Talk:Life annuity

Initial content
I saw a hole and started to fill it; of course, I have a deep interest in this topic from several angles. My wish is that the coverage be as extensive as this important topic needs, from the requisite viewpoints (technical, political, ...). jmswtlk 19:44, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Content
Ought some of this content (History of Calculating Life Annuities) move over to the History of the Life annuity page? jmswtlk 22:05, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Or be a separate page dealing with History that we can organize to early, mid, and present. Then, we would need a Techniques page (that points to current work and thinking) plus more on the Futures (where recent developments have gone and what might be the other improvements). jmswtlk 22:26, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Merge Annuity (financial contracts)
The Annuity (financial contracts) page (Category: Contract law) seems to be mainly about the concept of life annuities, and contains very little legal provisions. So why not merge it in here, or at least its appropriate non-legal content? --Wikiphile1603 (talk) 02:37, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Wikiphile1603 (talk) 01:29, 9 April 2009 (UTC)

Removal of table in 'History' section
Want to proactively provide explanation for deletion. I performed extensive searching of the internet and read many PDFs (gasp!) and couldnt find one source that confirmed values in the table. The Ulpian values match a table attributed to him, but the values are of a multiplier, not a fee, as the table caption suggested. Searches for other values associated with other historical figures returned no results. There is ambiguity of the nature of the value (price? what units? what currency? value? multiplier?). Thus, I deleted the unreferenced, ambiguous data. Regards, January2009 (talk) 03:31, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Life annuity. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070928095029/http://www.insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_news&id=30974 to http://www.insurancenewsnet.com/article.asp?a=top_news&id=30974

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 14:16, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

"substantial case law"
This article mentions that "substantial case law indicates that annuity products are not necessarily insurance products". This seems to presuppose an American point of view. Perhaps the statement could be qualified: "in the U.S., substantial case law indicates..." Also, just one court decision is cited, so it's not immediately clear what backs up the claim that "substantial" case law carries this force. Omphaloscope talk 14:10, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply] Omphaloscope talk 14:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)