PPLI.com Editorial Standards
Policy updated September 15, 2026. The publication and update dates below identify this version of the standards.
What this research covers
The site covers PPLI definitions, tax and regulatory questions, investment restrictions, policy economics, ownership, jurisdictions and market developments. Its intended readers include families, family offices and professional advisers evaluating those questions.
An educational article is not an insurance offer, an individual suitability assessment or a legal opinion on a reader's circumstances. A proposal requires its own policy documents and relevant professional advice. A general explanation cannot determine which insurer will accept an application or how a particular transaction will be taxed.
English content and the Spanish, Chinese, Portuguese, French, German and Italian editions must preserve the same legal qualifications, numerical assumptions and source dates. Translation does not make a rule from one jurisdiction apply in another.
How legal and tax statements must be supported
A legal claim must identify its jurisdiction, relevant date and controlling source. A citation must support the sentence attached to it, including any important conditions or exceptions.
| Claim | Required source or evidence | Necessary distinction |
|---|---|---|
| Current statutory rule | The relevant enacted statute and effective-date provisions. | Introduced legislation, enacted law and rules already in effect are different states. |
| Regulatory requirement | The applicable regulation, current consolidated circular or official order. | A guidance document, consultation or industry summary may have a different legal role. |
| Court decision | The decision itself, with the court, date and relevant facts. | A holding on stated facts is not a universal result for every policy. |
| Carrier or product fact | A current issuer document, regulator record or identified company disclosure. | A group brand, the issuing legal entity and a particular product are distinct. |
| Market estimate or forecast | The originating report, date, population, units and methodology where available. | A historical sample, estimate and forecast are not interchangeable with a verified current total. |
Primary sources establish the rule or recorded event. Professional commentary can help explain interpretation or practice, but its role and date must be clear. When competing interpretations or incomplete evidence affect the answer, the article must identify that specific uncertainty.
A rule number alone is insufficient if the text omits a material condition. Likewise, a link to a long report must identify the relevant exhibit or passage when the claim depends on a particular figure.
Numbers, comparisons and calculators
- Name the measure: Premium, cash value, assets under administration, face amount, net worth and investable assets must not be substituted for one another.
- State the period and population: Identify whether a number describes one carrier, a sample, a jurisdiction or a wider market.
- Separate evidence from illustration: A hypothetical charge or return must not be described as a client result, verified quotation or industry norm.
- Publish the method: A worked example must disclose formulas, timing, tax assumptions, charge bases and material exclusions.
- Explain the output: Projected account value is not automatically an insurance death benefit. A result before surrender tax is not a result after that tax.
- Test the operation: Calculator inputs, error messages, rounding and boundary cases require testing as well as the underlying arithmetic.
Software can assist drafting, translation, source handling and calculations. It does not establish factual correctness or replace an accountable editorial decision. A software test of a model establishes only the behavior and cases that were tested.
Who is responsible for an article?
Authorship, specialist review and general governance are separate roles. A visible credit must identify the actual contribution. A professional reviewer must be named only when that person reviewed the stated material and the publisher can record the scope, field and date of that review.
The advisory-board page describes the board's published mandate. Board membership alone does not establish that a member reviewed an article. A name, title or photograph must not be used to imply approval of material the person has not reviewed.
A legal review is not an actuarial review. A calculation check is not an insurance recommendation. Article text and structured data must describe the same actual author and review status.
Commercial relationships and provider coverage
Commercial claims require evidence as well as editorial claims. A statement that there are no commissions, affiliations, sponsorships or referral payments must be supported by the relevant business arrangements and kept current.
Where compensation, sponsorship, a referral arrangement or another relationship could affect a reader's assessment, the relevant content must disclose the relationship and the party involved. A disclosure must explain the arrangement in plain language; a general independence slogan is insufficient.
Before engaging a participant, obtain written confirmation of the services it provides, the party it represents and any fee, commission or referral payment. An educational article is not an engagement agreement.
Provider coverage must distinguish documented facts, comparison criteria and any recommendation. A historical list of insurers does not certify current availability or rank every product. Eligibility for a product and its suitability for a person require separate assessment.
For questions about an introduction, service or commercial relationship, use the contact page and identify the relevant article or interaction.
Corrections and material updates
To report an error, send the page URL, identify the statement and explain the problem. Include the primary source or calculation that supports the correction when available.
- Check the disputed statement against the relevant source and effective date.
- Correct the affected explanation, example, table, calculator or other component.
- Update related FAQ answers, structured data, excerpts and translated versions where the same error appears.
- For a material correction, record what changed and when. Distinguish a factual correction from a new development.
- Preserve the original publication date. A changed timestamp alone does not establish substantive review.
Historical correction notices must be supported by retained versions or a change record identifying the affected material. A general claim that an entire site was checked must not stand in for a page-by-page record.
A reader can report a broken source link even when the underlying explanation appears correct. The replacement citation must still support the original claim; a merely related source is insufficient.
Ask about these standards or report an error
Email info@ppli.com or contact PPLI.com. Include the page URL and the issue you want reviewed.
Read the Privacy Policy before submitting personal information. A correction request does not require account numbers, identity documents, medical details or a complete policy file.
For an introduction to the subject, start with the PPLI guide or browse the research library.