're going to bat for everybody, whether they're a part of NAIFA or not. And for that, I want to thank you. Is there any final words that you have, Kevin, as it relates to what you guys are up to? I appreciate you having me on, Caleb. Always enjoy our conversations. Always enjoy picking your brain about things. But most of all, enjoy you as a person. So thanks for having me here. Thank you.