A typical VUL illustration shouldn't show a 12% return, that's not
reasonable.

The 0% column should be the guaranteed return, net of expense. Which should
show the contract imploding somewhere along the line.

<onmyd[at]my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1132113998.728174.250480[at]g43g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
- quote -

A VUL insured wants to allocate 50% of premium to a separate account,
and the other 50% to a general account with a 3% guarantee. An
NASD-compliant illustration is produced, showing the usual 0% and 12%
columns. With respect to the 0% columns, what interest rate should be
used to accumulate funds in the general account?

For instance, if the 0% columns are labeled
0% assumed investment return on separate account
3% guaranteed return on general account
and the general-account portion of the cash value in these columns is
accumulated at 3%, is that OK? Or must the general-account funds be
accumulated at 0%, even though the contract guarantees a minimum that's
greater than 0% for the general account?