Life insurance is necessary. However, most individuals do not carry enough of it. The idea behind life insurance is that we all die. If your spouse dies prematurely, a life insurance policy will make sure that there is enough income to make your family whole for the financial loss you've suffered. Pretty much every adviser agrees having life insurance is a good thing.
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.
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 a waste of money. It is the worst type of insurance you can buy. The BEST kind of insurance is term insurance because it's cheap. Insurance companies are shady and always try to take advantage of policyholders and cash value insurance is proof of that.
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.
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?
They tell us that term insurance just doesn't pay...well not for policy owners anyway. Most people live until age 65. After that premium costs spike dramatically. This is why I say that, on most accounts, permanent is cheaper, even though there are probably a few critics saying "no Dave, it's cheaper on all accounts". Oh yeah? Watch this:
Let's reuse our example, Jim. Let's assume Jim is 25 and in good health with a wife and a Kiddo. He needs life insurance, and he is looking at $250,000 in coverage. A 30-year level term policy would cost Jim around $370 per year until age 55. At that point, Jim's premiums spike to 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. 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.
Be thankful that you pay some of the fees that you do. It makes saving and investing money a lot easier. In regard to life insurance, you have a choice: the 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). All of the expenses associated with permanent life insurance can be made just as efficient and in some cases more efficient than an investment product. 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: 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.
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.
The cash value life insurance that your financial guru told you was evil and that you didn't need could have prevented all of this by bypassing probate, providing an income tax free death benefit and, inside of a life insurance trust, completely avoided the estate tax thereby giving your heirs, your favorite charity, or your church 100% of the money you wanted to give them.
Although many so-called experts try to compare life insurance to an investment, don't be fooled. Yes, life insurance, if properly structured, can build very strong cash values that rival investment products (my guess as to why the investment folks are upset). They try to tell you what a lousy investment cash value life insurance is. But comparing this type of insurance to investing is nonsensical. It's like asking "how many walkmans does it take to equal an Ipod?"...cash value insurance serves a different purpose from an investment. Each has their own different objectives.
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.