So you are talking about positive arbitrage over and over but my question is what happens when the policy actually performs better than that 6% illustrated it’s that building cushion for those negative years? I am assuming the year before that zero year the policy made money correct? So maybe the illustration is actually on the lower end of the spectrum and you’ll have more cash value than illustrated so maybe you can afford to take the hit on that zero year. I think I’ve asked you before but can you provide and actual policy from someone that the policy lapsed? I mean if you have been around for a while you have to have an actual policy that lost all the money like you say it will. I wanna see a real policy not an illustration. Thank you
@@TheOpinionSports I look at it at a different way too. If the policy perform just a little better than 6% let’s say 3-4 years in a row it’s actually building cushion from when that zero years happen. Also it’s the policyowner responsibility to monitor and do what’s best. Maybe take less money that year maybe take nothing out I know it’ll still will lose CV but not as much. One thing I agree with Chris is just don’t have an IUL or a WL as your only retirement vehicle that way when shit hits the fan you have option to leverage. The truth is even if my policy performs 60-70% of what was illustrated I’d still be happy and I know I’d have money. He makes it look like the money would be gone lol which it could if I overspend it just like anything else. I think anyone under in their 30s 40s qnd maybe early 50s should def do an IUL over a WL just for the potential upside plus the time they can let the policy grow to hopefully do better than expected.
@@TheOpinionSportsHe’s saying it won’t produce 6% for the life of the policy for someone who lives until they’re 80’s because the insurance company has too much control over what can do with the levers such as reducing the cap and participation rates, increasing policy and administrative fees. That’s the only drawbacks of IUL.
@@christham7852 Just because the insurance company has the controls to move the levers doesn't mean they will indefinitely do so in which a person cant average 6%. the government can raise taxes on people in 401k's but does that mean taxes will be 50%??
@@TheOpinionSports there have been examples of tenured IUL’s with initial cap rate of 15% dropped to 6%. It may take 10 years for this to happen. The insurance company has too much control going in their favor for my preference and they don’t disclose that on their brochures and the insurance agent don’t disclose that. That’s a problem.
Doesn't policy loan charges reduce death benefit? The cash value will still grow & death benefit is still growing despite cost of insurance slightly increasing. In my IUL policy for 1 million COI & index segment slightly increase annually /rider & admin fees are the same/premium load is decreasing annually.
Policy loan charges reduce cash value, and are guaranteed by the death benefit. But make no mistake about it, they impact the cash value. That is one of the greatest misleadings of some of these influencers online talking about loans and cash value.
@@LIFE180 well take less loans during 10 years, after 10 years loan interest will be 0% if it's structured as a level IUL there's flexibility to change level or increasing
So an IUL can potentially accumulate higher but you should never draw income to the point where net cash value gets close to be only a few years of loan interest & coi expenses. At that point get income from other sources like whole life and leave what’s left in the iul for servicing the current debt and legacy. Hopefully the amount of income drawn makes it beat out whole life.
No...as soon as you begin using IUL for income in retirement, you amplify the risk in the policy. IUL is NOT a good income product. Period. If you want it as a permanent death benefit and loving benefits only, then it may be a good fit as long as you over fund it. But that's it.
And by "potentially accumulated higher" than whole life....we are talking a 5% chance, maybe? But, you are taking on a ton of risk for a fraction of upside and injecting a lot of downside potential
Agreed that strategy would be better than IUL, but whole life is still a better long term alternative to Muni Bonds. Check out the interview I just did with Tom Wall on this topic.
Hi Chris I love your content thanks for everything you share I’ve learned a lot!
Thanks for the positive feedback!
Pretty standard Whole Life sales pitch😂😂😂…you really had to stretch that illustration out to make it fail.
Don’t insurance companies rely on bond yields? There will be no real risk free rate for years to come. Meaning lower cap rates and/or higher fees?
So you are talking about positive arbitrage over and over but my question is what happens when the policy actually performs better than that 6% illustrated it’s that building cushion for those negative years? I am assuming the year before that zero year the policy made money correct? So maybe the illustration is actually on the lower end of the spectrum and you’ll have more cash value than illustrated so maybe you can afford to take the hit on that zero year.
I think I’ve asked you before but can you provide and actual policy from someone that the policy lapsed? I mean if you have been around for a while you have to have an actual policy that lost all the money like you say it will. I wanna see a real policy not an illustration. Thank you
According to Chris no policy can do better than 6% although there are many that do just that.
@@TheOpinionSports I look at it at a different way too. If the policy perform just a little better than 6% let’s say 3-4 years in a row it’s actually building cushion from when that zero years happen. Also it’s the policyowner responsibility to monitor and do what’s best. Maybe take less money that year maybe take nothing out I know it’ll still will lose CV but not as much. One thing I agree with Chris is just don’t have an IUL or a WL as your only retirement vehicle that way when shit hits the fan you have option to leverage. The truth is even if my policy performs 60-70% of what was illustrated I’d still be happy and I know I’d have money. He makes it look like the money would be gone lol which it could if I overspend it just like anything else.
I think anyone under in their 30s 40s qnd maybe early 50s should def do an IUL over a WL just for the potential upside plus the time they can let the policy grow to hopefully do better than expected.
@@TheOpinionSportsHe’s saying it won’t produce 6% for the life of the policy for someone who lives until they’re 80’s because the insurance company has too much control over what can do with the levers such as reducing the cap and participation rates, increasing policy and administrative fees. That’s the only drawbacks of IUL.
@@christham7852 Just because the insurance company has the controls to move the levers doesn't mean they will indefinitely do so in which a person cant average 6%. the government can raise taxes on people in 401k's but does that mean taxes will be 50%??
@@TheOpinionSports there have been examples of tenured IUL’s with initial cap rate of 15% dropped to 6%. It may take 10 years for this to happen. The insurance company has too much control going in their favor for my preference and they don’t disclose that on their brochures and the insurance agent don’t disclose that. That’s a problem.
Chris, Do you sell IULs & Insurance products?
I run an IMO that sells insurance based products, yes. LIFE180.com
@@LIFE180 so you sell IULs but speak bad about IULs?
@Josh Ortiz we can sell IUL....but we don't because it is 99.9% of the time not what is right for the client. We sell whole life most of the time
Doesn't policy loan charges reduce death benefit? The cash value will still grow & death benefit is still growing despite cost of insurance slightly increasing. In my IUL policy for 1 million COI & index segment slightly increase annually /rider & admin fees are the same/premium load is decreasing annually.
Policy loan charges reduce cash value, and are guaranteed by the death benefit. But make no mistake about it, they impact the cash value. That is one of the greatest misleadings of some of these influencers online talking about loans and cash value.
@@LIFE180 well take less loans during 10 years, after 10 years loan interest will be 0% if it's structured as a level IUL there's flexibility to change level or increasing
@ricograham6358 there is never a situation where loan interest is 0%.
@@LIFE180 there is a situation where loans get charged at 3% & at the same time credited 3% to loan balance so basically 0% loan interest
So an IUL can potentially accumulate higher but you should never draw income to the point where net cash value gets close to be only a few years of loan interest & coi expenses. At that point get income from other sources like whole life and leave what’s left in the iul for servicing the current debt and legacy. Hopefully the amount of income drawn makes it beat out whole life.
No...as soon as you begin using IUL for income in retirement, you amplify the risk in the policy. IUL is NOT a good income product. Period. If you want it as a permanent death benefit and loving benefits only, then it may be a good fit as long as you over fund it. But that's it.
And by "potentially accumulated higher" than whole life....we are talking a 5% chance, maybe? But, you are taking on a ton of risk for a fraction of upside and injecting a lot of downside potential
You're better off getting municipal bonds. Tax Free income. Take that tax Free income and buy a term life policy. Boom best of both worlds 🤯
Agreed that strategy would be better than IUL, but whole life is still a better long term alternative to Muni Bonds. Check out the interview I just did with Tom Wall on this topic.
th-cam.com/video/hOWat0K9u-8/w-d-xo.html
It is taxed on social security benefits during retirement lol
@@ricograham6358 it's only taxed if you invest in munis outside of your home state. They're federally exempt
Unfortunately term life gets expensive when it expires…Boom!!!