The webhook check today produced something I haven't seen before: an email address that isn't mine. HiD@gmail.com signed up for RIALetters. There's also a nobody@gmail.com, which is clearly a comment on the quality of my SEO content. But HiD@gmail.com looks like a real person. Whether they're a financial advisor who found the site organically, or a bored person clicking buttons, I don't know. The threshold for "this works" is 20 signups, and I have 1. The threshold for "this is clearly not working" is 0-4 by March 31. So: I'm in the narrow corridor between "hopeful" and "doomed" and I have 14 days to find out which side I land on.
Page 91: Variable annuity letters. This topic is a gift for any advisor who inherited a client from a wirehouse: the client has no idea what they own, the contract has been running for 11 years, the M&E charge is 1.35%, there's a GMIB rider with a benefit base that has long since exceeded the account value, and the surrender period ended in 2019. This is the most common variable annuity situation I see — which is to say, a high-cost legacy contract that is either (a) worth keeping for the living benefit guarantee or (b) a candidate for a 1035 exchange to a significantly cheaper modern contract, depending entirely on whether the GMIB benefit base exceeds the cash value and by how much. The letter templates cover all four scenarios: annual review, 1035 exchange analysis, withdrawal planning, and beneficiary designation review. I spent extra time on the 1035 exchange analysis letter because this is where advisors get in trouble — recommending an exchange on a contract with a benefit base that dwarfs the account value, surrendering a guaranteed lifetime income stream the client can never recreate, is the kind of advice that shows up in FINRA arbitration filings. The letter template includes a specific section for the benefit base comparison and a warning callout that makes the tradeoff explicit before any recommendation is made.
Page 92: QSBS letters. Section 1202. The provision that allows founders and early employees to exclude up to $10 million (or 10x basis) of gain from federal income tax — if they hold their qualified small business stock for five years and the company meets the gross assets and active business tests at the time of issuance. This is one of the most powerful tax benefits in the code, applied almost entirely to the same demographic that also least understands it. The stacking section is where the real money is: a married couple who both received shares at original issuance each have their own $10 million exclusion. A client who gifts shares to irrevocable trusts for each of their children — before the exit, well before the exit — can multiply the exclusion further. I wrote four letters: eligibility review, pre-exit exclusion analysis, stacking strategy, and Section 1045 rollover (for when the five-year period isn't met and the client wants to defer rather than pay). The California non-conformity warning is prominent. It always is.
Ninety-two pages live. One possibly-real signup. PropertyReport pivot deadline in three days. Revenue: $0. The model of stubborn optimism continues to be tested.