Gensler Defends Predictive Analytics to Skeptical Audience

SEC Chairman Gary Gensler addressed the investment community’s concerns anxiety about regulation of predictive data analytics, including artificial intelligence, at IAA’s 2024 Compliance Conference.

The Securities and Exchange Commission’s predictive analytics proposal, which would regulate predictive technology such as artificial intelligence, is associated with the “highest level of anxiety,” Karen Barr, the president and CEO of the Investment Adviser Association said on Friday at the IAA’s 2024 Investment Adviser Compliance Conference in Washington, D.C.

Barr told SEC Chairman Gary Gensler during a “fireside chat” at the conference that when she asked IAA members for their greatest concern about the SEC, “99.9% said the predictive analytics rule.” Gensler defended the merits of the proposal during the discussion.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

The proposal, first published in July 2023, would require an adviser to “eliminate or neutralize the effect of conflicts of interest associated with the firm’s use of covered technologies in investor interactions that place the firm’s or its associated person’s interest ahead of investors’ interests.”

A covered technology refers to “a firm’s use of analytical, technological, or computational functions, algorithms, models, correlation matrices, or similar methods or processes that optimize for, predict, guide, forecast, or direct investment-related behaviors or outcomes of an investor,” according to the SEC.

On Friday, Gensler defended the proposal and explained that it is designed to make sure advisers do not use predictive technologies to place their interests ahead of their clients, saying, “Our fiduciary duty doesn’t square with that.” He explained that more and more advising is automated or done through robotic advising.

Gensler’s concern with artificial intelligence and predictive analytics lies primarily in advisers that put their “profits and revenues into their optimization function,” he said. That is, when an algorithm or robo-adviser is programmed, the extent to which they account for an adviser’s profitability is a potential conflict to the extent that it leads to different advice than an algorithm programmed solely to promote the client’s interest would.

Comparing the financial industry to health care, Gensler asked about a hospital that uses AI when analyzing images produced by CT scans and MRIs and asked attendees if they were “fine with your doctor optimizing for the profits of the hospital? Because I’m not.”

Barr responded by saying that, “if they were also optimizing for my health, then, ‘Yes,’” and that the use of technology is “about the outcome for the client.”

Neither Gensler nor Barr discussed instances in which it is impossible to optimize both profitability and the interests of a client, whether in finance or health care.

The IAA has called on the SEC to completely withdraw the proposal.

Barr also argued that “the proposal addresses all technologies more broadly” and is not limited to machine learning and AI. She added that “we feel this is already addressed by fiduciary duty” and that the SEC’s standing Regulation Best Interest rule would prevent an adviser from putting himself or herself ahead of a client in the first place. She said, “Everyone is in a business to make money,” but “their obligation today is to put their client’s interest first.”

In a press pool with reporters after the discussion, Gensler said, “We live in a world now where we’re inundated with prompts, behavioral prompts and nudges to do things, and [the SEC is focused on] ensuring that investment advisers and broker/dealers continue to put investors first and put their interests behind the investors’, and that those behavioral prompts, as well as recommendations and advice, don’t shift that.”

He added: “We literally have over 50 million Americans with separately managed accounts, many of which don’t have a human in the loop: They’re just robo-advising and so forth.” He added that he wanted to ensure that “the algorithms live with that stricture and have the appropriate guardrails.”

In past public appearances, Gensler has also cited the difficulty of adequately disclosing the way AI is used as a reason why elimination of related conflicts is necessary, because disclosure will not be enough to protect investors.

On Thursday, the outgoing director of the SEC’s Investment Management Division, William Birdthistle, noted at the same conference that the SEC was unlikely to abandon the predictive analytics proposal as requested by the IAA. Gensler’s appearance further solidified that stance.

Prudential, RGA Assume Verizon Pension Obligations of $5.9B

The telecom giant announced the pension risk transfer through its purchase of single-premium group annuity contracts covering 56,000 retirees.

Verizon Communications Inc. has transferred $5.9 billion in employee pension obligations through the purchase of single-premium group annuity contracts from Prudential Insurance Co. of America and RGA Reinsurance Co., according to a filing on March 6, when the plan sponsor closed the purchase of the contracts.

The group annuities will provide benefits to 56,000 retirees who began receiving payments from the Verizon pension plans before January 1, 2023. Prudential is based in New Jersey, and RGA is based in Missouri.

Never miss a story — sign up for PLANADVISER newsletters to keep up on the latest retirement plan adviser news.

State Street Global Advisors Trust Co., based in Boston, is acting as the independent fiduciary of the affected pension funds, the Verizon Management Pension Plan and the Verizon Pension Plan for Associates.

“Prudential and RGA each irrevocably guarantee and assume the sole obligation to make future payments to the Transferred Participants as provided under their respective group annuity contracts, with direct payments beginning July 1, 2024,” the filing stated. “Prudential and RGA will each assume 50% of the benefit obligation related to Transferred Participants, except in certain jurisdictions where Prudential will assume 100% of the benefit obligation related to Transferred Participants residing in such jurisdictions.”

Verizon reported in the filing that it made additional contributions of about $365 million to the pension plans prior to the closing date of the transaction, which will mean that the funded ratio of each plan will not change as a result of this transaction.

The aggregate amount of each participant’s payment under the group annuity contracts “will be equal to the amount of each individual’s payment” under the pension funds, according to the Verizon filing.

One of the more unique features of the setup is the split transaction between Prudential and RGA, with each taking responsibility for 50% of payments for most participants, and Prudential administering everything, says Michael Clark, a managing director and consulting actuary with Agilis.

“Doing these type of split transactions—where technically each participant’s benefit is going to be split in half in terms of who is insuring it—means that they are getting double coverage from the state guarantee associations, which adds an additional level of protection from the participant’s perspective,” says Michael Clark, a managing director and consulting actuary with Agilis. “That’s a really good thing.”

Clark noted that RGA is a relatively new insurance player in the market among others who are seeking to leverage their business model for the PRT market.

“We’ve seen since 2012 more and more insurers get into this marketplace because they are realizing that these pension benefits are very much aligned with the type of long-term strategies that they employ anyway,” Clark says.

Verizon in 2012 transferred $7.5 billion in pension obligations to Prudential, which has completed four of the six largest U.S. pension risk transfers on record, according to an announcement related to the Verizon deal.

“Prudential is once again proud to help secure the pension benefits of Verizon’s retirees, along with RGA for this transaction, with whom we have a long-standing relationship,” said Alexandra Hyten, Prudential’s head of institutional retirement strategies, in a statement. “That, along with Prudential’s deep experience and leadership in managing and administering retirement benefits, will provide Verizon’s retirees a seamless transition with the superior service they expect and deserve.”

This is the largest transaction so far in 2024, though only slightly ahead of February’s top deal, when Prudential took on $4.9 billion in pension obligations from Shell, Clark notes, with Agilis expecting more deals, both big and small, through the year.

“It just goes to show you that the more and more companies that are analyzing the overall risk profile of maintaining pension plan benefits, they are realizing that the economics work in their favor to offload these to insurers,” he says.

Clark notes that many firms doing PRT transactions today are doing their second or third transfers. He expects, due to the relatively favorable market for PRTs, that transactions will soon grow among first-time companies as well as plan types.

“This is starting to expand beyond the corporate, single-employer space,” he says. “Especially as interest rates come up, we’re starting to see more interest from other types of pension plans in pension risk transfers—that includes multi-employer plans, church plans, public sector plans. They are starting to take a look at this and ask, ‘Hey, do the economics make sense for us as well?’”

Verizon’s recent transaction comes as the Department of Labor is overdue to release the results of its work to study and report on its findings about its Interpretive Bulletin 95-1, which governs fiduciary standards for selecting an insurer for a pension annuitization.

The SECURE 2.0 Act of 2022 required the DOL to study IB 95-1 and report its findings and any recommended changes to Congress by the end of this year. At hearings last year, hosted by the DOL’s ERISA Advisory Council, insurers said the existing procedure is working well, but some acknowledged that positive changes could still be made.

«