Comprehensive and Detailed in Depth Explanation with Exact Extract from Documents and Guides:
TheIFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law)defines "trafficking" (or "policy trafficking") as the unethical practice of arranging the sale or transfer of an insurance policy to a third party, typically for less than its face value, often involving vulnerable clients like seniors. Here, David is facilitating Craig selling his $150,000 policy for $50,000 to abusinessman, which fits this definition. Churning (A) involves replacing policies to earn commissions, anti-selection (B) refers to adverse risk selection by clients, and tied selling (D) links product purchases. Trafficking violates ethical standards and insurable interest principles, making C correct.
References:
IFSE Ethics and Professional Practice Course (Common Law), Module 1: Ethics and Professionalism, Section on "Unethical Practices - Trafficking."

The primary responsibility of the Canadian Insurance Services Regulatory Organizations (CISRO) is to establish and maintain a cohesive regulatory framework for insurance intermediaries, ensuring consistent standards across provincial and territorial jurisdictions in Canada. CISRO does not directly interact with consumers or administer PIPEDA; rather, it collaborates with regional regulators to promote regulatory harmony for insurance professionals.
This responsibility helps uphold public trust and ensures that intermediaries comply with legal and professional standards.

Comprehensive and Detailed Explanation:
Rene's salary is $70,000/year, and his group disability insurance provides 60% of this, or $42,000/year ($70,000 × 0.60), equating to $3,500/month ($42,000 ÷ 12). His monthly expenses are $3,500, so this just covers his needs if disabled. However, the LLQP stresses considering unexpected expenses (e.g., medical costs, inflation) beyond basic living expenses (Chapter 2:Insurance to Protect Income).
RRSP contribution: $1,000/month, savings: $45,000 (registered) + $10,000 (non-registered).
40% of salary = $70,000 × 0.40 = $28,000/year or $2,333/month.
Option A: Incorrect; $3,500/month matches expenses but leaves no buffer for unforeseen costs.
Option B: Incorrect; RRSPs are for retirement, not disability liquidity, and don't enhanceimmediate protection.
Option C: $1,000/month additional coverage is arbitrary and insufficient for 40% of salary; it doesn't align with needs analysis.
Option D: Correct; 40% of salary ($2,333/month) on top of $3,500 provides $5,833/month, offering a safety net for unexpected expenses, consistent with LLQP's holistic protection approach (Chapter 6:Client Profile).
Reference: LLQP Accident and Sickness Insurance Manual, Chapter 2:Insurance to Protect Income, Chapter 6:
Client Profile.

Due to Jessica's reduced life expectancy, an impaired life annuity would provide higher monthlypayments than a standard life annuity. This type of annuity takes her medical condition into account, offering larger payouts based on a shorter expected payment period. LLQP resources recommend impaired life annuities for individuals with significant health issues, as these provide better income compared to other types.
Options A and C offer a fixed period but don't maximize monthly income for someone with a reduced life expectancy. Option B would provide a standard income for life but not the potentially enhanced income from an impaired annuity.

To calculate net worth, we sum the couple's assets and subtract their liabilities. The calculation is as follows:
Assets:
Leonard's chequing account: $3,000
Ashley's chequing account: $3,000
Leonard's group RRSP: $40,000
Ashley's car (Subaru WRX): $20,000
Total Assets:$66,000
Liabilities:
Ashley's car loan: $10,000
Leonard's student loan: $30,000
Total Liabilities:$40,000
Net Worth Calculation:
$66,000 (Assets) - $40,000 (Liabilities) = $26,000
The couple's net worth is therefore $26,000, which aligns with LLQP methodologies for net worth calculations by considering all assets minus liabilities.