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 is shocking that the financial industry is responsible for informing and educating the rest of society about saving and investing. I say shocking because many of the advisors that represent the industry seem to be less concerned with the truth, and more concerned about pitching products.
I say that in light of the fact that on both sides of the debate, neither is doing a very good job of defending their position. Many financial professionals are simply leaving out critical information, or appear to not have a very good grasp of how life insurance really works.
Their reasons for lying can be many. Now, there's nothing wrong with pointing out the shortcomings in a financial product. In the case of life insurance; however, the attacks being made are completely baseless. This is especially disheartening because most, if not all, of these attacks are originating from well known financial "gurus". Here are a few of the lies being spread around:
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: 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 companies use the Law of Large Numbers. They sample a group of people (similar age, height, weight, etc.). The larger the group of people they insure, the more accurate they are about the number of losses they will see.
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.
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. 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 is not very transparent. So it is difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. That bothers some people. That's OK. Just don't buy whole life insurance. Universal life insurance, on the other hand, is very transparent. That's because UL policies are a term policy with a separate savings account. 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 seems expensive in comparison to term insurance (at least initially) because insurance contracts are front loaded as far as fees are concerned. That's a good thing...because the contract becomes cheaper over time. Unfortunately, the initial cost 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?
You will usually get all of your money back that you put into a permanent policy plus interest (depending on how you structured the contract). Additionally, the policy can give you a substantial tax-free income at retirement. The only exception to this is variable life, which typically has no guarantee on cash values
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.
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.
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 is shocking that the financial industry is responsible for informing and educating the rest of society about saving and investing. I say shocking because many of the advisors that represent the industry seem to be less concerned with the truth, and more concerned about pitching products.
I say that in light of the fact that on both sides of the debate, neither is doing a very good job of defending their position. Many financial professionals are simply leaving out critical information, or appear to not have a very good grasp of how life insurance really works.
Their reasons for lying can be many. Now, there's nothing wrong with pointing out the shortcomings in a financial product. In the case of life insurance; however, the attacks being made are completely baseless. This is especially disheartening because most, if not all, of these attacks are originating from well known financial "gurus". Here are a few of the lies being spread around:
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: 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 companies use the Law of Large Numbers. They sample a group of people (similar age, height, weight, etc.). The larger the group of people they insure, the more accurate they are about the number of losses they will see.
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.
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. 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 is not very transparent. So it is difficult to determine how much the death benefit is costing you. That bothers some people. That's OK. Just don't buy whole life insurance. Universal life insurance, on the other hand, is very transparent. That's because UL policies are a term policy with a separate savings account. 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 seems expensive in comparison to term insurance (at least initially) because insurance contracts are front loaded as far as fees are concerned. That's a good thing...because the contract becomes cheaper over time. Unfortunately, the initial cost 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?
You will usually get all of your money back that you put into a permanent policy plus interest (depending on how you structured the contract). Additionally, the policy can give you a substantial tax-free income at retirement. The only exception to this is variable life, which typically has no guarantee on cash values
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.
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 information: Only so much information can be covered in one article. If you want more information about any aspect of planning your personal finances, please visit David's website.
0 comments
Post a Comment