Talk:Unitised insurance fund

Change opening text

Any objections to changing the opening text to refer specifically to Isle of Man and Channel Islands instead of "British Isles offshore jurisdictions"? --Bardcom (talk) 15:42, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I don't think BI makes much sense here, but what precisely does it mean when it says "offshore jurisdications"? Presumably this doesn't include the Cayman Islands and such like. This would need checking. CarterBar (talk) 21:06, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Looking at other Wikipedia articles "offshore" might include British Virgin Islands and even Dublin, and might not include IoM etc. Looks like the first part of the second sentence could need re-writing. CarterBar (talk) 21:23, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

I confess that I don't understand what the editor means to say. Perhaps they mean just British offshore jurisdictions like the Channel Island and Isle of Man (for me, high probability given the context of the article and the word "jurisdiction"), but yeah - perhaps it means any offshore jurisdiction (in which case it could be anywhere on the planet). I'll ask. --Bardcom (talk) 17:54, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

The prevalence of these fund is linked to the prevalence of insurance bonds used as an investment product. Under UK tax law single premium life insurance contracts have certain advantages for investment. This lead to the development of the with-profits bond where the investor participates in the profits of the life assurance company and receives bonuses. In the 1970s unit linked contracts were introduced to compete with the traditional life offices offering with profit contracts. These 'new' companies structured their policies as unit-linked funds offering direct links to unit trusts as the underlying investment or running their own unit-linked investment funds as a segregated asset pool within the life assurance company. UK life offices with offshore arms typically in the Channel islands and the Isle of man also offered this type of contract. UK tax law recognises offshore insurance bonds in the same way as onshore bonds. Therefore these contracts are not uncommon. I suspect that this type of contract exists in the US but it is hard to find confirmation of this. simonthebold (talk) 09:28, 20 July 2008 (UTC)

There are a lot of different terms for similar investment products in the offshore market. Onshore insurance bonds generally apply to Uk Insurance Bonds. Most companies use the term insurance bond which makes it fairly easy to research what is available. The offshore market is far less homogenised. 'Offshore insurance bonds' are also referred to as 'offshore investment bonds' or 'portfolio bonds' or 'offshore bonds'. They are structured in a similar way to the Uk onshore insurance bond but gain certain advantageous particularly for ex-pats (not US citizens they qualify for little on account of their being taxed on worldwide earnings-better to stay based in US)in order to qualify for deferred tax -or rollup tax free. There are a number of key players in this market; the major ones are based in the Isle of Man and Guernsey. Key providers are: Royal Skandia, Friends Provident International, Royal London, Generali International, Hansard, Standard Life, Axa-although the former companies are more experienced in dealing with international investors. This is a huge area to cover and it is a pity this is just a footnote. Offshore bonds are not even titled as a topic yet thousands of investors have these plans. A little more information for consumers would be highly beneficial for them to avoid making errors and being reliant on the say so of an 'expert' they met through a friend. Single payment plans charges are higher than onshore- the regular payment plans are structured much like the old endowments- in other words they are horrendous in terms of charges. Many an expat has regretted the day he was sold one. Single payment plans can be attractive but again the charges should be carefully reviewed and comparisons should be made, better to negotiate a discount on commission. Most plans are sold through brokers. Investments placed through Isle of Man and Guernsey has adequate regulation however problems often arise since the selling process is very badly regulated. Complaints relating to what the broker wrote or said should not be relied upon in a court of law (which is often an understatement) and are given little time by providers or the regulators- it is what is stated in the contract which counts. The analogy with regulating the internet comes to mind, on the whole the present state of play, as long as the investor is careful, allows him tremendous opportunities in certain areas.--peterprov (talk) 08:42, 25 June 2009 (UTC)