<div class=”d4p-bbt-quote-title”>BigWerm wrote:</div>
My Universal life was getting about a 3-4% return last I checked, which is pretty good in the current savings rate climate imo. Both Universal and Whole Life policies can (and should imo) have level premiums, so you pay the same now as you will at 85 years old. They are not investments though, so they will always pale in comparison to open market investments, especially since no open market investment illustration usually factors in a recession or estate tax (that’s one reason why it’s apples to penguins imo). My buying dollars with pennies comment was in regards to the death benefit compared to the premium to fund the policy.
For the most part yes, Universal Life premiums do remain level, however that is not ALWAYS the case (link below). Even if your premiums do remain level, your ‘cost of insurance’ (COI) continues to increase. Eventually eating away and depleting your cash value unless you voluntarily increase your premiums.
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/millions-could-get-slapped-with-steep-premium-hikes-for-universal-life-insurance-2017-05-01
You nailed it outdoorsmn. We run in-force illustrations (sort of a detailed breakdown on their existing contracts) for clients all the time, and they are often shocked to hear that everything is great until they hit 65-75 years old and their cost of insurance outpaces their premiums/interest on the contract. What really gets them is when they see the policy completely blow up at 75-80 years old, far from ‘permanent’ in most people’s minds. It’s important to look at a proposal to see what sort of interest/earnings/cost of insurance they are assuming in the illustration, and then ask to see what the guaranteed (worst case) interest/earnings/cost of insurance would look like. There are plenty of truly permanent contracts from good companies that will provide insurance until age 120, and we use them regularly for folks with particularly large estates, as you can (at least partially) avoid MN’s relatively punitive estate tax environment (currently a couple can exclude $4.8MM of asset value from estate taxes, scheduled to reach $6MM in 2020 and beyond).
Like anything you purchase, go out there and get a few quotes. Don’t immediately sign on the line because they painted you a pretty picture of “Retirement and legacy planning all rolled into one!” NW Mutual, Thrivent, and other captives bug me more than most as they can only sell their own product, vs. an independent who will quote your case with a dozen carriers to find the best value. Captives can certainly be great companies, but they don’t have the best solution for everyone.
Sorry for getting off the main topic, but I guess it’s safe to say I side with Ramsey when it comes to the ‘buy term, invest the difference’ philosophy, unless we’re talking about big picture estate planning.