Sources#

Source ids [S#]/[R#] are carried verbatim from _research/kapitallebensversicherung.md (the citation ground truth for this product) and are frozen — never renumber. Unused sources are omitted, so the numbering has gaps: S14 (CosmosDirekt, “Erlebensfall: Was ist das und wie läuft die Auszahlung?” — located, but the fused search summary attributed no statement to it, so nothing in the product documents rests on it) and R31 (the EUROPA Lebensversicherung and Deutsche Lebensversicherungs-AG Geschäftsberichte 2024 — recorded in the research file as locatable primary sources of per-undertaking Stornoquoten and cost ratios, with no content established) are not cited by product-spec.md, technical-notes.md or model.md and are therefore absent below. Access date at drafting: 2026-08-29; the re-verification pass read on 2026-08-30, and each entry carries its own read date. No sources were newly added at drafting. Cross-product [REG-R#] tags are listed in their own section at the end.

The retrieval conditions, stated plainly, because they changed after this file was first written. delib was drafted under two limits, and both shaped every entry below. First, direct HTTP egress was blocked by an organisation network policy: WebFetch and curl were refused (HTTP 403 at the egress gateway) for every host outside a short package-registry allowlist, and gesetze-im-internet.de, bafin.de, gdv.de, aktuar.de, bundesfinanzministerium.de, dejure.org, buzer.de, destatis.de and de.wikipedia.org were all tried and all refused, so not one document listed here was retrieved — not a Bedingungswerk, not a Basisinformationsblatt, not a statutory text, not a BaFin Merkblatt. Second, the session’s shared WebSearch budget of 200 calls was exhausted after 24 searches on this product. The first draft therefore rested on search-result summaries and on the authoring model’s own knowledge of German insurance law and practice, disciplined by the std and unverified tags — which is why the statutory and supervisory core was researched to a usable depth and the insurer-by-insurer parameter sweep was not.

That policy has since been lifted, and these citations were re-verified against the primary documents on 2026-08-30. Of the forty-seven entries below, forty-five now rest on a document that was opened and read — 96 % — and two do not. The statutory core arrives as canonical XML from gesetze-im-internet.de, each instrument with its amendment status recorded: the VVG R1 to R5, the MindZV R6, the DeckRV R7, the VAG R8, the VVG-InfoV R9 and the EStG R10. The carrier material arrives as PDF — six Bedingungswerke, the GDV Musterbedingungen [S1] and Muster-Standmitteilung [S2], the Verbraucherinformationen bound into the VPV wording [S18] and one PRIIP-Basisinformationsblatt [S10] — and the consumer, trade-press and supervisory material as HTML. Several entries cover a group of documents and record one of the group as missing — R11 a subscription login, R19 a 404 on one article of three, R26 a paywall, R10 the Einkommensteuer-Handbuch behind a bot interstitial, R17 a press release — and the Retrieved: line always names which. The two failures are [S8], HTTP 404 at the cited die Bayerische URL with no replacement found on that carrier’s script-loaded document index, and R24, whose rechtsportal.de report of the 2001–2007 BGH line answers HTTP 429; both are kept as known references and nothing quantitative rests on either.

So read a Retrieved: line before you rely on the entry above it. Retrieved: yes means the document was opened and the passage the entry rests on was read; a German sentence quoted in such an entry is quoted from the instrument. Anything else leaves the entry a pointer, not a certificate — it names the instrument a claim should be checked against, it does not assert that anyone checked it — and a German sentence quoted there is quoted from a search-result summary. Re-verification was not a formality: several entries below record a claim the drafted text got wrong and now correct, among them the surplus base at [S3], the Debeka edition dates at [S4] and [S5], the Standmitteilung field list at [S2] and the lapse figures at R20. Across delib as a whole the coverage is materially thinner than it is here — roughly three entries in five are Retrieved: yes, the rest naming what happened: a 404, a consent or JavaScript wall, a paywall, a subscription login — so this product is one of the better-covered ones, and each sibling gives its own count. Every URL below was retrieved directly, returned by a search, or is the obvious canonical form of one; where there is none, the entry says URL: not established rather than guessing.

Primary product sources#

S1 — GDV, “Allgemeine Bedingungen für die kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung” (Musterbedingungen)#

  • Publisher / doc type: Gesamtverband der Deutschen Versicherungswirtschaft e. V.; Musterbedingungen — model AVB published by the industry association for members to adopt, adapt or ignore, the GDV stating their use to be unverbindlich and purely optional

  • URL: https://www.gdv.de/resource/blob/6348/075948efa290a72d0bb062dec766f56f/allgemeine-bedingungen-fuer-die-kapitalbildende-lebensversicherung-pdf-data.pdf (index: https://www.gdv.de/gdv/service/musterbedingungen)

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 20 pp., Stand: 21.07.2025, read 2026-08-30) — the whole model wording, §§ 1–20, arrives as clause text

  • Used for: the existence of a market-wide model wording, the second-person, question-headed drafting style of post-2008 VVG AVB (§ 1 is headed “Welche Leistungen erbringen wir?”), and the GDV’s own competition-law disclaimer, printed above the title of the retrieved edition: “Diese Bedingungen sind für die Versicherer unverbindlich; ihre Verwendung ist rein fakultativ.” Now that the text is readable it is also the market template for the clause shape this library models — § 12 Abs. 3 restating the § 169 VVG surrender construction including the five-year spread floor; § 13 Abs. 1 computing the beitragsfreie Versicherungssumme “unter Zugrundelegung des Rückkaufswertes nach § 12 Absatz 3”; § 14 Abs. 2 applying “das Verrechnungsverfahren nach § 4 der Deckungsrückstellungsverordnung”, with the amount so amortised “auf 2,5 % der von Ihnen während der Laufzeit des Vertrages zu zahlenden Beiträge beschränkt”; and § 2 Abs. 7, “Die Höhe der künftigen Überschussbeteiligung kann also nicht garantiert werden. Sie kann auch Null Euro betragen.” S1 still fixes no level, and no rate anywhere in delib is attributed to it. Every quantitative field in the model wording is an ellipsis for the undertaking to fill: the Abzug in §§ 12 Abs. 4 and 13 Abs. 2, the minimum sums in § 13 Abs. 4, and — footnote 6 — the Wartezeit, the Bemessungsgrößen für die Überschussanteile and the Rechnungsgrundlagen, all relegated to “unternehmensindividuelle Angaben”

S2 — GDV, “Jährliche Mitteilung zum Stand Ihrer Versicherung” (Muster-Standmitteilung, kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung, 02/2017)#

  • Publisher / doc type: GDV; model Standmitteilung, the annual statement sent to the policyholder. The GDV file name carries “02-2017”; the retrieved document is dated 22 March 2018 in its own body and is headed “Anlage 5”

  • URL: https://www.gdv.de/resource/blob/6302/890c551440e2d065eba74180437f6970/5-gdv-muster-standmitteilung-kapitalbildende-lebensversicherung-02-2017-data.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 7 pp., dated 22 March 2018 in the document body, read 2026-08-30) — the full field list, the glossary and the footnote apparatus

  • Used for: the field list of the German annual statement — and the retrieved document contradicts the four-quantity description this entry previously carried. What the Muster-Standmitteilung actually reports is a roll-forward of the Garantiertes Kapital (opening balance, plus premiums, plus Erträge, less the year’s Abschluss- und Vertriebskosten and Verwaltungskosten), then a “Für die Zukunft nicht garantierter Schlussüberschuss” and a “Für die Zukunft nicht garantierte Beteiligung an Bewertungsreserven” added to give a Gesamtkapital; separate blocks give the benefit at Versicherungsablauf, at death, at Beitragsfreistellung and at vorzeitige Vertragsbeendigung, each split into a guaranteed part and those same two non-guaranteed parts, with a three-column sensitivity at the current declaration and at ±1 percentage point. There is no line called Rückkaufswert and none called beitragsfreie Versicherungssumme: the surrender figure appears as “Gesamte einmalige Zahlung” under vorzeitige Vertragsbeendigung, the paid-up figure as a maturity benefit computed on a paid-up basis. The document also names a Sockelbeteiligung an Bewertungsreserven, which is the corroboration the Sockelbetrag at R8 previously lacked; and it is the statutory Standmitteilung duty in the specification’s regulatory context

S3 — Debeka Lebensversicherungsverein a. G., Bedingungswerk B LV 85 (edition 01.07.2026)#

  • Publisher / doc type: Debeka Lebensversicherungsverein a. G., 21 pp., running header “B LV 85 (01.07.2026) Seite 1 von 21”. Not an endowment wording. The retrieved document is titled “Allgemeine Bedingungen für eine Rentenversicherung mit aufgeschobener Rentenzahlung und Fondskomponenten nach Tarif CA2I (ABAR-IT 07/2026)” — a deferred annuity with a garantiebasierter and a fondsgebundener Baustein. Debeka’s own document library [S6] files it under Aufgeschobene Rentenversicherung

  • URL: https://www.debeka.de/content/dam/de/webauftritt/vertragsgrundlagen/lebens-rentenversicherung/BLV85.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 21 pp., edition 01.07.2026, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the quantified Stornoabzug, and nothing about endowment surplus. § 34 imposes two deductions, both “in Prozent des Deckungskapitals”: an Ausgleich für die Veränderungen der Ertragslage des Versichertenkollektivs keyed to the difference between the 10-year zero-coupon euro swap rate published by the Bundesbank three months before termination and its own ten-year average — “Kapitalmarktsituation 1 (Differenz von weniger als 0,5 Prozentpunkte): kein Abzug”, 2 (0,5 to under 1 pp): 5 %, 3 (1 to under 1,5 pp): 10 %, 4 (from 1,5 pp): 15 % — and a flat Ausgleich für kollektiv gestelltes Risikokapital of “5 % des Deckungskapitals”. Both fall linearly to 0 % over the last ten years of the Aufschubzeit, and both lapse entirely on a Kündigung in the last five years once the life has passed 62 and the contract has run twelve years. That is the observation the std storno_rate schedule is set against, and it is a schedule on the reserve — but note that the range starts at nil, not at 5 %, and decays with duration, neither of which a flat schedule reproduces

  • Contradicted by retrieval, and corrected downstream. The load-bearing surplus claim this entry previously carried is not in the document. § 30 Abs. 1 b sets Zinsüberschussanteile monthly, “in Prozent des Deckungskapitals” struck at the start of the month excluding the premium then due, and first from the third Versicherungsjahr, not annually and not from inception; and § 30 Abs. 2 sets Schlussüberschussanteile not on the reserve at all but “in Prozent der Summe der während der Aufschubzeit für den Erwerb von Fondsanteilen verwendeten Zinsüberschussanteile”. The allocated surplus is invested in a fund, not booked into the Deckungskapital. The reserve-as-surplus-base fact the model rests on is therefore now carried by [S18] and [S7], which are endowment wordings; S3 corroborates only that a German carrier declares interest surplus as a percentage of the reserve

S4 — Debeka, Bedingungswerk B LV 86 (edition 01.07.2026)#

  • Publisher / doc type: Debeka Lebensversicherungsverein a. G., 19 pp. Also not an endowment wording: “Allgemeine Bedingungen für eine Rentenversicherung mit aufgeschobener Rentenzahlung und Fondskomponenten nach Tarif CA6I (ABAR-IG 07/2026)”

  • URL: https://www.debeka.de/content/dam/de/webauftritt/vertragsgrundlagen/lebens-rentenversicherung/BLV86.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 19 pp., edition 01.07.2026, read 2026-08-30). The edition recorded here before this pass — 01.01.2025 — was wrong: the URL is a current-version path and the document behind it now carries 01.07.2026

  • Used for: the evidence that one insurer maintains three parallel wordings for one product family, which is the specification’s variation argument. Retrieval corrects what the three vary by. They are not endowment wordings of different vintages: all three carry the same edition date, 01.07.2026, and differ by tariff — CA2I regular premium (S3), CA6I (S4), CA2IE single premium (S5). The cohort argument for rechnungszins and the two DeckRV ceilings survives, but it now rests on DeckRV § 2 Abs. 2 and § 4 Abs. 4 at R7, which lock both to the rate used at conclusion for the whole term, and on the 4 %-era wording at [S7]

S5 — Debeka, Bedingungswerk B LV 97 (edition 01.07.2026)#

  • Publisher / doc type: Debeka Lebensversicherungsverein a. G., 18 pp. Likewise not an endowment wording: “Allgemeine Bedingungen für eine Rentenversicherung mit aufgeschobener Rentenzahlung und Fondskomponenten gegen Einmalbeitrag nach Tarif CA2IE (ABAR-IT-E 07/2026)”

  • URL: https://www.debeka.de/content/dam/de/webauftritt/vertragsgrundlagen/lebens-rentenversicherung/BLV97.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 18 pp., edition 01.07.2026, read 2026-08-30); the 01.01.2025 edition recorded before this pass was wrong for the same reason as at [S4]

  • Used for: the third member of the 85 / 86 / 97 triple — the single-premium sibling — and, still, for the disclosure in the specification and in model.md that no carrier wording in this corpus publishes a mortality basis, an expense loading or a commission scale. That holds after retrieval: none of the six carrier documents now read states a first-order mortality table, a Verwaltungskostensatz or a commission rate, so every such level in the model remains std

S6 — Debeka, “Vertragsgrundlagen und weitere Informationen (Bedingungswerke, Tarifbedingungen, IPID etc.)” — Kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung#

  • Publisher / doc type: Debeka; insurer document-library index page

  • URL: https://www.debeka.de/service/bedingungen/Lebensversicherung___Rentenversicherung/Lebensversicherung/Kapitalbildende_Lebensversicherung/index.html

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, read 2026-08-30). The cited path redirects to Debeka’s single document library at https://www.debeka.de/service/vertragsgrundlagen.html, headed “Vertragsgrundlagen, Tarifbedingungen, IPID etc.”

  • Used for: the fact that “Kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung” is a live heading in a major German insurer’s own taxonomy at the access date — it is there, under Lebensversicherung, in the retrieved index — which is the specification’s market-role anchor on the manufacturer side; and the document types a German carrier publishes per product, the index offering Bedingungswerke, Tarifbedingungen, Merkblätter and an IPID, the German market labelling the pre-contractual summary with the EU IDD term. Retrieval adds the sharper finding: under that heading Debeka lists no AVB at all — only a Steuermerkblatt, a Kirchensteuerinformationsblatt and the AVB for a Sterbegeldversicherung. The three Bedingungswerke at [S3]–[S5] sit under Aufgeschobene Rentenversicherung. So the category is live in the taxonomy and empty of wordings: Debeka publishes no endowment AVB

S7 — Gothaer, “Allgemeine Versicherungsbedingungen für die kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Gothaer Lebensversicherung AG; AVB for the kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung, 12 pp., “Version: 05.12.2011”, document stamp 215401 - 01.12, served from the broker portal partner.gothaer.de through a streaming endpoint carrying a scope parameter. One of the two genuine endowment wordings in the corpus (with [S18]) — and, being pre-LVRG, the only one written under the old ceilings

  • URL: https://partner.gothaer.de/StreamingServlet/app/dvz/DocumentDownload/215401?scope=makler_scope

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 12 pp., version 05.12.2011, read 2026-08-30) — the endpoint serves the document to a public reader

  • Used for: the benefit shape — § 3 I pays the Versicherungssumme at the Ablauf on survival and on death before it, “Mit der Auszahlung endet der Vertrag” in both branches; § 8 the reduction of the sum insured in whole or in part to a beitragsfreie Summe, with a floor of 1.500 EUR below which § 7 Abs. 2 and 3 are paid instead and the contract ends — the quantified form of the § 165 VVG Mindestversicherungsleistung branch at R3; and the surplus base, which S3 turned out not to supply: § 5 II (4) “Es werden Jahresanteile zugewiesen. Diese bestehen aus einem Risikoanteil in Promille der Versicherungssumme und in Prozent des Risikobeitrags sowie einem Ertragsanteil in Prozent des maßgeblichen Deckungskapitals.” That is surplus_base_pp — the reserve for the interest component, the sum insured and the risk premium for the risk component — from an endowment wording of a named carrier. Also the four Überschussverwendung systems by name (Verzinsliche Ansammlung, Barauszahlung, Gewinnsystem BE which “vor allem die Leistung Ihrer Versicherung im Erlebensfall verstärkt”, Gewinnsystem BS), the Schlussgewinnanteil at Ablauf with a reduced amount on surrender and death, the half share of the Bewertungsreserven on termination subject to a declared Mindestbetrag, and the Zillmerverfahren at § 6 Abs. 2 with the amortisable amount limited “auf 4 % der von Ihnen während der Laufzeit des Vertrags zu zahlenden Beiträge” — the pre-LVRG 40 ‰ ceiling, in a carrier wording, which is the primary evidence that deckrv_table.csv’s Zillmer column is a cohort fact

  • Two corrections retrieval forces. First, “on death before the Ablauftermin no further premiums are due” is not a rule of the ordinary endowment here: it appears only in variant II, the Kapitalversicherung auf festen Termin, where the sum insured falls due at the fixed date irrespective of survival, so premiums must be stopped expressly. In variants I, III and IV the contract simply ends with the death payment. prem_charged_pp’s cessation rule and pitfall 11 are correct for a Termfixversicherung and are a consequence of contract termination otherwise. Second, § 4 Abs. 1 limits the insurer’s liability to the Rückkaufswert on suicide “innerhalb von zwei Jahren nach Vertragsbeginn” — shorter than the three years of § 161 VVG, which § 171 VVG permits because it favours the policyholder, and a working illustration that the statutory period is a ceiling on the insurer’s relief, not a market constant

S8 — die Bayerische, “Allgemeine Bedingungen für die kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung”, document B 510121#

  • Publisher / doc type: BL die Bayerische Lebensversicherung AG; AVB for a Kapital-Lebensversicherung. The existence of this document is contested within the search evidence: one search returned the URL under this title, a narrower search returned its sibling documents but not it and reported it “may not be publicly available online”

  • URL: https://www.diebayerische.de/dam/jcr:e5f5f192-0edc-49b1-9be8-18c3cc503ae3/510121_avb_kapital-lebensversicherung.pdf

  • Retrieved: no — HTTP 404 at the cited URL on 2026-08-30. The publisher’s own site was searched once for a current path (diebayerische.de root and the formular-download pages); no replacement URL was found, the document index being script-loaded. The entry is kept as a known reference: no content has ever been established from it, and whether the document is public remains unverified

  • Used for: nothing substantive. It is cited in the specification only to record the contradiction in the search evidence rather than resolve it, and to count a fourth carrier in the variations table with the note that no term of the wording is known. The 404 settles the availability question in one direction only — the cited URL is dead — and does not show that no such document exists

S9 — die Bayerische, AVB KlassikRente (B 520136, 01.2025) and (B 520127, 01.2022)#

  • Publisher / doc type: BL die Bayerische Lebensversicherung AG; two editions of one wording, “Allgemeine Bedingungen für die moderne klassische Rentenversicherung (KlassikRente)”, 14 pp. each — B 520136 (01.2025), internal reference 25L03, and B 520127 (01.2022), reference 22L03. An annuity, not an endowment, recorded as the nearest sibling wording found and used only where the rule transfers, which is said wherever the fact is used

  • URL: https://www.diebayerische.de/dam/jcr:0936fd6c-71b9-453d-83f6-57ec76a76697/520136_avb_klassikrente.pdf and https://www.diebayerische.de/dam/jcr:0dcd832e-9107-44b4-a967-5e504c5c6fce/520127_avb_gezillmert_klassikrente.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (two PDFs, 14 pp. each, editions 01/2025 and 01/2022, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the surplus allocation timing, now verbatim from Anlage 1 to the 01/2025 edition: “Während der ANSPARPHASE erhält Ihr Vertrag an jedem Bilanztermin (31.12. des Jahres) und zum Ablauf der ANSPARPHASE Zinsüberschussanteile zugeteilt und in das DECKUNGSKAPITAL des Vertrages gebucht (laufende Zinsüberschussanteile).” That is the model’s annual, period-end, reserve-crediting convention and the std shift of the Bilanztermin to the policy-year end. The same Anlage refines it: the allocation is annual but accrues monthly, “dabei ist Zinsträger jeweils das am Anfang des Monats vorhandene DECKUNGSKAPITAL (inklusive eines ggf. fälligen Beitrags, abzüglich der zum Monatsbeginn fälligen Kosten)”, so the base is the start-of-month reserve including the premium then due — a convention the annual model approximates rather than reproduces. Also entitlement beginning with the start of cover: “Der Anspruch auf Überschussbeteiligung beginnt sofort mit dem Versicherungsschutz”, which is why surplus_credit_pp runs from t_start(); the glossary definition “Das Deckungskapital setzt sich zusammen aus den verzinsten Sparbeiträgen des Vertrags und den zugeführten laufenden Überschussanteilen”; § 2 Abs. 1 “Die Leistung aus der Überschussbeteiligung kann auch Null Euro betragen”, which is the nil scenario made runnable; and a Schlussüberschussanteil that “bemisst sich monatlich nach einem Prozentsatz der maßgebenden Größe für den Zinsüberschuss” and may be redetermined for past years or dropped entirely

  • Contradicted by retrieval. There is no gezillmerte / non-gezillmerte pair. Both documents are the same tariff, KlassikRente, in two editions two years apart, and both are zillmered: § 15 Abs. 2 is word-identical in the two, applying “das Verrechnungsverfahren nach § 4 der Deckungsrückstellungsverordnung” with the amortisable amount “auf 2,5 % der von Ihnen während der Laufzeit des Vertrages zu zahlenden Beiträge beschränkt”. The file name 520127_avb_gezillmert_klassikrente.pdf is the only place the word appears. zillmer_on and model point 13 are therefore not evidenced by a carrier pair; they remain a modelling device for the Höchstzillmersatz ceiling being a maximum and not a mandate, and this entry no longer supports them. Anlage 2 to the 01/2025 edition does supply a second quantified carrier deduction — “Der Abzug beträgt 50 EUR plus 0,15 %” of the premiums fallen due to the cancellation date multiplied by the whole and part years remaining to the originally agreed Rentenzahlungsbeginn

S10 — ÖSA, “Basisinformationsblatt — ÖSA StarthilfePlus (laufende Beitragszahlung)”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Öffentliche Lebensversicherung Sachsen-Anhalt (ÖSA Versicherungen); PRIIP-Basisinformationsblatt, 3 pp., Stand Basisinformationsblatt 01.01.2024, for a regular-premium variant of a product named StarthilfePlus

  • URL: https://www.oesa.de/export/sites/oesa/_resources/download/privat/service/bib/OeSA-StarthilfePlus_laufend_20.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 3 pp., Stand 01.01.2024, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the fact that it is the only PRIIP-BIB for a German capital-forming life product in this corpus — and, now that it is open, for figures rather than for their absence. The product type is settled: “Art: Versicherungsanlageprodukt in Form einer Kapitallebensversicherung mit garantierter Verzinsung nach deutschem Recht”, though the benefit is a time-limited annuity from Rentenbeginn, the death scenario pays 0,00 € at every horizon and the contract is continued premium-free on death before Rentenbeginn, so it is a savings contract with a premium waiver rather than the composite this library models. Its figures, for a 47-year-old with a 1.000 € annual premium over 20 years: risk indicator 3 of 7; premium split “Durchschnittliche Versicherungsprämie für das abgesicherte Risiko: 9,40 % (94,05 €)” against “Durchschnittlicher Anlagebetrag: 90,60 % (905,95 €)”; total costs 468 € / 3.342 € / 6.216 € at 1, 10 and 20 years, with the annual cost impact 5,3 % pro Jahr at 20 years, and an average return “voraussichtlich 2,4 % vor Kosten und -2,9 % nach Kosten”; entry costs 2,2 % and ongoing administration 28,5 % “der Summe aller Anlagebeträge”; and the Protektor statement that a shortfall can lead to “Abschlägen von bis zu 5 %”. This closes the corpus’s absolute silence on charges — one Effektivkosten-style figure now exists, for one product of one public-sector insurer, on the BIB’s own model case. It is far too narrow to calibrate against, so every charge level in the model stays std; the specification cites it as an order of magnitude and as evidence of how wide the Effektivkosten range is, alongside R18

S11 — Allianz, “Kapitallebensversicherung: Ihr umfassender Ratgeber”, with “Lebensversicherung: Arten im Überblick” and “Lebensversicherung Auszahlung: Ablauf & Steuer”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Allianz Lebensversicherungs-AG; three insurer product and guide pages on the German consumer site

  • URLs: https://www.allianz.de/vorsorge/kapitallebensversicherung/ · https://www.allianz.de/vorsorge/lebensversicherung/ · https://www.allianz.de/vorsorge/lebensversicherung/auszahlung/

  • Retrieved: yes (three HTML pages, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the manufacturer-side market-role finding, verbatim from the Arten im Überblick page — “Die kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung wird heute nur noch selten angeboten. Viele Versicherungsunternehmen haben sie durch moderne private Rentenversicherungen ersetzt.” — and the Garantiezins, which the Kapitallebensversicherung page states twice: “Das Bundesfinanzministerium hat den Garantiezins für Neuverträge seit dem 1. Januar 2025 auf 1,00 Prozent festgelegt”, corroborating R7 from the manufacturer side; the description of the product as a death cover combined with a savings process carrying a guaranteed minimum rate; the tax summary “nur die Hälfte des Ertrags versteuert, sofern Ihr Vertrag mindestens 12 Jahre gelaufen ist und Sie bei Auszahlung mindestens 62 Jahre alt sind”, with the death benefit paid free of income tax, which is R10 restated by a manufacturer; and the death cover being payable in full “schon ab der ersten Beitragszahlung”

  • Contradicted by retrieval, and consequential. The 2,70 % laufende Verzinsung is not on any of the three pages. The only rate Allianz states there is the 1,00 % Garantiezins. The figure exists — R26 reports Allianz holding the laufende Verzinsung “für die klassischen Lebens- und Rentenversicherungen konstant bei 2,7 Prozent” — but it is trade-press reporting of the 2025 declaration for a combined classic life-and-annuity book, not a manufacturer statement about an endowment book for 2026. decl_rate on the base scenario and the anchor cell’s interest surplus are therefore anchored to R26, one year older than recorded and not endowment-specific, and the surrounding band is R25’s annuity average. The statement that the Rückkaufswert can fall below the premiums paid in the early years is also not on the Allianz pages; it is now carried by [S12], which says it in terms

S12 — ERGO, “Ratgeber Kapitallebensversicherung”#

  • Publisher / doc type: ERGO Group; insurer guide page

  • URL: https://www.ergo.de/de/Ratgeber/finanzielle_vorsorge/kapitallebensversicherung

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, read 2026-08-30) — the page is now separately attributable, which it was not before

  • Used for: the premium decomposition, which ERGO states directly: “Der Beitrag für eine Kapitallebensversicherung lässt sich in 3 Teile untergliedern” — a Risikoanteil that “gleicht das Risiko vorzeitiger Versicherungsfälle aus”, a Kostenanteil for one-off acquisition and ongoing administration costs, and a Sparanteil that “wird verzinslich angesammelt”; the twelve-year minimum term (“Die Vertragsdauer beträgt mindestens 12 Jahre”), stated there as the tax condition rather than as a tariff limit, together with maturity after completion of the 62nd year; the Abgeltungsteuer mechanics — 25 % Kapitalertragsteuer withheld on the full Ertrag, the halving claimed in the assessment and the withheld tax credited; and the surrender signature the Allianz pages turned out not to carry: “Der Auszahlungsbetrag kann unter anderem bei vorzeitiger Kündigung sogar geringer ausfallen als die eingezahlten Beiträge. Vor allem zu Beginn der Laufzeit ist das der Fall, da die erhobenen Abschlusskosten durch die eingezahlten Beiträge noch nicht gedeckt sind.” The minimum sum insured is not on the page, so that row of the specification’s typical-parameter table has no source in this corpus and is std with no observation behind it

S13 — Sparkasse, “Kapitallebensversicherung — Für Rente & Familie vorsorgen”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Deutscher Sparkassen- und Giroverband; distributor product and guide page

  • URL: https://www.sparkasse.de/pk/produkte/versicherung/vorsorge-und-risiko/lebensversicherung/kapitallebensversicherung.html

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the distribution finding that the German endowment is sold through the savings-bank network as well as through tied agents and brokers — the page carries no terms of its own and routes the reader to a local Sparkasse (“Mehr Informationen und konkrete Konditionen finden Sie bei Ihrer Sparkasse”), which is itself the evidence that pricing is set at the level of the distributing institution. That is what the specification uses to argue that the Vertriebsweg drives the acquisition-cost level and that a single std commission scale stands for a range this library cannot observe. It corroborates [S12]’s twelve-year minimum (“durch die mindestens zwölfjährige Laufzeit”) and states no other parameter

S15 — Verivox, “Kapitallebensversicherung”, “Überschussbeteiligung” and “Zillmerung”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Verivox GmbH, a comparison portal — secondary, not a product document; three consumer explainer pages

  • URLs: https://www.verivox.de/kapitallebensversicherung/ · https://www.verivox.de/lebensversicherung/themen/ueberschussbeteiligung/ · https://www.verivox.de/lebensversicherung/themen/zillmerung/

  • Retrieved: yes (three HTML pages, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the consumer-facing statement of the Höchstzillmersatz rule, now verbatim from the Zillmerung page: “Angaben zum möglichen Höchstzillmersatz lassen sich in Paragraph 4, Abschnitt 1 der Deckungsrückstellungsverordnung (DeckRV) finden. Seit dem 1. Januar 2015 darf der Zillmersatz 25 Promille – also 2,5 Prozent – der gezahlten Prämien nicht überschreiten, die nicht dem Versicherungsschutz und der Deckung der Verwaltungskosten dienen.” That is deckrv_table.csv’s second column and check_zillmer_cap(), with the effective date R7 does not itself carry; the page also works a numerical example (25-year term, 100 € monthly, 30.000 € Beitragssumme, 750 € zillmered cost spread over 300 months). The 40 ‰ predecessor is not on the retrieved page — the cut from 40 ‰ is carried by R29 and, primarily, by the 4 % ceiling written into the 2011 wording at [S7]. Also used for the Überschussbeteiligung and Überschussverwendung material in the specification’s mechanics sections

S16 — Finanztip, “Überschussbeteiligung Lebensversicherung: Arten & Höhe” and “Steuer auf Lebensversicherung”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Finanztip Verbraucherinformation gGmbH — secondary, consumer journalism; two explainers

  • URLs: https://www.finanztip.de/lebensversicherung/ueberschussbeteiligung-lebensversicherung/ · https://www.finanztip.de/lebensversicherung-versteuern/

  • Retrieved: yes (two HTML pages, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the clearest secondary statement of the surplus split into a laufende Überschussbeteiligung and a Schlussüberschuss, and the consumer-facing quotas: the insurer must pass on “90 Prozent des Zins- und Risikoüberschusses an Dich weitergeben (§§ 6, 7 MindZV). Beim Kostenüberschuss ist es die Hälfte (§ 153 Abs. 3 VVG)”, with the Bewertungsreserven released “zu 50 Prozent”. The specification records these beside the MindZV framing at R6 and expressly does not treat them as the same rule, and retrieval shows why that caution was right: Finanztip’s citation for the 50 % is wrong — the half share of the übriges Ergebnis is § 8 MindZV, while § 153 Abs. 3 VVG is the half share of the Bewertungsreserven at contract end, a different rule with a different base. Also used for the point that the Schlussüberschuss is paid at termination and is lost on early surrender, which is term_bonus_pp’s accrual shape

S17 — HUK24, “Überschussbeteiligung der Risikolebensversicherung”#

  • Publisher / doc type: HUK24 AG (HUK-COBURG group); insurer guide page — about term life, not endowment

  • URL: https://www.huk24.de/risikolebensversicherung/ratgeber-lebensversicherung/ueberschussbeteiligung

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, read 2026-08-30). No endowment-specific statement is taken from it

  • Used for: the corroboration that the sources of surplus are described the same way across product lines by carriers themselves. Retrieval narrows this. The page does not use the four-component vocabulary: it names three drivers — “Höhe der am Kapitalmarkt erwirtschafteten Gewinne”, “Kostenstruktur des Versicherers” and “Zahl der während der Vertragslaufzeit verstorbenen Versicherten” — and describes the two term-life application forms, Todesfallbonus and Sofortrabatt. So it corroborates the three sources (interest, cost, mortality) and the statutory obligation to participate “verursachungsorientiert und angemessen”, but it is not a carrier use of the names Zins-, Risiko-, Kosten- and Schlussüberschuss. Those four names as market vocabulary now rest on the carrier wordings that use them — [S7], [S9] and [S18] — and on [S16]

S18 — VPV Lebensversicherungs-AG, “Bedingungen und Verbraucherinformationen für die Kapital bildende Lebensversicherung” (01.2019)#

  • Publisher / doc type: VPV Lebensversicherungs-AG (Vereinigte Postversicherung); the customer document set for an endowment, 26 pp., stamp 2.MP.0401 01.2019 ZU, containing the AVB für die Kapital bildende Lebensversicherung (01.2019), AVB vorläufiger Versicherungsschutz, AVB Unfalltod-Zusatzversicherung, Besondere Bedingungen Nachversicherungsgarantie, Steuerinformationen, Allgemeine Verbraucherinformationen and the Satzung of the Vereinigte Postversicherung VVaG. The lawinsider.com record that this entry originally cited is a stub that hosts no text and names the document’s real location

  • URL: https://www.deteassekuranz.de/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Bedingungen-SterbegeldV-VPV.pdf (index record, title only: https://lawinsider.com/de/contracts/duGC9LpAVlC). The file name says SterbegeldV and is wrong; the document behind it is the endowment set named above

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 26 pp., edition 01.2019, read 2026-08-30). The lawinsider record itself is a stub: it carries the title and the contract-type label and points at the URL above

  • Used for: the document pair the German market delivers to a customer, Bedingungen and Verbraucherinformationen, which is the vocabulary the specification uses for the contract documentation set — and, since retrieval, for far more than that. This is the second genuine endowment wording in the corpus (with [S7]) and the most explicit one on surplus. § 2 Abs. 3 (a) states the interest surplus as a formula: “Das um ein Jahr mit dem Rechnungszins abgezinste Deckungskapital wird mit dem deklarierten Zinsüberschussanteilsatz multipliziert”, with a Risikoüberschussanteil for premium-paying contracts equal to “des deklarierten Risikoüberschussanteilsatzes mit dem Risikojahresbeitrag” — the clearest carrier statement in the corpus that surplus_base_pp is the reserve, and that the base is the reserve discounted back one year at the technical rate. The same clause imposes a one-year Wartezeit and allocates “jeweils zu Beginn des Versicherungsjahres”, against the no-waiting-period rule at [S9] and the three-year deferral at [S3] and [S7] tariff group A — the carriers differ, and the specification says so. § 2 Abs. 3 (b) runs a Schlussüberschusskonto fed by an annual Schlussüberschussanteil on the same base as the interest surplus, itself bearing a declared Schlussüberschusszinssatz, redeterminable for past years and able to fall to nil, which is term_bonus_pp’s accrual shape from a wording. § 2 Abs. 5 restates the Sicherungsbedarf cut-back in a carrier’s own words — “Bewertungsreserven auf festverzinsliche Anlagen sind gemäß derzeitiger aufsichtsrechtlicher Regelung (vgl. § 139 Abs. 3 VAG) nur insoweit zu berücksichtigen, als sie einen ggf. vorhandenen Sicherungsbedarf (vgl. § 139 Abs. 4 VAG) übersteigen” — and § 2 Abs. 6 a Mindestbeteiligung an den Bewertungsreserven, the third independent witness to the Sockelbetrag at R8. § 12 Abs. 4 gives a third quantified Stornoabzug, on a base unlike either of the others: “ein Stornoabzug in Höhe von 100 € für erhöhte Verwaltungsaufwendungen. Zusätzlich erfolgt ein Stornoabzug in Höhe von 0,2 % der Differenz zwischen Versicherungssumme und dem Rückkaufswert nach Abs. 3”

Regulatory and actuarial references (product research numbering)#

R1 — VVG § 153, Überschussbeteiligung#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz (Gesetze im Internet); mirrored by dejure.org and buzer.de

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/__153.html · https://dejure.org/gesetze/VVG/153.html

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML from gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/xml.zip, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156, read 2026-08-30). The __153.html page is a ~5 kB frameset shell carrying no statutory text and is kept only as the human-facing link; the reading is now version-pinned, which closes gap 15 for this section

  • Used for: Abs. 1 — the entitlement to share in the surplus and the Bewertungsreserven “es sei denn, die Überschussbeteiligung ist durch ausdrückliche Vereinbarung ausgeschlossen; die Überschussbeteiligung kann nur insgesamt ausgeschlossen werden”, which is why the specification says there is no partially participating German endowment; Abs. 2 — the verursachungsorientiertes Verfahren, which allocation in proportion to reserve implements, with § 268 Abs. 8 HGB amounts left out of account; Abs. 3 — annual redetermination of the Bewertungsreserven and, on termination, “wird der für diesen Zeitpunkt zu ermittelnde Betrag zur Hälfte zugeteilt und an den Versicherungsnehmer ausgezahlt”, which is bwr_rate’s mechanism, together with the Satz 3 proviso that now names its provisions expressly — “insbesondere die §§ 89, 124 Absatz 1, § 139 Absatz 3 und 4 und die §§ 140 sowie 214 des Versicherungsaufsichtsgesetzes bleiben unberührt”. Abs. 4, which moves the reference date to the end of the Ansparphase for annuities, does not apply to this product

R2 — VVG § 169, Rückkaufswert#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; mirrored by dejure.org, lxgesetze.de and buzer.de

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/__169.html · https://dejure.org/gesetze/VVG/169.html

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156, read 2026-08-30); the __169.html page is a 7 kB frameset shell and is kept as the human-facing link only

  • Used for: the whole surrender construction, now quotable exactly. Abs. 3 Satz 1: “Der Rückkaufswert ist das nach anerkannten Regeln der Versicherungsmathematik mit den Rechnungsgrundlagen der Prämienkalkulation zum Schluss der laufenden Versicherungsperiode berechnete Deckungskapital der Versicherung, bei einer Kündigung des Versicherungsverhältnisses jedoch mindestens der Betrag des Deckungskapitals, das sich bei gleichmäßiger Verteilung der angesetzten Abschluss- und Vertriebskosten auf die ersten fünf Vertragsjahre ergibt; die aufsichtsrechtlichen Regelungen über Höchstzillmersätze bleiben unberührt.” Those are res_guar_pp’s design decisions, including its reading of the reserve at t + 1, and res_min_pp is the floor in the same sentence. Abs. 4 puts the Zeitwert branch on fondsgebundene contracts and expressly not on this one. Abs. 5: “Der Versicherer ist zu einem Abzug … nur berechtigt, wenn er vereinbart, beziffert und angemessen ist. Die Vereinbarung eines Abzugs für noch nicht getilgte Abschluss- und Vertriebskosten ist unwirksam.” Abs. 7 adds the already-allocated Überschussanteile and the Schlussüberschussanteil provided for on Kündigung. Abs. 2, not previously recorded, caps the payable Rückkaufswert at the benefit that would fall due on a claim at the date of cancellation and directs the remainder to a prämienfreie Versicherung — a branch this library does not model and the specification now names

R3 — VVG § 165, Prämienfreie Versicherung#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; mirrored by buzer.de, LexMea and dejure.org

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/__165.html · https://dejure.org/gesetze/VVG/165.html

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156, read 2026-08-30); __165.html is a 4 kB shell

  • Used for: the Beitragsfreistellung right at the end of the current Versicherungsperiode “sofern die dafür vereinbarte Mindestversicherungsleistung erreicht wird”, and the failure branch — “Wird diese nicht erreicht, hat der Versicherer den auf die Versicherung entfallenden Rückkaufswert einschließlich der Überschussanteile nach § 169 zu zahlen” — the two branches is_paid_up and lapse_rate implement and model points 11 and 12 exercise; Abs. 2, the paid-up sum computed “mit den Rechnungsgrundlagen der Prämienkalkulation unter Zugrundelegung des Rückkaufswertes nach § 169 Abs. 3 bis 5 … und im Vertrag für jedes Versicherungsjahr anzugeben”, which is bfz_si_pp, why the paid-up sum inherits the five-year floor, and why the schedule is contractual and tabulated; and Abs. 3, which computes it net of Prämienrückstände and leaves the surplus entitlement untouched. The Mindestversicherungsleistung is quantified in two of the wordings read: 1.500 EUR of sum insured at [S7] and a monthly 25 EUR guaranteed minimum annuity at [S9]. The practical note that attached Zusatzversicherungen are regularly lost on paid-up is commentary, not statute, and is not in § 165

R4 — VVG § 161, Selbsttötung#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; mirrored by dejure.org, lxgesetze.de and rewis.io

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/__161.html · https://rewis.io/gesetze/vvg/p/161-vvg/

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156, read 2026-08-30); __161.html is a 4 kB shell

  • Used for: the insurer not being liable “wenn die versicherte Person sich vor Ablauf von drei Jahren nach Abschluss des Versicherungsvertrags vorsätzlich selbst getötet hat”, the exception “wenn die Tat in einem die freie Willensbestimmung ausschließenden Zustand krankhafter Störung der Geistestätigkeit begangen worden ist”, Abs. 2 allowing the period to be increased by individual agreement, and — the rule the model turns on — Abs. 3, “Ist der Versicherer nicht zur Leistung verpflichtet, hat er den Rückkaufswert einschließlich der Überschussanteile nach § 169 zu zahlen”, so the German rule is a benefit substitution and not a forfeiture. That is benefit_death_pp’s first-three-years branch and pitfall 7. Abs. 2 permits only an increase, but § 171 makes § 161 halbzwingend, so a shorter period is lawful because it favours the policyholder — and [S7] § 4 Abs. 1 writes two years, which is why the three years are a statutory ceiling on the insurer’s relief and not a market constant

R5 — VVG § 19, Vorvertragliche Anzeigepflicht#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; commentary from ra-zn.de and fairtest.de

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg_2008/__19.html · https://www.ra-zn.de/anzeigepflicht-19-vvg

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156, read 2026-08-30); __19.html is a 6 kB shell

  • Used for: the question-bounded disclosure duty — Abs. 1 covers the circumstances known to the policyholder that are material and “nach denen der Versicherer in Textform gefragt hat”; the remedy ladder of Abs. 2 to 4, ending in Abs. 4 Satz 2 with the anderen Bedingungen becoming part of the contract retrospectively on the insurer’s demand, which is the statutory home of the exclusion or Risikozuschlag rating_factor represents; Abs. 5, under which none of the rights exists unless the insurer gave a separate Textform warning; and Abs. 6, giving the policyholder an immediate right to cancel if a contract change raises the premium by more than 10 Prozent or excludes the undisclosed risk. One correction: the five- and ten-year limits are in § 21 Abs. 3 VVG, not § 19, and § 21 was not researched, so the specification’s underwriting section attributes them to the VVG generally and the exact locus stays unverified

R6 — MindZV, Verordnung über die Mindestbeitragsrückerstattung in der Lebensversicherung#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; mirrored by lxgesetze.de and buzer.de

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/mindzv_2016/BJNR083100016.html · https://lxgesetze.de/mindzv/6

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML from gesetze-im-internet.de/mindzv_2016/xml.zip, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 1 V v. 7.7.2020 I 1688, read 2026-08-30). The consolidated BJNR083100016.html page is itself substantive, unlike the per-section shells

  • Used for: the minimum allocations to the Rückstellung für Beitragsrückerstattung, now section by section: § 6 Abs. 1 — “90 Prozent der nach § 3 Absatz 1 anzurechnenden Kapitalerträge abzüglich der rechnungsmäßigen Zinsen”; § 7 — “90 Prozent des auf überschussberechtigte Versicherungsverträge entfallenden Risikoergebnisses”; § 8 — “50 Prozent des … übrigen Ergebnisses”; with § 4 Abs. 1 defining the three results by reference to the Versicherungsberichterstattungs-Verordnung line items and directing that “Alt- und Neubestand … getrennt betrachtet” werden. The specification presents this as the origin of the surplus and expressly not as what determines a declared rate

  • One correction from the text. What § 6 Abs. 1 deducts before striking the 90 % is the rechnungsmäßige Zinsen — the technical interest already owed to the contracts — not, as this entry previously recorded, the Aufwand für die Diskontierung der Deckungsrückstellung. The distinction matters to the specification’s account of where the interest surplus comes from: the minimum allocation is a quota of investment income in excess of the guarantee, which is exactly why a declared laufende Verzinsung is the guarantee plus a surplus and not a separate rate

R7 — DeckRV — Höchstrechnungszins and Höchstzillmersatz#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; buzer.de carries the amendment history

  • URL: https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/12006/index.htm

  • Retrieved: yes — the DeckRV as canonical XML (Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 1 V v. 19.7.2024 I Nr. 250) and the buzer amendment history as HTML, both read 2026-08-30

  • Used for: the two cohort ceilings the model keys on issue_year, both now read in the instrument. § 2 Abs. 1 Satz 1: “wird der Höchstzinssatz für die Berechnung der Deckungsrückstellungen auf 1 Prozent festgesetzt”. § 4 Abs. 1 Satz 2: “Der Zillmersatz darf 25 Promille der Summe aller Prämien nicht überschreiten” — note the statutory base is the Summe aller Prämien, which the market and this library call the Beitragssumme. Those are deckrv_table.csv’s two value columns, check_rechnungszins_cap() and check_zillmer_cap(), and alpha_rate sitting at the ceiling. The cohort keying is itself statutory, which was previously an inference: § 2 Abs. 2 Satz 1 fixes the Rechnungszins used at conclusion “für die gesamte Laufzeit des Vertrages”, and § 4 Abs. 4 does the same for the Zillmersatz

  • The dating tag is discharged, and the date corrected. buzer’s Fassung line reads “Text in der Fassung des Artikels 1 Sechste Verordnung zur Änderung von Verordnungen nach dem Versicherungsaufsichtsgesetz V. v. 19. Juli 2024 BGBl. 2024 I Nr. 250 m.W.v. 1. Januar 2025”. The announcement date is 19 July 2024, not 24 July, and the 1 January 2025 effective date is confirmed. The rate history before 2025 and the 2015 date of the 25 ‰ cut are not in the current consolidated text and rest on [S15], R15, R29 and REG-R15

R8 — VAG § 139, Überschussbeteiligung, and the Sicherungsbedarf#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; summary obtained through dejure.org

  • URL: https://dejure.org/gesetze/VAG/139.html

  • Retrieved: yes (canonical XML from gesetze-im-internet.de/vag_2016/xml.zip, Stand: Zuletzt geändert durch Art. 25 G v. 25.3.2026 I Nr. 81, read 2026-08-30); the dejure.org mirror was read as well

  • Used for: the restriction that decides bwr_rate. Abs. 3, in full: “Bewertungsreserven aus direkt oder indirekt vom Versicherungsunternehmen gehaltenen festverzinslichen Anlagen und Zinsabsicherungsgeschäften sind bei der Beteiligung der Versicherungsnehmer an den Bewertungsreserven gemäß § 153 des Versicherungsvertragsgesetzes nur insoweit zu berücksichtigen, als sie einen etwaigen Sicherungsbedarf aus den Versicherungsverträgen mit Zinsgarantie gemäß Absatz 4 überschreiten.” Abs. 4 defines the Sicherungsbedarf as the sum over contracts whose maßgeblicher Rechnungszins exceeds the Bezugszins of the actuarially valued interest obligation less the Deckungsrückstellung. Retrieval narrows the rule: the cut-back bites on fixed-income and hedging reserves, not on the whole of the Bewertungsreserven, which is why bwr_rate = 0 is the base run for a book of guaranteed contracts in a rate-driven reserve position and not a universal statement. Abs. 2 Satz 3 adds that a Bilanzgewinn may be distributed only so far as it exceeds the Sicherungsbedarf

  • The Sockelbetrag tag is discharged, and the fact relocated. It is not in § 139 VAG. It is a contractual and declaratory minimum, and three independent retrieved documents now carry it: the GDV Muster-Standmitteilung’s “Sockelbeteiligung an Bewertungsreserven” [S2], the Mindestbeteiligung in Anlage 1 to [S9], and [S18] § 2 Abs. 6 — “Sie erhalten jedoch einen Mindestwert als Beteiligung an den Bewertungsreserven. Diese Mindestbeteiligung an den Bewertungsreserven wird als zusätzlicher Schlussgewinn festgelegt.” Its existence is therefore established and its size remains unobserved: every carrier sets it annually and every one of the three says it can fall away

R9 — VVG-InfoV § 2, and the Effektivkosten disclosure#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Justiz; mirrored by buzer.de; explained by the Institut für Finanz- und Aktuarwissenschaften (ifa Ulm)

  • URLs: https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg-infov/__2.html · https://www.buzer.de/gesetz/8025/a153312.htm

  • Retrieved: yes — § 2 VVG-InfoV in full from gesetze-im-internet.de/vvg-infov/__2.html, which for this small instrument serves the norm text rather than a frameset, read 2026-08-30; the buzer.de mirror was read as well

  • Used for: the cost-disclosure duty, now precise. Abs. 1 Nr. 1 requires the einkalkulierte Abschlusskosten “als einheitlicher Gesamtbetrag” and the other costs, with the Verwaltungskosten separately, as a share of the annual premium with the relevant term; Abs. 2 requires Nr. 1, 2, 4 and 5 to be given in Euro, which is the euro-amount duty this entry recorded. Abs. 1 Nr. 4, 5 and 6 require the Rückkaufswerte, the Mindestversicherungsbetrag for a conversion to a paid-up or reduced contract, and the extent to which both are guaranteed — the statutory origin of the Garantiewerttabelle the wordings at [S7] and [S18] refer the reader to. Abs. 1 Nr. 9 defines the Effektivkosten as “die Minderung der Wertentwicklung durch Kosten in Prozentpunkten … bis zum Beginn der Auszahlungsphase”, and Abs. 6 fixes the method: they “werden berechnet wie der Gesamtkostenindikator nach Anhang VI der Delegierten Verordnung (EU) 2017/653”. That is why the technical notes treat the figure as a validation target rather than an input — reproducing one needs Annex VI and a holding period, neither of which this library implements. Abs. 3, not previously recorded, quantifies the § 154 VVG Modellrechnung: it must be shown at “dem Höchstrechnungszinssatz, multipliziert mit 1,67” and at that rate plus and minus one percentage point — at today’s ceiling, 1,67 % with a 0,67 %–2,67 % band

  • The date on which the Effektivkosten duty was introduced is still not established from the instrument: the current § 2 Abs. 6 refers to a 2017 delegated regulation as amended in 2019, while the 1 January 2015 start date rests on [S15], R19 and R29. That much remains unverified

R10 — EStG § 20 Abs. 1 Nr. 6, and the Einkommensteuer-Handbuch annex#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Finanzen (amtliches Einkommensteuer-Handbuch); commentary from NWB and Haufe

  • URLs: https://esth.bundesfinanzministerium.de/esth/2024/C-Anhaenge/Anhang-22a/I/inhalt.html · https://www.haufe.de/steuern/steuerwissen-tipps/nach-dem-31122004-abgeschlossene-lebensversicherungen_170_448252.html

  • Retrieved: yes for the statute, no for the handbook. § 20 and § 52 EStG were read as canonical XML (Stand: zuletzt geändert durch Art. 7 G v. 29.6.2026 I Nr. 197) on 2026-08-30. The Einkommensteuer-Handbuch URL answers 200 with a Radware interstitial — “Verifying your browser before proceeding” — and no document body, so the handbook annex itself is not retrieved; the Haufe commentary was read

  • Used for: the Unterschiedsbetrag and the half-income rule, now from the instrument. § 20 Abs. 1 Nr. 6 Satz 1 taxes “der Unterschiedsbetrag zwischen der Versicherungsleistung und der Summe der auf sie entrichteten Beiträge (Erträge) im Erlebensfall oder bei Rückkauf des Vertrags … bei Kapitalversicherungen mit Sparanteil, wenn der Vertrag nach dem 31. Dezember 2004 abgeschlossen worden ist”; Satz 2 halves it where the benefit is paid “nach Vollendung des 60. Lebensjahres des Steuerpflichtigen und nach Ablauf von zwölf Jahren seit dem Vertragsabschluss”. The age-62 locus tag is discharged and the citation corrected: it is § 52 Absatz 28 Satz 7 EStG — “§ 20 Absatz 1 Nummer 6 Satz 2 ist für Vertragsabschlüsse nach dem 31. Dezember 2011 mit der Maßgabe anzuwenden, dass die Versicherungsleistung nach Vollendung des 62. Lebensjahres des Steuerpflichtigen ausgezahlt wird” — not § 52 Abs. 36 Satz 9. The personal marginal rate rather than the Abgeltungsteuer where the halving applies is commentary, corroborated by [S12], which describes the 25 % withholding on the full Ertrag and the halving claimed back in the assessment. The tax rules do not enter the projected cash flows: they fix the anchor cell’s twenty-five-year term ending at attained age 62, and the lapse table’s twelve-year shape

R11 — BMF-Schreiben of 1 October 2009, IV C 1 - S 2252/07/0001#

  • Publisher: Bundesministerium der Finanzen; BMF-Schreiben, binding administrative guidance to the tax offices

  • URL: https://datenbank.nwb.de/Dokument/351401/ (NWB database record)

  • Retrieved: partly — the NWB record page was read on 2026-08-30 (HTML) and yields the full citation, subject and Gliederung; the Randnummern themselves are behind a subscription login and are still not established

  • Used for: naming the administrative guidance under which the Mindesttodesfallschutz test at R12 is applied. Retrieval adds the Bundessteuerblatt citation, BStBl 2009 I S. 1172, the official subject “Besteuerung von Versicherungserträgen im Sinne des § 20 Absatz 1 Nummer 6 EStG”, and the section structure — I to XIV, with “IV. Kapitalversicherung mit Sparanteil / 1. Kapitalversicherung auf den Todes- und Erlebensfall (klassische Kapital-Lebensversicherung)” and “X. Hälftiger Unterschiedsbetrag / 6. Mindesttodesfallschutz”. So the guidance is now located precisely and its relevant section confirmed to exist; no sentence of its text is quoted anywhere in delib

R12 — Mindesttodesfallschutz: the 50 %-rule for contracts concluded from 1 April 2009#

  • Publisher: Haufe (Haufe Finance Office Premium) and IWW (Wirtschaftsberatung aktuell) — secondary commentary

  • URLs: https://www.haufe.de/id/beitrag/kapitallebensversicherungen-einkommensteuer-3121-einzelheiten-der-50-regel-HI8459275.html · https://www.iww.de/wvm/archiv/kapitallebensversicherungen-neuer-mindesttodesfallschutz-fuer-ab-dem-1-april-2009-abgeschlossene-vertraege-f14610

  • Retrieved: yes for both commentaries (HTML, read 2026-08-30) — and the rule itself is now read in the statute, § 20 Abs. 1 Nr. 6 Satz 6 EStG, which supersedes both as the authority

  • Used for: the 50 %-Regel, whose statutory form is narrower than the summary this entry carried. Satz 6 disapplies the halving where both limbs hold: (a) “in einem Kapitallebensversicherungsvertrag mit vereinbarter laufender Beitragszahlung in mindestens gleichbleibender Höhe bis zum Zeitpunkt des Erlebensfalls die vereinbarte Leistung bei Eintritt des versicherten Risikos weniger als 50 Prozent der Summe der für die gesamte Vertragsdauer zu zahlenden Beiträge beträgt”, and (b) the benefit on the insured event does not exceed the Deckungskapital or Zeitwert “spätestens fünf Jahre nach Vertragsabschluss … um mindestens 10 Prozent des Deckungskapitals, des Zeitwerts oder der Summe der gezahlten Beiträge”. That is the constraint on death_ratio, checked when the model point table is built rather than being a model formula

  • The tag on the second limb is discharged in full. Its base is any of the three named — Deckungskapital, Zeitwert or premiums paid; its time profile is “at the latest five years after conclusion”; and the trailing qualifier that would not parse is Satz 6 Satz 2: “Dieser Prozentsatz darf bis zum Ende der Vertragslaufzeit in jährlich gleichen Schritten auf Null sinken.” Retrieval also sharpens the application date: § 52 Abs. 28 Satz 8 applies the provision to contracts concluded after 31 March 2009 or where the first premium was paid after that date

R13 — The pre-2005 regime and the 2004/2005 boundary#

  • Publisher: Haufe; Bund der Steuerzahler; VLH; smartsteuer — secondary commentary

  • URLs: https://www.haufe.de/steuern/steuerwissen-tipps/nach-dem-31122004-abgeschlossene-lebensversicherungen_170_448252.html · https://steuerzahler.de/bayern/newsticker-archiv/newsticker/news/kapitallebensversicherungen-versteuerungsregeln-sehr-differenziert/

  • Retrieved: yes for the Haufe and Bund-der-Steuerzahler pages (HTML, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the 1 January 2005 boundary and the taxation of the Unterschiedsbetrag on post-2004 contracts, which § 20 Abs. 1 Nr. 6 Satz 1 EStG at R10 now states directly (“wenn der Vertrag nach dem 31. Dezember 2004 abgeschlossen worden ist”). That is what makes the specification’s book three tax cohorts — pre-2005, 2005–2011 and 2012 onwards — and what fixes delib’s composite as a post-2011 contract. The conditions of the pre-2005 regime remain unverified: they are not in the current statute, which knows the old regime only through transitional provisions, and the retrieved commentary states them only in outline. [S12] gives the outline a carrier’s voice — a pre-2005 contract’s death benefit is tax-free only if it met “die damaligen Voraussetzungen einer steuerbegünstigten Kapitallebensversicherung … (Mindestlaufzeit 12 Jahre, laufende Beitragszahlung, Mindesttodesfallschutz)” — and nothing in delib asserts them

R14 — DAV, “Herleitung der Sterbetafel DAV 2008 T für Lebensversicherungen mit Todesfallcharakter”#

  • Publisher / doc type: Deutsche Aktuarvereinigung e. V.; Fachgrundsatz / DAV-Richtlinie, with a 2008 derivation paper and a 2022 restatement

  • URLs: https://aktuar.de/content/PDF/Fachwissen/20080708_DAV_2008_T.pdf · https://aktuar.de/content/PDF/Fachwissen/2022-11-29_DAV-Richtlinie_Herleitung_DAV2008T.pdf

  • Retrieved: yes (two PDFs: the 2008 derivation paper and the Richtlinie of 29 November 2022, 49 pp., read 2026-08-30). The table values themselves are not redistributed here

  • Used for: the name and provenance of the first-order basis the shipped mort_table.csv stands in for, and the market-coverage figure, which the derivation paper states exactly: “Nach dieser Bereinigung weisen die untersuchten Versichertendaten eine Abdeckung von 60% des deutschen Versicherungsmarktes im Bereich der Kapitallebensversicherungen auf; im Bereich der Risikolebensversicherungen sind es sogar 70%.” The data are the pooled portfolios of Gen Re, Münchener Rück, Swiss Re and the Verband öffentlicher Versicherer — 47 undertakings, more than 100 million Bestandsjahre — read against the Sterbetafeln des Statistischen Bundesamts. The Richtlinie fixes the method for the Sicherheitszuschläge — the Schwankungs-, Irrtums- and Änderungsrisiko, with the Schwankungszuschlag struck on a model portfolio of 200.000 lives aged 20 to 65 — which is what mort_be_factor = 0.75 represents. And the suitability limit, verbatim: “Die Sterbetafel DAV 2008 T ist grundsätzlich auch für die Beitragskalkulation von Lebensversicherungen mit Todesfallcharakter, ausgenommen Tarife ohne Gesundheitsprüfung, geeignet”, so the whole basis presupposes the underwriting the specification describes

  • Two corrections from the documents. The observation period is 2001 to 2004, not 2006–2008: “Als Beobachtungszeitraum werden die Jahre 2001 bis 2004 zu Grunde gelegt.” 2006–2008 is when the DAV working group did the work, which the Richtlinie states separately. And the open question is answered: there is no distinct first-order table for endowment as against term business. DAV 2008 T is a single Schlusstafel built from data from the sixth policy year onwards to eliminate selection; about 91 % of the observations behind it come from Kapitallebensversicherungen, and endowment mortality from the sixth year sits at 101 % of the all-tariff level, which the paper calls marginal

R15 — DAV recommendations on the Höchstrechnungszins for 2025 and 2026#

  • Publisher: Deutsche Aktuarvereinigung e. V.; two newsroom items

  • URLs: https://aktuar.de/de/newsroom/detail/deutsche-aktuarvereinigung-empfiehlt-auch-fuer-2026-einen-hoechstrechnungszins-in-hoehe-von-1-prozent/ · https://aktuar.de/de/newsroom/detail/deutsche-aktuarvereinigung-begruesst-ministeriumsvorstoss-zum-hoechstrechnungszins-2025/

  • Retrieved: yes (two HTML newsroom items, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the DAV recommending 1,0 % for 2026 as well, which is the basis for holding deckrv_table.csv flat at 1,00 % for issue years after 2026 std; and the specification’s point that the maximum technical rate is set by regulation but proposed by the actuarial profession, the recommendation having been adopted in both cycles evidenced here

R16 — GDV, “Höchstrechnungszins-Erhöhung ist eine ‘angemessene Reaktion auf gestiegene Zinsen’”#

  • Publisher: GDV; Medieninformation

  • URL: https://www.gdv.de/gdv/medien/medieninformationen/hoechstrechnungszins-erhoehung-ist-eine-angemessene-reaktion-auf-gestiegene-zinsen–176848

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, read 2026-08-30). Adds no independent figure

  • Used for: the industry association’s public support for the increase to 1,0 %, cited in the specification’s regulatory context to corroborate R7 and R15 and to show that the 2025 change was uncontested across the profession, the ministry and the industry

R17 — BaFin, Merkblatt 01/2023 (VA), zu wohlverhaltensaufsichtlichen Aspekten bei kapitalbildenden Lebensversicherungsprodukten#

  • Publisher / doc type: BaFin; supervisory Merkblatt, published May 2023 — the most important supervisory document for this product

  • URLs: https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Merkblatt/VA/mb_01_2023_wohlverhaltensaufsichtliche_aspekte_va.html · https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Pressemitteilung/2023/pm_2023_05_08_Merkblatt_kapitalbildende_LV.html

  • Retrieved: yes for the Merkblatt, whose full text (Rn. 1 ff., sections A to D) is served on the page and was read 2026-08-30; no for the press release, which is HTTP 404 at the cited URL. The reading confirms that the Merkblatt itself states no numerical threshold — not for Effektivkosten, not for commission, not for the real return; the “über vier Prozent” observation belongs to R18, and is a BaFin survey finding rather than a Merkblatt limit

  • Used for: the scope — Rn. 2 defines kapitalbildende Lebensversicherungsprodukte as classic and unit-linked life products with a savings component, including Direktversicherungen and AltZertG contracts; the Renditeziel duty at Rn. 15, under which undertakings must formulate return targets consistent with their target market and “auch prüfen, ob die Angehörigen des Zielmarktes nicht nur eine positive Rendite nach Kosten, sondern auch eine positive Rendite nach Kosten und Inflation anstreben”, with the ECB medium-term inflation target named as a candidate benchmark and attainment to be tested “mit geeigneten stochastischen Analysen”; the cost-and-return interaction at Rn. 18, which names the Effektivkosten computed under § 2 Abs. 1 Nr. 9 i. V. m. § 2 Abs. 6 VVG-InfoV as the measure of total cost; and the Storno limb at Rn. 23 with the distribution-remuneration limb at Rn. 52, where BaFin suggests tying a high Abschlussprovision to the intermediary’s own Stornoquote. This is why the specification treats charge levels as a supervised rather than a free parameter, while shipping every one of them as std

  • One qualification retrieval forces. The Renditeziel duty is not flat across products. Rn. 16 and 17 provide that where the target market is sicherheitsorientiert the value of the guarantee may take precedence and “die Formulierung eines Renditeziels und die Prüfung, ob dieses mit hinreichender Wahrscheinlichkeit erreicht wird, ist dann gegebenenfalls entbehrlich” — and Rn. 17 names “klassische Lebensversicherungsprodukte ohne fondsgebundene Komponenten”, which is exactly this product, as the paradigm case

R18 — BaFin, Risiken im Fokus 2026 — “Kosten von kapitalbildenden Lebensversicherungen”#

  • Publisher / doc type: BaFin; annual supervisory risk-focus publication, 2026 edition, consumer-protection chapter

  • URL: https://www.bafin.de/DE/die-bafin/publikationen-daten/risiken-im-fokus/Fokusrisiken_2026/RIF_Verbraucher_3/RIF_verbraucher_lebensversicherung_node.html

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, full chapter text, read 2026-08-30)

  • Used for: the fact that the product’s charge level is a named focus risk in BaFin’s 2026 risk agenda, three years after the Merkblatt — and now for the chapter’s figures, which are the only supervisory quantities in the corpus. Market size: “Im Jahr 2024 gab es hierzulande rund 59 Millionen kapitalbildende Lebensversicherungen. 2,4 Millionen Verträge wurden in dem Jahr neu abgeschlossen”, on the Merkblatt’s broad definition, so classic and unit-linked together. Costs: a 2022 survey of first-half-2021 new business found that “In Einzelfällen beliefen sich die Effektivkosten auf über vier Prozent”, and a repeat survey in 2025 covering 2024 new business found them falling since 2021 — “vor allem bei den verkaufsstarken langen Laufzeiten war im oberen Viertel ein Rückgang der Effektivkosten um mehr als 0,4 Prozentpunkte zu beobachten”. Lapse: “Einige Lebensversicherungsprodukte sind mit sehr hohen Stornoquoten aufgefallen – speziell in den ersten Jahren nach Vertragsabschluss, in denen ein großer Teil der Kosten anfällt”, a high early-lapse rate being treated as evidence of an inadequate Kundennutzen. And the enforcement record: products withdrawn from the market, cost reductions in the in-force book, retrospective compensation, and Verwarnungen issued to individual Geschäftsleiter. This is the evidence for the specification’s treatment of early-duration lapse as a supervised quantity and of the Effektivkosten as the measure a German endowment is judged by. The one-sentence product definition the specification’s overview follows is not on this page and comes from the associated BaFin consumer page in the same result family, which was not separately retrieved

R19 — BaFin Fachartikel: “Wenn Lebensversicherungen zu viel kosten” (2022), “PRIIPs-Verordnung” (2022), “Kundennutzen im Fokus” (2024)#

  • Publisher: BaFin (BaFinJournal / Fachartikel)

  • URLs: https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Fachartikel/2022/fa_bj_2203_Effektivkosten_Versicherer.html · https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Fachartikel/2022/fa_bj_2207_priips_surfday.html · https://www.bafin.de/SharedDocs/Veroeffentlichungen/DE/Fachartikel/2024/bafin_fachartikel_wohlverhalten.html

  • Retrieved: partly — “Wenn Lebensversicherungen zu viel kosten” (2022) and “Kundennutzen im Fokus” (2024) were read as HTML on 2026-08-30; the PRIIPs Surfday article is HTTP 404 at the cited URL

  • Used for: the content requirements of a Basisinformationsblatt — total risk indicator, maximum loss, four graded performance scenarios (Stress, pessimistisch, moderat, optimistisch) as annualised returns at three time points, and total costs with the Reduction in Yield split into one-off and ongoing — which the technical notes cite when explaining why the Effektivkosten is a validation target the model does not compute. With the PRIIPs article gone, that list is now best evidenced not by BaFin but by the retrieved BIB itself at [S10], which prints every one of those fields, and by the Franke und Bornberg piece at R27

R20 — GDV, “Die deutsche Lebensversicherung in Zahlen 2024”#

  • Publisher: GDV; industry statistical annual and the Jahresmedienkonferenz page

  • URLs: https://www.gdv.de/resource/blob/180978/b8ae8eb0b1bf4b15e7cc3354bc231af9/die-deutsche-lebensversicherung-in-zahlen-2024-publikation-pdf-data.pdf · https://www.gdv.de/gdv/statistik/jahresmedienkonferenz-zahlen-und-daten/lebensversicherung-2024-165748

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 40 pp., Redaktionsschluss 27.06.2024, read 2026-08-30; the Jahresmedienkonferenz page as HTML)

  • Used for: the Stornoquote — and retrieval corrects both figures and both descriptions. The publication titled 2024 reports the 2023 financial year, and gives one measure, not two: “Die Stornoquote (Anzahl) stieg im Jahr 2023 leicht auf 2,56 % (Vorjahr: 2,51 %).” So 2,56 % is the count measure, not a premium- or Bestand-weighted one; the 2,72 % attributed to 2024 and the separate 1,2 % count measure are not in this document and are not established anywhere in the corpus. The substantive point survives intact and is now better founded: the GDV measure is a headline Stornoquote over all life business, is not endowment-specific and is not split by duration, which is the evidence base for pitfall 10 and for lapse_table.csv being std rather than calibrated

  • Also used, and new to this pass, for the endowment-specific market figures the corpus previously lacked. In-force at 31 December 2023 by annual premium: “Der Anteil der Kapitalversicherungen (klassisch) lag Ende 2023 bei 15,7 % (Vorjahr: 17,0 %)”, against 61,8 % for annuity and pension business. New business 2023 with regular premiums: klassische Kapitalversicherungen 158 Mio. Euro, a 3,9 % share, up 8,2 %. Single premiums 2023: 1,1 Mrd. Euro of the 24,5 Mrd. total. And the count series for eingelöster Neuzugang of klassische Kapitalversicherungen, which quantifies the collapse R21 said was unquantified: 1.954,9 Tsd. (26,8 %) in 2000 → 1.354,2 (18,5 %) in 2005 → 742,1 (12,1 %) in 2010 → 527,2 (10,3 %) in 2015 → 392,3 (8,4 %) in 2020 → 325,3 (7,4 %) in 2023

R21 — GDV statistics, “Neugeschäft und Bestand der Lebensversicherer für die letzten zehn Geschäftsjahre”#

  • Publisher: GDV; statistical series pages

  • URL: https://www.gdv.de/gdv/statistik/statistiken-zur-deutschen-versicherungswirtschaft-uebersicht/lebensversicherung/neugeschaeft-und-bestand-der-lebensversicherer-fuer-die-letzten-zehn-geschaeftsjahre-137804

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML index of the statistical series, read 2026-08-30). The series pages themselves are download links; the numbers used below come from R20, which is the same publisher’s annual and was retrieved in full

  • Used for: the shape of the published series — gross written premiums for the Bestand, and the Beitragssumme and Annual Premium Equivalent for the Neugeschäft — which is why the specification treats the Beitragssumme as a headline market measure and why the model publishes beitragssumme() as a derived quantity rather than only the annual premium. R20 supplies the definitions verbatim: the APE adds 10 % of single premiums to the annual premium, assuming a ten-year term for single-premium contracts, while the Beitragssumme weights regular premiums by their payment term and adds the whole single premium, and is therefore “sehr viel größer als das APE”. For 2023 the APE was 8,9 Mrd. Euro (−1,1 %) and the Beitragssumme des Neugeschäfts 175,4 Mrd. Euro (2022: 170,6). The statement that no endowment-specific figure was established is withdrawn — see R20

R22 — BGH on the Debeka Stornoabzug: the Bezifferung requirement#

  • Publisher: Bundesgerichtshof; reported by LTO, LTMK and Cash.

  • URLs: https://www.lto.de/recht/nachrichten/n/bgh-ivzr18424-debeka-stornogebuehr-transparenz-zurueckverweisung-olg-angemessen · https://www.ltmk.de/kapitalmarktabhaengiger-stornoabzug-in-der-lebensversicherung-bgh-klaert-die-anforderungen-an-die-bezifferung/

  • Retrieved: yes (both HTML reports, read 2026-08-30). Both tags are discharged: the LTO report gives the citation in full — “Urt. v. 18.03.2026, Az. IV ZR 184/24” — so the docket is no longer an inference from a URL slug and the decision date is established

  • Used for: the holding that beziffert does not require a concrete euro amount at conclusion. LTO: the clause satisfies “die im Versicherungsvertragsgesetz (VVG) festgelegten Anforderungen an die Bezifferung des Abzugs gem. § 169 Abs. 5 S. 1 VVG”, is not void for want of transparency under § 307 Abs. 1 Satz 2 BGB, and “Die Vorschrift verlange nicht, dass der Abzug bereits zu Vertragsschluss als konkreter Betrag vereinbart werde. ‘Vielmehr kann der Versicherer auch auf die Regelung eines Berechnungsverfahrens für den Stornoabzug zurückgreifen.’” So a capital-market-dependent Stornoabzug is lawful in principle and the deduction need not be constant. The BGH set aside the OLG Koblenz judgment and remitted, the Angemessenheit question never having been examined below, which is why the specification records the Debeka schedule as unresolved at the access date. The rider that the procedure must leave the insurer no Ermessensspielraum is not in either retrieved report; it is dropped rather than attributed

R23 — BGH, judgment of 20 January 2021, IV ZR 318/19 — Bewertungsreserven after the LVRG#

  • Publisher: Bundesgerichtshof; reported by rewis.io, NWB and RWS-Verlag

  • URL: https://rewis.io/urteile/urteil/e7b-20-01-2021-iv-zr-31819/

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML, full judgment text from rewis.io, read 2026-08-30). The disposition of the parallel constitutional challenge to § 153 Abs. 3 Satz 3 VVG is still not established and remains unverified

  • Used for: the leading post-LVRG authority confirming that the half share of § 153 Abs. 3 VVG is cut back by the Sicherungsbedarf on contracts with interest guarantees and that the cut-back is lawful — the case law behind bwr_rate = 0 and behind the specification’s statement that the exit half share has frequently been nil

R24 — The older BGH line on Rückkaufswert and Stornoabzug clauses (2001–2007)#

  • Publisher: Bundesgerichtshof; reported by verbraucherrecht.at and rechtsportal.de

  • URL: https://www.rechtsportal.de/Rechtsprechung/Rechtsprechung/2007/BGH/Wirksamkeit-der-Klauseln-ueber-den-Stornoabzug-und-die-Hoehe-des-Rueckkaufswerts-in-der-Kapitallebensversicherung

  • Retrieved: no — the cited rechtsportal.de page answers HTTP 429 (rate limited) on 2026-08-30, and no alternative locus for the 2001–2007 line was retrieved; the entry is kept as a known reference and everything below stands on the earlier search summaries

  • Used for: the case law that produced the present § 169 — clauses failing to distinguish clearly between the Rückkaufswert and the Stornoabzug held void, and a deduction left to the insurer’s discretion or named only after the Kündigung failing the transparency requirement. This is why the model treats storno_rate as a contractual, pre-declared schedule read from a table rather than as a decision taken at the exit

R25 — Assekurata, 24. Marktstudie “Überschussbeteiligungen und Garantien 2026”#

  • Publisher: Assekurata Assekuranz Rating-Agentur GmbH; market study, reported by finanzwelt

  • URL: https://www.assekurata-rating.de/2026/03/04/assekurata-marktstudie-zu-ueberschussbeteiligungen-und-garantien-2026/

  • Retrieved: yes (HTML press release for the 24th edition, published March 2026, read 2026-08-30). The critical caveat is confirmed by the text, not merely suspected: Assekurata’s figures are stated “in der klassischen privaten Rentenversicherung”, so they are annuity averages, and that an endowment book shares the rate remains unverified

  • Used for: the market-average laufende Verzinsung, verbatim: “In der klassischen privaten Rentenversicherung erhöht sich die laufende Verzinsung für 2026 im Branchendurchschnitt auf 2,62 % (Vorjahr: 2,53 %). Inklusive Schlussüberschüssen liegt die in Aussicht gestellte Gesamtverzinsung bei durchschnittlich 3,23 % (Vorjahr: 3,19 %)”, with Neue Klassik at 2,65 % laufend and 3,32 % total. The specification prints this beside the 2,7 % Allianz declaration — which, after this pass, comes from R26 and is the 2025 rate — to show that the anchor cell sits at the top of a narrow band. Also the attribution of the caution to “weiterhin vorhandene stille Lasten in den Kapitalanlagen sowie vorsichtige Prognosen zur Zinsentwicklung”, which is why decl_rate is held level rather than trended, and the new-business finding that “nur noch elf der untersuchten Gesellschaften überhaupt klassische private Rentenversicherungen im Neugeschäft anbieten”

R26 — Trade-press reporting on the 2026 declarations and the market position of Klassik#

  • Publisher: VersicherungsJournal, procontra, Versicherungsbote, Biallo, Versicherungsmonitor

  • URLs: https://www.versicherungsjournal.de/markt-und-politik/etwa-jeder-dritte-lebensversicherer-erhoeht-die-ueberschussbeteiligung-154961.php · https://www.procontra-online.de/lebensversicherung/artikel/lebensversicherung-2026-klassik-wird-zur-nische · https://www.procontra-online.de/lebensversicherung/artikel/allianz-verzichtet-auf-erhohung-der-uberschussbeteiligung

  • Retrieved: partly — the two procontra articles were read in full as HTML on 2026-08-30; the VersicherungsJournal piece is paywalled, its body reserved to premium subscribers, so only the headline and the standfirst were read

  • Used for: the declared rate the anchor cell rests on, which after this pass is sourced here rather than at [S11]: procontra reports Allianz holding the laufende Verzinsung “für die klassischen Lebens- und Rentenversicherungen konstant bei 2,7 Prozent”, with Perspektive at 2,8 % — a 2025 declaration for a combined classic life-and-annuity book, and the nearest thing in the corpus to a manufacturer figure for an endowment. The same piece gives Alte Leipziger at 2,25 % laufend / 2,45 % total and LVM at 2,4 % / 3,1 %, which is the band the specification prints. Also about one in three life insurers raising the Überschussbeteiligung for 2026 — the VersicherungsJournal headline of 27 January 2026, whose standfirst records a survey of “fast 50 Anbieter mit rund 87 Prozent Marktanteil” but whose figures are behind the paywall — and the trade characterisation “Klassik wird zur Nische”, which with [S11]’s “nur noch selten angeboten” is the evidence base for the specification modelling a large in-force book with a thin new-business layer. The description of the 2024 Stornoquote as an eight-year high is not in the retrieved articles and is not established

R27 — DAV, Ergebnisbericht — Standardverfahren PRIIP Kategorie 4 (1 July 2025); Franke und Bornberg on Basisinformationsblätter#

  • Publisher: Deutsche Aktuarvereinigung e. V.; Franke und Bornberg GmbH

  • URLs: https://aktuar.de/content/PDF/Fachwissen/2025-07-01_DAV_Ergebnisbericht_LV_Standardverfahren_PRIIP_Kategorie_4.pdf · https://www.franke-bornberg.de/blog/basisinformationsblaetter-bib-zu-anlageprodukten-welche-informationen-liefern-bibs

  • Retrieved: yes (PDF, 30 pp., Köln, 1 July 2025, read 2026-08-30; the Franke und Bornberg blog post as HTML). No figure is taken from the Franke und Bornberg piece

  • Used for: the existence of a profession-agreed standard method for PRIIP Kategorie 4 — and the report says in its own preamble why that matters: “Dieser Bericht stellt im Sinne des Anhangs II der RTS zu PRIIP einen ‘robusten, anerkannten Branchen- oder Regulierungsstandard’ dar”, and it works “ein geeignetes Standardverfahren für PRIIP der Kategorie 4 zur Ermittlung des Marktrisikomaßes (MRM) und der Performance-Szenarien” using recognised standard capital-market models. That is what the specification cites for the point that a German BIB’s risk indicator and performance scenarios come from a common method rather than from each insurer’s own model, and hence that reproducing one is out of this library’s scope. One caveat retrieval adds: the report names Rentenversicherungen der 3. Schicht as the products it has principally in view, so its application to an endowment is by analogy

R28 — Actuarial and lexicon reference works on Deckungskapital, Zillmerung and Überschussverwendung#

  • Publisher: various — DGVFM/DAV teaching series; Universität zu Köln; Universität Heidelberg; Gabler/Versicherungsmagazin lexicon; VersWiki; Wikipedia. Secondary throughout, and the search summaries fused them, so attribution is to the group

  • URLs: https://werde-aktuar.de/content/DGVFM/PDF/Schulmaterialien/DGVFM_Band_4_Lebensversicherung.pdf · https://www.versicherungsmagazin.de/lexikon/gezillmerte-nettopraemie-1945423.html · https://www.deutsche-versicherungsboerse.de/verswiki/index_dvb.php?title=Lebensversicherung%3A_Zillmerung · https://www.deutsche-versicherungsboerse.de/verswiki/index_dvb.php?title=Ratenzahlungszuschlag

  • Retrieved: yes (the DGVFM Band 4 teaching PDF and the three lexicon pages, read 2026-08-30). No formula is copied from them into delib: the prospective reserve is standard actuarial content, used as a std construction and cited to no source

  • Used for: the Deckungskapital / Deckungsrückstellung distinction, which is why this library projects the former and references the latter; the gezillmerte Nettoprämie and Zillmerung reducing the reserve by the present value of unrecovered acquisition costs so that a negative Deckungskapital arises in the early years, which is res_zill_pp(1) = -alpha_cost; the four Überschussverwendung systems and — the discriminating fact the model turns on — that the verzinsliche Ansammlung gives a higher payment at maturity while the Bonussystem gives higher death benefits; and the Ratenzahlungszuschlag at 2 % half-yearly, 3 % quarterly and 5 % monthly, with the echte / unechte distinction that makes the loading inert on a genuine sub-annual Versicherungsperiode

R29 — LVRG legislative and market-impact material#

  • Publisher: Deutscher Bundestag (GDV Stellungnahme); Pfefferminzia; Versicherungsbote; AssCompact

  • URLs: https://www.bundestag.de/resource/blob/284406/e26d0309aa9989f59485ae83bf52bca9/08-GDV-data.pdf · https://www.pfefferminzia.de/vertrieb/untersuchung-zeigt-abschlusskosten-sinken-nach-lvrg-um-fast-8-prozent-1469012604/ · https://www.versicherungsbote.de/id/4804227/LVRG-Lebensversicherung-Provision-Modelle/

  • Retrieved: yes for the Pfefferminzia and Versicherungsbote reports and the Bundestag Stellungnahme PDF, all read 2026-08-30. The “almost 8 %” study is now attributed: it is the LV-Check of the magazine Procontra, which “seit 2009 die Bilanzen der relevantesten deutschen Lebensversicherer im engeren Sinne untersucht”, reported on 20 July 2016, and the figure is 7,9 %, with the Beitragssumme des Neuzugangs down only 5,7 % over the same period so the fall is not a volume effect. No Stornohaftung period was established and none is asserted

  • Used for: the Lebensversicherungsreformgesetz and its Höchstzillmersatz cut, which Versicherungsbote states in the form the model needs: “Für die Zillmerung bei Lebensversicherungspolicen sieht das LVRG eine Höchstgrenze von 25 Promille der Prämien ab dem kommenden Jahr vor. In der Bilanz kann der Versicherer somit von ursprünglich 4,0 Prozent nur noch 2,5 Prozent der Beitragssumme als Vertriebs- und Abschlusskosten geltend machen.” That is the 40 ‰ predecessor, corroborating the 4 % ceiling written into the 2011 wording at [S7]; and the reported 7,9 % fall in Abschlusskosten

  • Two corrections retrieval forces, one of them consequential. First, the same sentence continues: “Eine Deckelung der Provisionen ist gesetzlich nicht vorgesehen. Höhere Provisionen können daher von den Versicherern gezahlt werden, sind jedoch aus anderen Töpfen zu nehmen.” The LVRG caps what may be zillmered and recognised, not what may be paid — so the ceiling constrains alpha_rate, and it does not constrain comm_init_rate at all. Second, the Die Stuttgarter figure is not in either retrieved article. The only carrier named is ERGO, and only qualitatively: a stepwise redistribution in which “eine höhere Bestandsprovision dann eine geringere Abschlussprovision ausgleicht”. There is therefore no named-carrier commission figure anywhere in this corpus, and comm_init_rate = 2.5 % and comm_renew_rate = 1.5 % are std with no observation behind them — which is what the specification and model.md now say

R30 — Verbraucherzentrale material on the Debeka Stornoabzug collective action#

  • Publisher: Verbraucherzentrale Bundesverband and its Land bodies (Hamburg, Niedersachsen)

  • URLs: https://www.verbraucherzentrale.de/verfahren/debeka/faq · https://www.vzhh.de/themen/versicherungen/lebens-rentenversicherung/urteil-stornoabzug-der-debeka

  • Retrieved: yes (both HTML pages, read 2026-08-30). The framing is adversarial and the figures are the consumer bodies’, not Debeka’s, but they now match the wording read at [S3] and the legal press at R22

  • Used for: the running collective action over the Stornoklauseln, and the quantified deduction structure, which the vzbv FAQ states in terms: “Neben dem üblichen Stornoabzug von 5 Prozent wurde eine zusätzliche Stornogebühr erhoben. Ihre Höhe richtete sich nach der jeweiligen Kapitalmarktsituation und konnte 5, 10 oder 15 Prozent des Deckungskapitals betragen.” The observed total range for that carrier is 5 % to 20 %, which is the observation the std storno_rate schedule is set against, and the specification says so in the table itself. Retrieval settles the cohort question the entry left open: the class action covers policyholders who took out a Debeka life or annuity contract after 2007 and cancelled it, “besonders betroffen” being those cancelling from 1 May 2022; the vzhh page adds that the OLG Koblenz had prohibited the clause and the BGH reversed. And [S3] supplies what the consumer bodies omit — a fourth Kapitalmarktsituation carrying no deduction at all, and both components running linearly to nil over the last ten years before maturity, so the schedule’s floor is 0 % rather than 5 %

Cross-product references ([REG-R#])#

[REG-R#] tags resolve against the cross-product German reference library references/regulatory-and-actuarial-references.md (its own R-numbering, R1–R56, frozen; research provenance in _research/regulatory-actuarial.md). The [REG-R#] entries were not re-checked in this pass, which upgraded the product-level S# and R# entries above; their retrieval status is whatever references/regulatory-and-actuarial-references.md records. Where a [REG-R#] tag restates a product-level entry — REG-R9 for R8, REG-R14 to REG-R16 for R7, REG-R18 for R6, REG-R24 for R1, REG-R28 for R2 and R3, REG-R45 for R10 and R12 — the retrieved statutory text is the one above, and that is what the specification and the technical notes cite. Entries cited by the kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung documents:

  • REG-R1 — Richtlinie 2009/138/EG (Solvabilität II): the framework the projected cash flows feed and which this library does not implement.

  • REG-R2 — Delegierte Verordnung (EU) 2015/35: the same, at the level of the standard formula and contract boundaries.

  • REG-R3 — Richtlinie (EU) 2025/2, the Solvency II review: named in the specification’s regulatory context as pending.

  • REG-R4 — EIOPA risk-free term structures, the UFR and the Volatilitätsanpassung: the discount curves a valuation layer would apply to liability_cf.

  • REG-R5 — VAG 2016, its architecture and Anlage 1: the Sparte this product is written in.

  • REG-R6 — VAG §§ 74–110 and § 40: best estimate, risk margin, SCR/MCR and the SFCR — cited as the layer above this one.

  • REG-R8 — VAG § 138, Prämienkalkulation and Gleichbehandlung: the statutory frame for the first-order pricing basis.

  • REG-R9 — VAG § 139 and the Sicherungsbedarf test on Bewertungsreserven: the cross-product statement of the rule at R8, and the argument for bwr_rate = 0.

  • REG-R10 — VAG §§ 140 and 145, the RfB and the Verordnungsermächtigung: the provision the declared surplus is paid out of, and which the model does not carry.

  • REG-R11 — VAG §§ 141–143, the Verantwortlicher Aktuar and the 1994 deregulation: why a German tariff is no longer approved in advance.

  • REG-R12 — VAG §§ 221–236 and § 314, Protektor and the supervisor’s crisis powers: the § 314 write-down the specification names as out of scope.

  • REG-R14 — DeckRV and its § 2: the Höchstrechnungszins as a reserving-regulation quantity, keyed by cohort.

  • REG-R15 — the Höchstrechnungszins rate history and the Sechste Verordnung of 19 July 2024: the source of deckrv_table.csv’s first column, and of its two split-year std entries.

  • REG-R16 — DeckRV § 4, Höchstzillmersätze: the source of the second column, and of check_zillmer_cap().

  • REG-R17 — DeckRV § 5 Abs. 3, the Referenzzins, the Zinszusatzreserve and the Korridormethode: named and expressly not modelled.

  • REG-R18 — MindZV, the minimum allocation to the RfB: the cross-product statement of R6.

  • REG-R19 — RfBV, the collective part of the RfB: cited for the Schlussüberschussanteilfonds the model does not carry.

  • REG-R20 — LVRG 2014: the statute behind the 25 ‰ cut and the Effektivkosten disclosure.

  • REG-R21 — BaFin, the FinDAG, the MaGo and the Auslegungsentscheidungen: the supervisory frame around R17 and R18.

  • REG-R22 — VVG 2008, Kapitel 5 and § 171 (halbzwingende Vorschriften): why §§ 153, 161, 165 and 169 cannot be contracted around to the policyholder’s detriment.

  • REG-R24 — VVG § 153 and the hälftige Beteiligung: the cross-product statement of R1.

  • REG-R25 — VVG §§ 154 and 155, Modellrechnung and Standmitteilung: the statutory duty behind [S2].

  • REG-R26 — VVG §§ 150, 159–162: Einwilligung, Bezugsberechtigung and the Selbsttötung rule at R4.

  • REG-R27 — VVG § 163, Prämien- und Leistungsänderung: cited in pitfall 16 for what a Beitragsverrechnung offset is not — a discretionary rebate rather than a price change.

  • REG-R28 — VVG §§ 165–170: the cross-product statement of R2 and R3, and of the Stornoabzug conditions.

  • REG-R30 — VVG §§ 19, 37, 38, 157 and 158: the Anzeigepflicht at R5; §§ 37 and 38 are named as not researched and nothing is asserted about them.

  • REG-R31 — VVG §§ 6, 7, 1a, 7b, 7c and 214 with the VVG-InfoV: advice, information and the Effektivkosten at R9.

  • REG-R32 — PRIIPs, Verordnung (EU) Nr. 1286/2014 and its technical standards: the BIB regime at R19 and R27.

  • REG-R33 — IDD, Richtlinie (EU) 2016/97 and § 34d GewO: the distribution frame behind the IPID at [S6].

  • REG-R34 — Unisex: EuGH C-236/09 (Test-Achats) and §§ 19, 20 and 33 AGG. The hard constraint behind mort_rate_at_age — new business unisex from 21 December 2012, so sex may not enter the premium (pitfall 17).

  • REG-R35 — BaFin Merkblatt 01/2023 and angemessener Kundennutzen: the cross-product statement of R17.

  • REG-R36 — the BGH line of authority on German life contracts: the cross-product frame for R22, R23 and R24.

  • REG-R38 — AltEinkG and the Drei-Schichten-Modell: where a kapitalbildende Lebensversicherung sits (Schicht 3), and the 2005 boundary at R13.

  • REG-R45 — EStG § 20 Abs. 1 Nr. 6: the Unterschiedsbetrag, the 12/62 rule and the Mindesttodesfallschutz — the cross-product statement of R10 and R12, and the reason the anchor cell matures at attained age 62.

  • REG-R46 — ErbStG and SGB V §§ 226, 229 and 240: the treatment of a death benefit, named and not modelled.

  • REG-R47 — Rechnungsgrundlagen erster und zweiter Ordnung, and the DAV as owner of the tables. The frame for the model’s two mortality bases, for the Sicherheitszuschlag whose release is the Risikoüberschuss, and for the fact that the direction of prudence forks between the death and the survival leg (pitfalls 13 and 14).

  • REG-R48 — DAV 2008 T and its predecessors: the cross-product statement of R14, including the selection factors the shipped proxy does not carry.

  • REG-R52 — Destatis Sterbetafeln and the reuse licence: the population benchmark an insured-lives replacement table must sit below.

  • REG-R53 — the German life market in numbers (GDV, BaFin, Assekurata, Map-Report, Franke und Bornberg): the source of the statement that the laufende Verzinsung is the guarantee plus the interest surplus, which is pitfall 1 and the single most load-bearing line in the model.

  • REG-R54 — HGB §§ 341–341o, RechVersV and BerVersV: § 341f forming the Deckungsrückstellung excluding verzinslich angesammelte Überschussanteile, which is why av_sur_pp is a cells of its own and not part of res_pp; and § 28 RechVersV naming the declared rate as a published quantity.

  • REG-R55 — IFRS 17 and the Variable Fee Approach: named as the other measurement basis these cash flows feed.

  • REG-R56 — DAV Fachgrundsätze and the annual Höchstrechnungszins recommendation: the professional standard this documentation sits under, and the frame for R15.

Provenance note#

Extraction details — which fact was read from which search summary, section-level notes organised by mechanic, and the twenty-four-item gaps and caveats register — live in _research/kapitallebensversicherung.md. That file is the citation ground truth for the S# and R# numbering used here.

What this pass changed. Every entry above now records what was actually opened. Of the forty-seven product-level entries, forty-one are Retrieved: yes, four are partly retrieved (R10, whose Einkommensteuer-Handbuch URL answers with a bot interstitial; R11, whose body is behind a subscription login; R19, one of whose three articles is a 404; and R26, whose VersicherungsJournal piece is paywalled), and two are not retrieved at all — S8 (HTTP 404 at the cited URL, no replacement found on the publisher’s site) and R24 (HTTP 429). The statutory core is now read as canonical XML with its Stand attached, so gap 15 is closed for §§ 19, 153, 161, 165, 168, 169 and 171 VVG (Stand: zuletzt geändert durch Art. 12 G v. 26.5.2026 I Nr. 156), § 139 VAG (Art. 25 G v. 25.3.2026 I Nr. 81), §§ 20 and 52 EStG (Art. 7 G v. 29.6.2026 I Nr. 197), the MindZV (Art. 1 V v. 7.7.2020 I 1688) and the DeckRV (Art. 1 V v. 19.7.2024 I Nr. 250, in force 1 January 2025) — those statements are version-pinned and no longer “current in substance as reported”.

The caveats that survive, and which the specification and the technical notes repeat rather than leave here: no Schlussüberschuss rate of any kind is established, for any insurer, in any year — [S18] and [S7] give the mechanism and the base, none of the six carrier documents gives a level — so term_rate is wholly std (gap 1); the declared-rate market averages are for the annuity, not the endowment, which R25 states in terms, and the one manufacturer figure, 2,7 %, is R26’s report of a 2025 declaration for a combined classic life-and-annuity book (gap 2); one charge figure now exists — the ÖSA BIB at [S10], with total costs of 6.216 € and a 5,3 % annual cost impact at twenty years on its own model case, beside BaFin’s finding at R18 of Effektivkosten “über vier Prozent” in individual cases — but no Abschlusskostenquote, Verwaltungskostenquote or commission rate is established for any carrier, so every charge in the model stays std (gap 7, materially narrowed); no German Produktinformationsblatt or IPID for this product was located, though [S10] supplies the PRIIP-BIB fields it would have carried (gap 9); the GDV Stornoquote is a single headline count measure — 2,56 % for 2023 — and is neither endowment-specific nor split by duration, so it is still not a surrender rate a decrement can be calibrated to (gap 10, restated: there are not two irreconcilable measures, there is one unsuitable one); no premium rate table, underwriting grid or Risikozuschlag scale is public for any German endowment, so every premium here is computed by the model’s own equivalence principle (gap 16); the DAV tables are cited and never shipped, so every decrement in the model is a std proxy (gap 14); three carrier Stornoabzug schedules are now in the corpus, on three different bases — a percentage of the Deckungskapital [S3], a euro amount plus a percentage of premiums paid times the years remaining [S9], and a euro amount plus a percentage of the gap between sum insured and reserve [S18] — so storno_rate as a flat percentage of the reserve is one observed shape of three, and the Debeka schedule remains sub judice after R22 (gap 18, superseded); four statutory provisions the product depends on were never separately researched — §§ 152, 37, 38 and 150 VVG — and nothing is asserted about any of them; § 168 has since been read and is recorded at R2 (gap 20, narrowed); and the variations table is six carriers wide, of which [S7] and [S18] are genuine endowment wordings, [S3]–[S5] and [S9] are annuity wordings used only where the rule transfers, and [S8] produced no document at all (gap 22). One Austrian wording was returned by a search and is excluded: the VVG, the DeckRV and the MindZV do not apply to it, and nothing anywhere in delib is cited to it (gap 24).

On this page
Show Source