Today, life insurance is based around the idea that if you or your spouse dies, that your family will be made whole by replacing your spouse's income. This essential foundation for effective financial planning is often overlooked by many individuals. Most advisers agree that life insurance is necessary.
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.
Life insurance agents of course love cash value insurance. The investment industry does a pretty good job of putting down the insurance industry. So...who's right?
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.
The motivation for lying can be as simple as "money". There is a lot of money floating around in the financial industry, and everyone is competing for it. So, while isn't anything wrong with demonstrating flaws in a financial product, it has to be done objectively. In regards to life insurance, it's not. The attacks are baseless and unsound, and most, if not all, of them are coming from very well known financial professionals. Here are a few of the misconceptions being passed around. Many of them have been repeated so many times, that most people think they are true (they aren't):
Lie number one:
Don't waste your money on cash value insurance. It is a complete waste of money because the insurance company collects premiums from you for 20 years and then when you die you only get the death benefit. They keep all of your cash and your family gets ripped off. Besides, you could make more money by buying term and investing the difference.
Fact: Term insurance can be the best type of insurance if all you are considering is the cost. But it is generally the worst type of insurance you can buy to insure your life if you want it to pay off, at least statistically speaking. To understand this, we need to understand how life insurance companies position their product line, and how they make money.
You may have heard of the "law of averages". Well, insurance uses something called the Law of Large Numbers. The larger the group of people you are insuring, the more certain you can be about the number of losses.
If I started a life insurance company and I only had one customer, I would be taking on an incredible risk because of the nature of life insurance, if that one person dies, I could be out of business very quickly. If, however, I have thousands or millions of customers, then I can manage the risk. Since no one can predict when a specific individual will die (i.e. no one can predict when I will die), I need a large number of people to study to formulate a statistic. With a large enough number of people, I can make surprisingly accurate predictions about the number of individuals within a particular group that will die in any given year. So...what do the statistics say?
They say that that term insurance doesn't pay, since most individuals live until age 65. This is why I say permanent is a better deal. In the long-run, it's cheaper. I know, I know...there are probably a few of you saying "no way, it is always cheaper to buy term insurance". 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.
By the time he is 65, he will have spent $58,780 on premiums. Keep in mind that the insurance company collected this money but never has to give it back. There's no cash value in term insurance, so the contract only pays 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: Whole life insurance carries a stigma in that it is often difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. However, universal life insurance is, in actuality, a term policy with a separate savings account - often called 'the pot of money'. The costs are broken down and the policy is very transparent. Cash value insurance can seem expensive in comparison to term insurance because of the front loaded nature of the contract and the fact that you are forced to save money in a cash account. Sadly, the fees charged by the insurance company are being stressed (I guess they don't know that all financial products carry similar fees).
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:
Be smart with the money you have today and pay off your mortgage, car loans and other debt. Put enough money into retirement plans you don't need insurance 30 years from now to protect your family when you die.
Fact: You may not need life insurance in 30 years to protect your children from financial ruin when you die. But you may need it to protect your beneficiaries (whoever they may be) from taxes. And, even if you are "smart" with your money, you can't predict the investment returns in a mutual fund (or a stock for that matter) inside of a 401(k) or IRA unless you are very good at researching stocks (hint: 99% of the general population is not). It takes years of practice, and even some of the best stock brokers and financial 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 doesn't matter how "smart" you were with your money.
Also, consider that dying isn't free. Ask a funeral director in your home town how much a funeral costs...and then ask him or her how much it should be in 10 years...20 years...when you expect to die. You will be amazed...and not in a good way. Also, ask any child whose parents left them any amount of money what they paid in taxes and if it was financially disruptive.
Your financial guru told you cash value insurance was evil, but it could have really helped out of a jam when the tax man cometh. You could also bypassing probate, providing an income tax free death benefit and, inside of a life insurance trust, completely avoid the estate tax.
Although many financial gurus try to draw a connection between insurance and investing in the process of telling you what a lousy investment cash value life insurance is, comparing this type of insurance to investing is nonsensical. It's like asking "how many vinyl records does it take to equal a DVD?"...we're talking about two different products that, while somewhat related, work in two very different ways - each with their own different objectives.
Before you make a final decision on whether to buy term or cash value life insurance, consider what you are really looking for. If you are looking for an investment, then be prepared to look for stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds, options, and other various financial derivatives (and learn how to research them). If you're looking for a long-term savings tool, then cash value life insurance can fit that need very well. - 21511
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.
Life insurance agents of course love cash value insurance. The investment industry does a pretty good job of putting down the insurance industry. So...who's right?
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.
The motivation for lying can be as simple as "money". There is a lot of money floating around in the financial industry, and everyone is competing for it. So, while isn't anything wrong with demonstrating flaws in a financial product, it has to be done objectively. In regards to life insurance, it's not. The attacks are baseless and unsound, and most, if not all, of them are coming from very well known financial professionals. Here are a few of the misconceptions being passed around. Many of them have been repeated so many times, that most people think they are true (they aren't):
Lie number one:
Don't waste your money on cash value insurance. It is a complete waste of money because the insurance company collects premiums from you for 20 years and then when you die you only get the death benefit. They keep all of your cash and your family gets ripped off. Besides, you could make more money by buying term and investing the difference.
Fact: Term insurance can be the best type of insurance if all you are considering is the cost. But it is generally the worst type of insurance you can buy to insure your life if you want it to pay off, at least statistically speaking. To understand this, we need to understand how life insurance companies position their product line, and how they make money.
You may have heard of the "law of averages". Well, insurance uses something called the Law of Large Numbers. The larger the group of people you are insuring, the more certain you can be about the number of losses.
If I started a life insurance company and I only had one customer, I would be taking on an incredible risk because of the nature of life insurance, if that one person dies, I could be out of business very quickly. If, however, I have thousands or millions of customers, then I can manage the risk. Since no one can predict when a specific individual will die (i.e. no one can predict when I will die), I need a large number of people to study to formulate a statistic. With a large enough number of people, I can make surprisingly accurate predictions about the number of individuals within a particular group that will die in any given year. So...what do the statistics say?
They say that that term insurance doesn't pay, since most individuals live until age 65. This is why I say permanent is a better deal. In the long-run, it's cheaper. I know, I know...there are probably a few of you saying "no way, it is always cheaper to buy term insurance". 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.
By the time he is 65, he will have spent $58,780 on premiums. Keep in mind that the insurance company collected this money but never has to give it back. There's no cash value in term insurance, so the contract only pays 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: Whole life insurance carries a stigma in that it is often difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. However, universal life insurance is, in actuality, a term policy with a separate savings account - often called 'the pot of money'. The costs are broken down and the policy is very transparent. Cash value insurance can seem expensive in comparison to term insurance because of the front loaded nature of the contract and the fact that you are forced to save money in a cash account. Sadly, the fees charged by the insurance company are being stressed (I guess they don't know that all financial products carry similar fees).
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:
Be smart with the money you have today and pay off your mortgage, car loans and other debt. Put enough money into retirement plans you don't need insurance 30 years from now to protect your family when you die.
Fact: You may not need life insurance in 30 years to protect your children from financial ruin when you die. But you may need it to protect your beneficiaries (whoever they may be) from taxes. And, even if you are "smart" with your money, you can't predict the investment returns in a mutual fund (or a stock for that matter) inside of a 401(k) or IRA unless you are very good at researching stocks (hint: 99% of the general population is not). It takes years of practice, and even some of the best stock brokers and financial 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 doesn't matter how "smart" you were with your money.
Also, consider that dying isn't free. Ask a funeral director in your home town how much a funeral costs...and then ask him or her how much it should be in 10 years...20 years...when you expect to die. You will be amazed...and not in a good way. Also, ask any child whose parents left them any amount of money what they paid in taxes and if it was financially disruptive.
Your financial guru told you cash value insurance was evil, but it could have really helped out of a jam when the tax man cometh. You could also bypassing probate, providing an income tax free death benefit and, inside of a life insurance trust, completely avoid the estate tax.
Although many financial gurus try to draw a connection between insurance and investing in the process of telling you what a lousy investment cash value life insurance is, comparing this type of insurance to investing is nonsensical. It's like asking "how many vinyl records does it take to equal a DVD?"...we're talking about two different products that, while somewhat related, work in two very different ways - each with their own different objectives.
Before you make a final decision on whether to buy term or cash value life insurance, consider what you are really looking for. If you are looking for an investment, then be prepared to look for stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds, options, and other various financial derivatives (and learn how to research them). If you're looking for a long-term savings tool, then cash value life insurance can fit that need very well. - 21511
About the Author:
Author information: David C Lewis, RFA, specializes in personal finance. If you would like more detailed information about any aspect of personal finance, please visit David's website.
No comments:
Post a Comment