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.
However, financial professionals often disagree about how much and what type of insurance one should carry. The perception is that term insurance is always the easiest and most cost effective. To this end, many advisers and financial "gurus" like Suze Orman and Dave Ramsey often suggest that their audience forget about cash value insurance and instead focus on good-sounding investments. In short...they 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.
On both sides of the debate, neither is doing a very good job of defending their respective position. It amazes me to see so many financial professionals leave out important information about not only their products but about the nature of insurance contracts. I wonder sometimes if they even have any idea of how life insurance really works.
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.
For example, if we were to start an insurance company and we only had one customer, we would be taking on an incredible risk because of the nature of life insurance, if that one person dies, we could be out of business very quickly (imagine that one customer giving you $20 for a $250,000 death benefit and then dying the very next day). If, however, we have a million customers, then we can better control the risks we are taking by insuring other people's lives. No one can predict when an individual will die, but if we study a large enough group of people, we can make surprisingly accurate predictions about the number of individuals within that group that will die in any given year. Given that insurance companies have an excellent record of predicting deaths every year, what do all of the statistics say?
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.
At age 65, he will have spent $58,780 on policy premiums. Keep in mind that this is money that the insurance company collected but never had to pay back. Since there's no cash value in a pure insurance (term) plan, the insurance contract pays off only when Jim dies.
What would have happened if he had, say, purchased the same amount of death benefit but used a universal life insurance policy with slightly higher but level annual premiums of $1739 every year to age 100? By his 65th birthday, 'ole Jimbo would have had a total premium outlay of $69,560 ($1739 x 40). But, he would have built up $157,000 of cash value inside the policy.
That money can be used on a tax-free basis to supplement his retirement or left alone to continue growing. This is an example of one of many living benefits that permanent insurance has (didn't your adviser tell you about that?). Some permanent policies also offer an option to spend down up to 100% of the death benefit for any reason in the event of a critical, chronic, or terminal illness. This can be especially useful if you haven't been able to accumulate a lot of money and something tragic happens to you...and you live!
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).
Be thankful that you pay some of the fees that you do. It makes saving and investing money a lot easier than having to fire a lawyer to negotiate every individual contract you sign. A life insurance contract can be set up to maximize the death benefit (maximizing the cost of the contract), or it can be set up to focus on cash accumulation (minimizing expense charges to .5% - 1% of the interest earned over the life of the policy). The expenses associated with a permanent life insurance contract can be made just as efficient and in some cases more so than what the antagonists suggest as an alternative - which is usually some type of mutual fund - without sacrificing the practicality of owning the contract. But again, why are the antagonists trying to compare the cost of 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: You might need insurance to protect your children from a big tax burden. Even if you are "smart" with your money, you can't predict the future with absolute certainty. Some people alive today are experiencing a 40% loss in their retirement accounts 5 years before retirement. This is money that was supposed to be there for them and it isn't. If your investments take a hit right before YOU are ready to retire, it 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.
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 any decision on whether to buy term or cash value life insurance, think about what you are trying to accomplish. If you want to invest your money, then learn about investing. Learn how to value corporations and buy stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds. If you want a long-term savings, then find an adviser that can maximize your savings through cash value life insurance. - 21511
However, financial professionals often disagree about how much and what type of insurance one should carry. The perception is that term insurance is always the easiest and most cost effective. To this end, many advisers and financial "gurus" like Suze Orman and Dave Ramsey often suggest that their audience forget about cash value insurance and instead focus on good-sounding investments. In short...they 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.
On both sides of the debate, neither is doing a very good job of defending their respective position. It amazes me to see so many financial professionals leave out important information about not only their products but about the nature of insurance contracts. I wonder sometimes if they even have any idea of how life insurance really works.
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.
For example, if we were to start an insurance company and we only had one customer, we would be taking on an incredible risk because of the nature of life insurance, if that one person dies, we could be out of business very quickly (imagine that one customer giving you $20 for a $250,000 death benefit and then dying the very next day). If, however, we have a million customers, then we can better control the risks we are taking by insuring other people's lives. No one can predict when an individual will die, but if we study a large enough group of people, we can make surprisingly accurate predictions about the number of individuals within that group that will die in any given year. Given that insurance companies have an excellent record of predicting deaths every year, what do all of the statistics say?
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.
At age 65, he will have spent $58,780 on policy premiums. Keep in mind that this is money that the insurance company collected but never had to pay back. Since there's no cash value in a pure insurance (term) plan, the insurance contract pays off only when Jim dies.
What would have happened if he had, say, purchased the same amount of death benefit but used a universal life insurance policy with slightly higher but level annual premiums of $1739 every year to age 100? By his 65th birthday, 'ole Jimbo would have had a total premium outlay of $69,560 ($1739 x 40). But, he would have built up $157,000 of cash value inside the policy.
That money can be used on a tax-free basis to supplement his retirement or left alone to continue growing. This is an example of one of many living benefits that permanent insurance has (didn't your adviser tell you about that?). Some permanent policies also offer an option to spend down up to 100% of the death benefit for any reason in the event of a critical, chronic, or terminal illness. This can be especially useful if you haven't been able to accumulate a lot of money and something tragic happens to you...and you live!
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).
Be thankful that you pay some of the fees that you do. It makes saving and investing money a lot easier than having to fire a lawyer to negotiate every individual contract you sign. A life insurance contract can be set up to maximize the death benefit (maximizing the cost of the contract), or it can be set up to focus on cash accumulation (minimizing expense charges to .5% - 1% of the interest earned over the life of the policy). The expenses associated with a permanent life insurance contract can be made just as efficient and in some cases more so than what the antagonists suggest as an alternative - which is usually some type of mutual fund - without sacrificing the practicality of owning the contract. But again, why are the antagonists trying to compare the cost of 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: You might need insurance to protect your children from a big tax burden. Even if you are "smart" with your money, you can't predict the future with absolute certainty. Some people alive today are experiencing a 40% loss in their retirement accounts 5 years before retirement. This is money that was supposed to be there for them and it isn't. If your investments take a hit right before YOU are ready to retire, it 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.
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 any decision on whether to buy term or cash value life insurance, think about what you are trying to accomplish. If you want to invest your money, then learn about investing. Learn how to value corporations and buy stocks, bonds, no load mutual funds. If you want a long-term savings, then find an adviser that can maximize your savings through cash value life insurance. - 21511
About the Author:
About the 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.
No comments:
Post a Comment