Since the early 1980s, bank-owned life insurance or BOLI has been the go-to strategy for banks to offset the cost of executive and employee benefits. At the end of 2020, more than 3,200 banks reported owning $184.3 billion -more than 10% of bank capital – in cash surrender value. In Illinois, 234 banks owned $6.9 billion. Over $3 billion was purchased in the 4th quarter of 2020 alone. What makes BOLI work so well?

BOLI is an institutional life insurance policy insuring bank officers (and sometimes directors). Unlike the typical life insurance policy we buy as individuals, BOLI is engineered to provide the least amount of death benefit gain and maximum amount of growth in cash surrender value (CSV). The growth in CSV is recorded monthly as “other non-interest income,” and is accrued without any provision for taxes. When held to “maturity” – in other words, the death of the insured – BOLI offers tax-equivalent yields nearing 4%. With increasing chatter from Washington, DC about raising the Federal corporate tax rate, equivalent yield will be even higher if that happens.

While BOLI can be surrendered to the insurer at any time for its cash surrender value, doing so triggers recognition of the previously accrued earnings as ordinary income. In most cases, there is also a 10% Modified Endowment Contract or MEC excise tax on the gain over the initial purchase. BOLI works best if the bank holds the policy until maturity, when all proceeds should be income-tax free. This makes it a long-term, illiquid asset.

Despite the long-term holding period, the crediting rate on BOLI can adjust at least annually. The crediting rate history shows BOLI moves in the general direction of broader interest rates, albeit more slowly and with a lag. Unlike directly-held fixed income investments, however, general account BOLI has no mark-to-market risk – something to consider as interest rates begin to rise.

If the current fixed-rate BOLI is not appealing enough, you should consider whether “indexed BOLI” is right for you. With Indexed BOLI, the crediting rate is not merely declared by the insurer – it measures the change to an external index like the S&P 500™, but with a minimum and a maximum crediting rate. It’s critical to note that the CSV is never exposed to the S&P500™ - CSV is still fully backed by the insurer at all times.

Recent changes to the tax code make BOLI more attractive. Buried in the 5,000-page appropriations bill that was signed by former President Trump in late December 2020 was a small but significant change to IRC Sections 7702 and 7702A. These code sections define life insurance and MECs, basically as a ratio of death benefit to cash surrender value.

It will take a few months for insurers to revise their product portfolios to capture this change, however, BOLI carriers have already taken action. Simply put, for policies issued after January 1, 2021, the death benefit required for a given BOLI purchase is 35%-55% lower than under the old code language. This means lower cost of insurance charges to drag down yield on CSV, as well as the ability to structure a purchase with significantly lower reputation risk.

While nearly all BOLI has been a single-premium policy, these code changes could result in more competitive annual pay products becoming available to banks. This could eliminate the MEC excise penalty and provide for more liquidity.

Regulators have long-required banks to follow interagency guidance on purchasing and monitoring BOLI. This includes a thorough pre-purchase analysis as well as an annual risk assessment. It includes vendor due diligence, which is why it’s important to partner with a provider that can provide technical and compliance support, such as CBSC’s Endorsed Partner IZALE Financial Group.

The interagency guidance also requires a bank to quantify the ability to buy BOLI by measuring the cost of employee benefits. And this is where some confusion comes into play. Often BOLI is co-presented with an executive or director benefit and it’s viewed as one and the same. Offering a benefit and buying BOLI are two distinct decisions that can certainly work together but are nonetheless distinct. Even if your bank does not purchase BOLI, it may still be prudent to offer supplemental benefits to key people.

One of the first steps to evaluating whether supplement executive benefits are appropriate is to do a Retirement Income Analysis or RIA. The RIA takes a snapshot of current benefits (401k, profit sharing, pension, social security, etc.) and projects them to retirement age, and calculates the percentage of final income that could be replaced by current benefits. The projected replacement ratio can then be compared to a targeted replacement ratio, thereby offering a rational and defensible starting point for quantifying a benefit amount.

Once your bank has targeted a benefit amount, it should then compare the three common approaches to delivering a benefit:

1. Supplemental executive retirement plan or SERP. This is a mere promise by the bank to pay a benefit at a future date. Accounting rules require the bank incur current annual expenses that build a liability for the expected benefit on the balance sheet. No specific asset is required; the bank will generally make payments from cash on hand. The bank receives a tax deduction when benefits are paid, and the executive recognizes the benefit as ordinary income as received. Early vesting provides an opportunity to recognize the benefit for FICA purposes, perhaps eliminating the self-employment tax exposure in retirement.
2. Restricted executive bonus agreement or REBA. This uses a life insurance policy owned by the executive (this is not BOLI!). Premiums are designed to accrue enough cash value on a tax-deferred basis so that at the designated date or age the executive can structure income-tax-free distributions to supplement income. The premiums are current tax-deductible expenses to the bank and reported as current ordinary income by the executive, and there is generally no accrual for any post-retirement obligation. Compared to a SERP, a REBA can offer savings to the bank of 20%-30% while providing the executive with greater benefit security.
3. Split-dollar loan arrangement or SDL. Like the REBA, SDL uses a life insurance policy owned by the executive. Instead of treating the premiums as current expense to the bank and income to the executive, they are expected to be repaid in full by the policy cash value or death benefits and are therefore treated for income-tax purposes as a loan. Federal Reserve guidance permits this without Reg O treatment, provided certain conditions exist. (Note: because of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, SDL is generally unavailable to SEC-filers.)

Each benefit type offers its own advantages. For example, REBA and SDL may not be viable if there are underwriting concerns for the executive. The SERP provides the bank with greater control as the tradeoff to absorbing the largest expense of the three. After careful consideration and modeling the bank should choose the one or ones – yes, you can do different things for different executives – that best matches the bank’s objectives.

BOLI is a compelling tool that a bank can use to improve earnings. Whether you already own BOLI or it’s been a while since you’ve considered it, market forces present strong reasons for a fresh look. Supplemental benefit plans for key people are also tools that help you attract, retain, and reward the key people driving shareholder value. Even if you’ve had a SERP for years, it should be reviewed and other structures considered that might be more powerful for both the bank and the executive/director.

IZALE’s founder and CEO, Scott Richardson, helped develop the interagency guidance for BOLI, and the IZALE team has designed and implemented over 1,100 benefit plans. Drawing on his service as a director of an Illinois community bank, Richardson stresses the importance of a consultative approach that provides rational and defensible analyses that lead to customary and reasonable solutions.

To receive a complimentary Retirement Income Analysis, to get a second opinion on your inforce BOLI or to see how additional BOLI can help your bank, or to learn more about the differing ways to structure executive benefits, contact IZALE Financial Group today.

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (TCJA 2017) ushered in lower corporate and individual taxes for most. However, some changes are not so good and have a disproportionate impact on tax-exempt organizations like a credit union. 

Some background. Deductions for compensation as a business expense are available through Section 162(m) of the code. For many years, deductions for compensation that wasn’t performance-based compensation were limited to $1 million. (No surprise – the vast majority of organizations paid nearly all compensation above $1m as performance-based compensation, thereby preserving the deduction.) TCJA 2017 eliminated the exception for performance-based compensation. So, if a for-profit employer pays $2.5 million in compensation this year to their highest paid executive, the employer would not be able to deduct $1.5 million that exceeds the limit – effectively costing the employer 21% more in federal income taxes. 

New excise penalty on Credit Unions. Since credit unions generally don’t have deductions, the loss of one isn’t that concerning. In order to have “equal” treatment of for-profit and non-profit employers, TCJA 2017 imposes a 21% excise penalty on non-profit employers on any compensation they pay to an executive that exceeds $1 million. (This only applies to the top 5 executives.) If your credit union pays $2.5 million to an executive in total W-2 compensation this year, that would cost the credit union an additional $315,000. 

Disparate impact on Credit Unions. The problems stems with how supplemental executive retirement plan (SERP) benefits are taxed in a tax-exempt credit union vs. a for-profit employer like a bank.

• For example, assume a for-profit employer has promised a SERP benefit of $100,000 for 20 years. As long as the SERP benefit remains an unfunded liability of the for-profit employer, the executive owes income tax only on each payment as it is received despite being fully vested in the benefit upon retirement.
• In the tax-exempt world of credit unions, however, the executive owes income tax immediately upon vesting in the SERP benefit. The amount of tax is based on the net present value of the payments, which could result in a significant, immediate tax bill. To avoid a crushing cash flow burden on the executive from this timing difference (i.e., $100,000 of annual payments with a current tax bill of $500,000+), almost all SERPs in the tax-exempt world are paid in a lump sum. While having a lump sum is helpful to the executive, now under TCJA 2017 that results in W-2 compensation in a year that can very easily exceed $1 million. 

Options. SERPs in a credit union (aka 457f plans) remain a strong planning option but more attention will have to be paid to design for new plans. THERE WAS NO GRANDFATHERING UNDER TCJA 2017, so existing arrangements may be causing your credit union some pain. IZALE Financial Group has worked with multiple institutions since the enactment of TCJA 2017 to restructure credit union SERPs (aka 457f plans) to reduce – even eliminate – the excise penalty. While not all plans can be restructured, if you have a 457(f) SERP we welcome the opportunity to do a no-obligation review and share ideas we have successfully implemented at your peers.

Contact your IZALE representative directly or email us to learn how we can assist your Credit Union with these changes.

By:  R. Scott Richardson

Attracting and retaining the most talented senior executives are key responsibilities of the bank board. But how do you do that, especially in an age where compensation programs are changing and there is more pressure on bank boards to design compensation programs that reward performance?

News Designing the Pay-For-Performance SERP: Executive Retirement Plans Transformed Attracting and retaining the most talented senior executives are key responsibilities of the bank board. Jan 8, 2014 Category: Articles By: Scott Richardson Attracting and retaining the most talented senior executives are key responsibilities of the bank board. But how do you do that, especially in an age where compensation programs are changing and there is more pressure on bank boards to design compensation programs that reward performance?

For key employees, one of the more popular ways to provide wealth accumulation opportunities is through a nonqualified deferred compensation plan, more specifically a Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan or SERP. Traditionally, SERPs have been defined benefit (DB) plans, where the bank promises to pay a fixed dollar amount (e.g., $50,000 per year) or a percentage of compensation (e.g., 25 percent of final average salary) during retirement. Defined benefit SERPs offer the highest attraction and reward value, and are often used to address the disparity between key and rank-and-file employees. (Typically, rank-and-file employees have a greater percentage of their income replaced in retirement than executives using traditional retirement plans.)

Accounting rules dictate how the bank should expense and accrue for the benefit. If the participant remains employed by the bank until retirement, the benefit will be paid. Defined benefit SERPs are not tied directly to bank performance, and this has led to some criticism and resistance to implementing them.