And finally, I’ll just add that under the last proposed rule change, we implemented policies and procedures to comply with the final prohibited transaction exemption in a timely fashion, and we’d expect to do the same here.
Tracy Benguigui: Do you think that evolution also took place in the IMO channel or they could comply with new standards? .
Caroline Feeney: I’m sorry, Tracy, I want to make sure I heard your question.
Tracy Benguigui: The IMO channel independent agents Yes, would they also be well equipped since the last proposal?
Caroline Feeney: So what I could improve on Yes. So Tracy, what I couldn’t comment on is others in terms of their IMO channels and whether they’d be prepared or not. What I will say, particularly, and I’ll just reiterate with the last DOL-proposed rule, we were very much ready as an entire enterprise across all of the various businesses where there was any impact, and we are ready to comply with the rule. And as I mentioned, we would expect to do the same here. That would include all of the distribution channels that would, in any way, be impacted by the new proposed rule.
Tracy Benguigui: Got it. I want to touch on Prismic and thinking about the investor consortium. Could you let me know like what they’re thinking in terms of an investment time horizon? Will there be like a call option being arbitrary here but, let’s say, like in 10 years, would prune to provide liquidity to those investors after a set period of time? Or do you envision raising new funds?
Robert Falzon: Tracy, it’s Rob. So we’re partnering with a group of very large global institutional investors. Their intent is to operate with scale. And their investment horizon very much aligned with our own is quite long term. Prismic itself has an independent Board of Directors, and that will govern the route toward growth and otherwise. But there are no put or call provisions embedded in the agreement that we’ve got with Prismic.
Operator: [Operator Instructions]. Our next question is coming from Wilma Burdis from Raymond James.
Wilma Burdis: A couple of earnings-related questions. First, I think you guys previously cited $65 million of deal closing costs with Somerset Re. I just want to know if that would lower the 275 baseline for 4Q? Or maybe just an update on timing there? And then the other is, if you could walk us through the trajectory of benefits from the restructuring. Will we see a benefit in 1Q? Or is it going to take a little bit longer?
Kenneth Tanji: Yes. It’s Ken. The deal-related costs for the reinsurance with Summerset Re will be incurred at the time of closing, and those have not been included in the baseline. And I’m sorry. And obviously, I think your second part of the question was the benefits of the restructuring or the benefits of the reinsurance will occur subsequent to close, obviously. .
Wilma Burdis: Yes, the restructuring, should we start to see some benefits coming in 1Q? Or is it going to take some time?
Kenneth Tanji: Are you say the organizational restructuring, is that what you’re referring to or the reinsurer. I’m sorry. We will see benefits in 2020 for pretty soon thereafter, there will be a portion that’s highly — that’s effective in the first quarter and then thereafter.
Wilma Burdis: And could you talk about the impact of Prismic on Pages RBC — just — I know there was a little bit of a holdco liquidity impact from the initial investments. So could you just talk about that aspect as well?
Kenneth Tanji: Sure. The initial impact of the reinsurance of the structured settlement the Prismic was modest, and that was impact — that was in our RBC ratio for September. And so we had the impact of the initial portion of that. But over time, it will also enable capital benefits as we reallocate the retained investment portfolio. And so it will — we had some impact immediately, but they also will have continued impact as we reallocate the investment portfolio.
