The Truth About Whole Life Insurance
The necessity of life insurance today is based around the idea of a family with one or both spouses working outside of the home, and that if one of them dies, the other will be left with financial obligations that will not be able to be met. Most advisers agree that life insurance is supposed to fill that gap.
This is where the agreement between financial professionals ends abruptly, because the next question that arises is: OK, so what kind of life insurance should people buy? The debate between which is better - term or cash value/permanent life insurance - is seemingly a "never ending battle". For many various reasons, many investment houses, stock brokers, mutual fund managers (and the agents who sell their funds), as well as many popular financial "gurus" like Suze Orman, Ric Edleman, and Dave Ramsey presumably (according to their many published books and comments on national radio and television) hate whole life insurance.
The life insurance industry, and all of it's agents, of course love it. For the most part, the investment industry discounts its importance. So, who wins the debate?
It's surprising that the financial industry is supposed to be the educator. I say that only because many of the financial advisors in my industry seem to be more concerned about what the next "hot" mutual fund is...or manipulating interest rate returns, eliminating or disguising fees and disregarding suitability with respect to their clients.
In truth, neither the insurance industry nor the investment industry is doing a very good job of defending their respective positions. Point Blank: Financial "gurus" are leaving out critical information. Either they do not have a very good grasp of how life insurance really works, or they are outright lying. Either scenario is totally unacceptable.
Their motives for deception can be numerous, and diverse. Now, there isn't anything wrong with pointing out the flaws in a financial product, as long as it can be done objectively. However, in the case of life insurance, the attacks being made are baseless and unsound. This is especially shocking because most, if not all, of these attacks are coming from high profile, well known financial professionals. Here are a few common lies, attacks, & misconceptions:
Lie Number One:
Cash value life insurance is one of the worst financial products available, and it is definitely the worst type of insurance you can buy to insure your life. The BEST kind of insurance is term insurance because it's cheap and I'm not paying all those extra fees to the evil and greedy insurance company. Besides, don't insurance companies have a record of being reckless, cheating their policyholders, and systematically going out of business.
Fact: About 1% of all term policies pay a claim. So, your family has (roughly) a 1% chance that they will benefit from that term policy. Term insurance is cheap - IF you are only considering the cost per thousand dollars of insurance. It is guaranteed to get more expensive as time goes on (and you will see this if your policy gets repriced). Life insurance companies are not dumb. They know they can collect premiums from term life and make a killing because the turnover rate is high (people drop their policies before the term is up) or the policy owner simply doesn't die before the term is up. Life insurance companies are in the business to make money and provide a product. You have to understand how they position their products and how they make money.
Insurance uses something called the Law of Large Numbers. Basically this is how it works: the larger the group of people you are insuring, the more certain you can be about the number of losses you will sustain.
Let's suppose you were to start an insurance company and you only had one customer - let's call him "Jim". You would be taking on an incredible risk by insuring just Jim. If Jim kicks the bucket, then you're on the hook for a lot of money that you may not have. You would be business very quickly (imagine: Jim gives you $20 for a $500,000 death benefit and then they die the very next day...where do you come up with $500K for Jim's family?). However, if you have thousands of customers just like Jim, then you have the unique ability to better control the risk you take by insuring Jim's life. No one can predict when Jim will die, but if you study a large enough group of people just like Jim, then you can begin to make very, very accurate predictions about the number of people just like Jim that will die in any given year. Given the accuracy of insurance companies in predicting deaths every year, what do their statistics tell us?
Term insurance just doesn't pay, at least not for policy owners. That's because most people live to age 65. Term is expensive long-term. Permanent is a good deal long-term. A few critics will still say "no Dave, term is cheaper - always cheaper". Oh yeah? Watch this:
A male (let's use Jim again), age 25 and in good health with a wife and a child finds that he needs life insurance. Jim is looking for $250,000 in coverage. A typical 30-year term policy - a policy that has level premium payments for 30 years - should cost Jim around $370 per year until he reaches age fifty-five. At that point, the premiums jump up significantly (as all term insurance premiums do) to a tad over $4,700 per year.
After 65, will have spent $58,780 in premiums. That's a lot! Also, remember that this is money that the insurance company collects and never has to give back. Since there's no cash value associated with term insurance, the insurance contract pays off only when he dies.
What would have happened if he had purchased the same amount of death benefit but used a universal life insurance policy? His annual premiums would have been higher - $1739. By his 65th birthday, Jim has a total premium outlay of $69,560 ($1739 x 40). Wow! But, he will have built up $157,000 of cash value inside the policy.
This money is part of the policy's living benefits, and can be used on a tax-free basis to supplement his retirement or left alone to continue growing. Some life insurance companies also offer an option to spend down up to 100% of the death benefit if you become chronically or terminally ill. If you haven't been able to accumulate a lot of money, this can be very helpful.
Lie number two:
Cash value life insurance is overpriced for what you get. Also, you can never tell how much money you are spending on death benefit and how much money is actually going into the cash value of the policy. With term insurance, the costs are clear.
Fact: With whole life insurance it is often difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. If that bothers you, then don't buy whole life insurance. However, universal life insurance is, in actuality, a term policy with a separate savings account - often called 'the pot of money'. As such, you can easily determine the cost per thousand dollars of insurance, how much is going to pay the death benefit, and how much is going into the cash value of the policy. Cash value insurance can seem expensive in comparison to term insurance because of the front load (commissions and administrative fees) nature of the contract and the fact that you are forced to save money in a cash account. This is a point that is really driven home by the anti-cash value life insurance crowd.
The fees aren't so bad. I'm serious. Think about how much more difficult it would be if every time you wanted to save or invest money, you had to call a lawyer to draft a contract for you? With respect to life insurance, you have a few choices: you can structure the contract for maximum cash (minimizing the fees) or maximum death benefit (maximizing the fees, but getting more death benefit as a result). All of the expenses associated with permanent life insurance can be made very reasonable if cost is the concern. But why compare insurance to an investment?
In the long run, you will usually get all of your money back that you put into a cash value policy and then some. You can even structure the policy so that it provides substantial cashflow in retirement. The only exceptions to this are variable life insurance contracts. There really aren't any guarantees on them.
Lie number three:
If you are smart with your money, pay off your mortgage and other loans, and put money into retirement plans you won't need insurance 30 years from now to protect your family.
Fact: I'm not exactly sure what being "smart" with your money means, but advisers like Ric Edelman have done at least one thing right by demonstrating that debt can be leveraged and paying off your home early is rarely a good idea. But beyond that, you may need life insurance to protect your beneficiaries (whoever they may be) from taxes. As for retirement, you can't predict the investment returns in a mutual fund inside of a 401(k) or IRA unless you are very good at researching stocks - which most people are terrible at. Even professional stock analysts don't always get it right. The stock market ebbs and flows, and goes through cycles of boom and bust. If your investments take a hit right before you are ready to retire, it just doesn't matter how "smart" you were with your money.
Is life insurance is necessary as you get older? You will be shocked at the costs of even a modest funeral these days. What does the average funeral cost in your home town? Ask a funeral director. What is the inflation effect in the funeral industry. If it costs $12,000 today, what will it cost in 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? Ask any beneficiary who has been left any amount of money what they paid in taxes and if it was financially disruptive to them personally.
That cash value life insurance policy that your financial guru told you to ditch could have bypassed probate, provided an income tax free death benefit and, inside of a life insurance trust, completely avoided the estate tax thereby giving your heirs what they deserve.
There are an alarming number of financial professionals that try to draw a connection between life insurance and investing. It's a huge mistake (even supporters of CV insurance make this mistake). Comparing cash value insurance to investing is like asking "how many walkmans does it take to equal an Ipod?". Even if you find an investment strategy that "beats" the insurance product...so what? Cash value insurance is supposed to provide a death benefit with a savings component, not an investment component (despite the mistakes of variable life).
So, should you buy term or cash value life insurance? That depends. What are you really looking for? If you are looking for an investment, then learn how to invest in stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds, options, and other financial derivatives. If you want a savings, then a properly structured permanent life insurance policy can fill that need very well.
This is where the agreement between financial professionals ends abruptly, because the next question that arises is: OK, so what kind of life insurance should people buy? The debate between which is better - term or cash value/permanent life insurance - is seemingly a "never ending battle". For many various reasons, many investment houses, stock brokers, mutual fund managers (and the agents who sell their funds), as well as many popular financial "gurus" like Suze Orman, Ric Edleman, and Dave Ramsey presumably (according to their many published books and comments on national radio and television) hate whole life insurance.
The life insurance industry, and all of it's agents, of course love it. For the most part, the investment industry discounts its importance. So, who wins the debate?
It's surprising that the financial industry is supposed to be the educator. I say that only because many of the financial advisors in my industry seem to be more concerned about what the next "hot" mutual fund is...or manipulating interest rate returns, eliminating or disguising fees and disregarding suitability with respect to their clients.
In truth, neither the insurance industry nor the investment industry is doing a very good job of defending their respective positions. Point Blank: Financial "gurus" are leaving out critical information. Either they do not have a very good grasp of how life insurance really works, or they are outright lying. Either scenario is totally unacceptable.
Their motives for deception can be numerous, and diverse. Now, there isn't anything wrong with pointing out the flaws in a financial product, as long as it can be done objectively. However, in the case of life insurance, the attacks being made are baseless and unsound. This is especially shocking because most, if not all, of these attacks are coming from high profile, well known financial professionals. Here are a few common lies, attacks, & misconceptions:
Lie Number One:
Cash value life insurance is one of the worst financial products available, and it is definitely the worst type of insurance you can buy to insure your life. The BEST kind of insurance is term insurance because it's cheap and I'm not paying all those extra fees to the evil and greedy insurance company. Besides, don't insurance companies have a record of being reckless, cheating their policyholders, and systematically going out of business.
Fact: About 1% of all term policies pay a claim. So, your family has (roughly) a 1% chance that they will benefit from that term policy. Term insurance is cheap - IF you are only considering the cost per thousand dollars of insurance. It is guaranteed to get more expensive as time goes on (and you will see this if your policy gets repriced). Life insurance companies are not dumb. They know they can collect premiums from term life and make a killing because the turnover rate is high (people drop their policies before the term is up) or the policy owner simply doesn't die before the term is up. Life insurance companies are in the business to make money and provide a product. You have to understand how they position their products and how they make money.
Insurance uses something called the Law of Large Numbers. Basically this is how it works: the larger the group of people you are insuring, the more certain you can be about the number of losses you will sustain.
Let's suppose you were to start an insurance company and you only had one customer - let's call him "Jim". You would be taking on an incredible risk by insuring just Jim. If Jim kicks the bucket, then you're on the hook for a lot of money that you may not have. You would be business very quickly (imagine: Jim gives you $20 for a $500,000 death benefit and then they die the very next day...where do you come up with $500K for Jim's family?). However, if you have thousands of customers just like Jim, then you have the unique ability to better control the risk you take by insuring Jim's life. No one can predict when Jim will die, but if you study a large enough group of people just like Jim, then you can begin to make very, very accurate predictions about the number of people just like Jim that will die in any given year. Given the accuracy of insurance companies in predicting deaths every year, what do their statistics tell us?
Term insurance just doesn't pay, at least not for policy owners. That's because most people live to age 65. Term is expensive long-term. Permanent is a good deal long-term. A few critics will still say "no Dave, term is cheaper - always cheaper". Oh yeah? Watch this:
A male (let's use Jim again), age 25 and in good health with a wife and a child finds that he needs life insurance. Jim is looking for $250,000 in coverage. A typical 30-year term policy - a policy that has level premium payments for 30 years - should cost Jim around $370 per year until he reaches age fifty-five. At that point, the premiums jump up significantly (as all term insurance premiums do) to a tad over $4,700 per year.
After 65, will have spent $58,780 in premiums. That's a lot! Also, remember that this is money that the insurance company collects and never has to give back. Since there's no cash value associated with term insurance, the insurance contract pays off only when he dies.
What would have happened if he had purchased the same amount of death benefit but used a universal life insurance policy? His annual premiums would have been higher - $1739. By his 65th birthday, Jim has a total premium outlay of $69,560 ($1739 x 40). Wow! But, he will have built up $157,000 of cash value inside the policy.
This money is part of the policy's living benefits, and can be used on a tax-free basis to supplement his retirement or left alone to continue growing. Some life insurance companies also offer an option to spend down up to 100% of the death benefit if you become chronically or terminally ill. If you haven't been able to accumulate a lot of money, this can be very helpful.
Lie number two:
Cash value life insurance is overpriced for what you get. Also, you can never tell how much money you are spending on death benefit and how much money is actually going into the cash value of the policy. With term insurance, the costs are clear.
Fact: With whole life insurance it is often difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. If that bothers you, then don't buy whole life insurance. However, universal life insurance is, in actuality, a term policy with a separate savings account - often called 'the pot of money'. As such, you can easily determine the cost per thousand dollars of insurance, how much is going to pay the death benefit, and how much is going into the cash value of the policy. Cash value insurance can seem expensive in comparison to term insurance because of the front load (commissions and administrative fees) nature of the contract and the fact that you are forced to save money in a cash account. This is a point that is really driven home by the anti-cash value life insurance crowd.
The fees aren't so bad. I'm serious. Think about how much more difficult it would be if every time you wanted to save or invest money, you had to call a lawyer to draft a contract for you? With respect to life insurance, you have a few choices: you can structure the contract for maximum cash (minimizing the fees) or maximum death benefit (maximizing the fees, but getting more death benefit as a result). All of the expenses associated with permanent life insurance can be made very reasonable if cost is the concern. But why compare insurance to an investment?
In the long run, you will usually get all of your money back that you put into a cash value policy and then some. You can even structure the policy so that it provides substantial cashflow in retirement. The only exceptions to this are variable life insurance contracts. There really aren't any guarantees on them.
Lie number three:
If you are smart with your money, pay off your mortgage and other loans, and put money into retirement plans you won't need insurance 30 years from now to protect your family.
Fact: I'm not exactly sure what being "smart" with your money means, but advisers like Ric Edelman have done at least one thing right by demonstrating that debt can be leveraged and paying off your home early is rarely a good idea. But beyond that, you may need life insurance to protect your beneficiaries (whoever they may be) from taxes. As for retirement, you can't predict the investment returns in a mutual fund inside of a 401(k) or IRA unless you are very good at researching stocks - which most people are terrible at. Even professional stock analysts don't always get it right. The stock market ebbs and flows, and goes through cycles of boom and bust. If your investments take a hit right before you are ready to retire, it just doesn't matter how "smart" you were with your money.
Is life insurance is necessary as you get older? You will be shocked at the costs of even a modest funeral these days. What does the average funeral cost in your home town? Ask a funeral director. What is the inflation effect in the funeral industry. If it costs $12,000 today, what will it cost in 10 years? 20 years? 30 years? Ask any beneficiary who has been left any amount of money what they paid in taxes and if it was financially disruptive to them personally.
That cash value life insurance policy that your financial guru told you to ditch could have bypassed probate, provided an income tax free death benefit and, inside of a life insurance trust, completely avoided the estate tax thereby giving your heirs what they deserve.
There are an alarming number of financial professionals that try to draw a connection between life insurance and investing. It's a huge mistake (even supporters of CV insurance make this mistake). Comparing cash value insurance to investing is like asking "how many walkmans does it take to equal an Ipod?". Even if you find an investment strategy that "beats" the insurance product...so what? Cash value insurance is supposed to provide a death benefit with a savings component, not an investment component (despite the mistakes of variable life).
So, should you buy term or cash value life insurance? That depends. What are you really looking for? If you are looking for an investment, then learn how to invest in stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds, options, and other financial derivatives. If you want a savings, then a properly structured permanent life insurance policy can fill that need very well.
About the Author:
Author: Only so much information can be covered in one article. If you would like more detailed information about any aspect of personal financial planning, please visit David's website.
posted by Debt Consolidation Loan at
9:27 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home