Infinite Banking concept

[Allen Trent]

And as Ed Slott says: "The tax exemption for life insurance is the single biggest benefit in the tax code."

Absolutely love Ed Slotts info & especially his PBS videos. I believe alot of his views on life pertain to the tax free leveraged death benefit. I am not seen much from him about using as a retirement income tool. I will have to take a new look at it.

Likely the biggest benefit in the tax code is the standard ded & SS not being taxed for most people, causing 25% of population to pay 0%, 20% to pay 10% & 30% paying 15%. With only around 20% paying 25% or more. And that is all tax payers. Even more weighted on the low end for seniors.

 

[DHK]

Watch his videos - he's talking about using it for retirement income, but he doesn't get into much detail.

 

[Lloyds of Lubbock]

Life insurance certainly can be used in retirement.
As a main source?
I am not sold on this no matter how many links and videos are posted.
Even Bob Castiglione of LEAP fame preached a diversified portfolio.
I have been to a Slott seminar and most of what he said was based on using your life policy to maximize your other assets.

 

[Golfnut2112]

Guys it's really simple. Take ANY balanced fund and run a historical report for the last 20,30 or 40 years (I know past performance is not guaranteed) and compare it to a life insurance policy. Start in any year during the 70's or 80's and life insurance will not even come close ever!! So all the talk about 14.5% and all the other jargon is useless because you are more than likely to have 3 or 4 times more cash in the a real investment and not trying to make life insurance do something it is not designed to do. I can tell you this from experience I bought my first large life policy from Pru in 1988 and one from NYL in 1993 and they are not even close to my Roth IRA even though I have not contributed to the Roth in years.

 

[DHK]

Well, let me apologize up front. We're talking about strategy when we haven't defined, nor agreed upon the problem to be solved.

This isn't a 'net worth' play or conversation. That's traditionally what is often talked about with planning - net worth and cash flow - regardless of the sources.

This is a strategy for people whom I believe want to be the primary beneficiary of their life's work and of their financial and retirement planning. Unfortunately, in California, most people's financial planning will have them be paid 6th out of their money.

When I can show people how they can spend $1 million as though it was $3 million on a guaranteed (or rather non-guaranteed dividend performance basis) using the tax code... I don't care how good your securities are - past or future performance - you can't touch this.

And I was conservative with 14.5%. This guy - a billionaire computer manufacturer with a 4-letter last name did NOT buy his policies "for estate planning". With a similar calculation, the equivalent rate of return on HIS strategy would be 21.88%. Again, equivalent, not the actual product performance.

Tech billionaire buys record-setting $201 million insurance policy

Now, it's okay that you choose not to believe this and want to just ignore it. I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not here to challenge your beliefs, but the math and the tax code support this.

I'd invite you to a webinar with Thomas Love for today at 3pm Eastern time... but registration is full and closed. We're holding another one for May 12th, if you'd like to check it out. It's just an invitation, but only if you are open-minded enough to see the problem and the math behind the solution.

There's also lots of short video clips in this thread too.
https://insurance-forums.com/commun...dy-tells-you-about-taxes.101752/#post-1349642

And if you'd prefer to hear from the author of Confessions of a CPA series, here's one podcast he recently did:

 

[Golfnut2112]

Okay you have my interest. Show me how a million dollars of cash value is equal to or better than 3 million in a security. Three million in a security at a 4% withdrawal should generate $120,000 per year assuming a 40% combined tax bracket that nets out to $72,000. Which company has a product that on a million dollar cash value can sustain withdrawals of $72,000. Please provide an illustration so I can understand

 

[DHK]

Join the webinar on May 12th.

Or buy Bryan Bloom's books.

 

[Allen Trent]

Well, let me apologize up front. We're talking about strategy when we haven't defined, nor agreed upon the problem to be solved.

This isn't a 'net worth' play or conversation. That's traditionally what is often talked about with planning - net worth and cash flow - regardless of the sources.

This is a strategy for people whom I believe want to be the primary beneficiary of their life's work and of their financial and retirement planning. Unfortunately, in California, most people's financial planning will have them be paid 6th out of their money.

When I can show people how they can spend $1 million as though it was $3 million on a guaranteed (or rather non-guaranteed dividend performance basis) using the tax code... I don't care how good your securities are - past or future performance - you can't touch this.

And I was conservative with 14.5%. This guy - a billionaire computer manufacturer with a 4-letter last name did NOT buy his policies "for estate planning". With a similar calculation, the equivalent rate of return on HIS strategy would be 21.88%. Again, equivalent, not the actual product performance.

Tech billionaire buys record-setting $201 million insurance policy

Now, it's okay that you choose not to believe this and want to just ignore it. I'm perfectly fine with that. I'm not here to challenge your beliefs, but the math and the tax code support this.

I'd invite you to a webinar with Thomas Love for today at 3pm Eastern time... but registration is full and closed. We're holding another one for May 12th, if you'd like to check it out. It's just an invitation, but only if you are open-minded enough to see the problem and the math behind the solution.

There's also lots of short video clips in this thread too.
https://insurance-forums.com/commun...dy-tells-you-about-taxes.101752/#post-1349642

And if you'd prefer to hear from the author of Confessions of a CPA series, here's one podcast he recently did:

only item I would point out is the entire article you linked to clearly says the buyer did this for estate planning & estate tax play, not a retirement income alternative to saving money in other qualified, NQ, roth, after tax places.

Again, I own all of these & believe that everyone should have some & it is especially great for high income, high net worth clients & business owners (imagine if business owners had saved someplace outside of their business the last 10 years & now had access to cash---could save their companies & employees livlihoods)

my problem is with our industry taking younger average or below average income earners & new savers & hard selling them that they should stop saving in employer plans, stop paying ahead on debts & mortages & instead put $500 or 1k per month into a WL or UL/IUL/VUL (especially when most are not designed to be overfunded). for many, it is a commission play and easier commission play than trying to call on high income, high net worth or business owners who are more suspicious than the average American letting a life only rep come in saying they are a "financial advisor". not you DHK, but you have to admit there are a lot of reps, agents, GA, & IMO's doing this & leaving a lot of carnage considering most of the plans are not being funded or even still active within a few years for those average consumers.

All good & great conversation for sure while we are all sheltered in place

 

[DHK]

only item I would point out is the entire article you linked to clearly says the buyer did this for estate planning & estate tax play, not a retirement income alternative to saving money in other qualified, NQ, roth, after tax places.

I know. But the truth and what's printed are two different things.

If it were my client and case, I wouldn't want to give away what I knew, nor the details of the case to anyone... so stating that it's for "estate planning purposes"... is a safe way to do exactly that.

 

[Tahoe Ray]

When I can show people how they can spend $1 million as though it was $3 million on a guaranteed (or rather non-guaranteed dividend performance basis) using the tax code... I don't care how good your securities are - past or future performance - you can't touch this.

This type of statement hurts our industry.

You are using assumptions on future tax rates, the performance of a product, future interest rates, future dividend rates and it also assumes that people are putting all of their money in a 401k/traditional IRA.

If you're really targeting wealthy people, the majority of their assets will be in vehicles like real estate, non-qual brokerage accounts, their businesses, and other investments that have varying tax rates.

To say that 1m > 3m because the 1m is in a life insurance policy is disingenuous.