Infinite Banking concept

I did. I said it was about $200,000 a year premium.

Even Van Mueller would say "What if we transferred your money from this pocket and moved it to this other pocket - where only YOU could access it?"

All top producers find their ways of communicating compliantly the concept they are getting across.

Even then, I wouldn't let terminology get in the way of communication.

Otherwise, we become like this guy:
 
Hello guys, this is my first post and forgive my ignorance on the subject.

I'm currently reading Becoming Your Own Banker by Nelson Nash and I'm trying to understand the Infinite Banking Concept. Can you guys explain to me some details (and correct me I'm wrong):

You get a Whole Life Insurance and deposit a yearly amount. Let's say $10k
1) After 5 years do you have $50k as your cash value?

2) Do you receive interest/dividends from that money? In that case will you have more than $50k after those 5 years?

3) Let's say I want to borrow $20k. Do I continue to receive dividends on my $50k cash value?
What are the rates for borrowing the $20k and what are the rates based on?

4) What I'm more concerned is about the insurance as a retirement vehicle. How and when can I start receiving a fixed amount + death benefit for my beneficiaries?

in My opinion, Life insurance (WL, UL, VUL or IUL) should never be a primary plan for retirement. It should at best be a supplemental retirement plan or safety net for unexpected events (pandemic, business downturn) or a tax play to help your primary retirement income plan. Making sure you utilize your 401k plan for at least matches or 10% of your pay.

I have yet to see a single case in my 24 year career where someone saved all their planned savings into a life plan that has done even half as well as saving into other primary retirement planning vehicles. Keep in mind, I am not bashing use of permanent life as I own a tremendous amount on myself & family members. But, I hate to see people being talked into putting all savings into Permanent life or stopping contributions to 401k/IRA/Roth at young ages to put in all into permanent life.
 
I have yet to see a single case in my 24 year career where someone saved all their planned savings into a life plan that has done even half as well as saving into other primary retirement planning vehicles.

I suppose it depends on what criteria you are using to determine what "half as well" is.
 
Has putting all your eggs in one basket worked for anyone?
Even LEAP advocated to take up to the match in your 401k.
One thing I will say is that for me as I am in somewhat of a retirement mode, looking back I would rather have put less money into qualified plans.
 
I suppose it depends on what criteria you are using to determine what "half as well" is.
I mean basically during the accumulation phase that it has accumulated half(50%) as much. the reason I say this is because even the best ones I have seen or designed myself for others had human nature come in & stop the plan early, divorce, etc.

Because our life plans have so much up front time needed to build up, the majority don't make it through to see the days where the original illustrations on the life made up some of the lost ground to the 401k/IRA/Roth monies.

any life plan for an average risk tolerance person that bought the life in the 1980s-2000 is very unlikely to have anywhere near what those same funds would have in 401k/IRA/Roth, let alone come close to having what the original life policy originally illustrated. if anyone has such policies, I would love to see such creatures compared.

again, not knocking the policies as I love them, just the aggressive sales tactics that pursue telling existing savers to stop making contributions to 401k/IRA & that permanent life is some magical product that makes better returns & is tax free.
 
Back
Top