- Thread starter
- #11
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
North American/Midland probably have the best IUL at the moment.
After that there is LFG, Penn Mutual, & Allianz.
Always enjoy discussing/posting with you regarding IUL. We share a lot more in common than the 83.
I would add that Pacific Life's IUL is a front-runner in the industry. Not sure how much you've looked at it, however PAC has placed many of the largest IUL cases to date (COLI). the flexibility their product has to blend in temp term really juices the IRR on cv's.
You know I place a lot of IUL through Penn, just got back from their leaders conference in AZ last week. However, I've been doing more with PAC and really liking my experiences. Hands down they have the sharpest advanced planning team i have ever seen.
By pure coincidence, I just met a guy at the Penn conference who's group just placed 320 IUL's with a hospital on the west cost with avg annual premiums of 20k. Penn was a close second in getting this business. For deferred comp planning PAC's product gets a ton of play with the big dogs.
Also like PAC's statements...they look identical to an investment account brokerage statement. They've got servicing an IUL down to a science (i wish penn were better here). Their producer website has an inforce illustrator that is like running a morningstar report for an IUL.
I have heard a lot from other producers about PACs IUL. And yes, they are big in the NQDC world.
Dont they only run their life products through a BD?
No they do not. They appoint direct and through FMO's
So compare that to a WL, where the DB is being forced increase year after year.
Show me a WL policy that has actually done this without the use of Paid Up Additions. A whole life policy is structured to mature at face value at age 121. I've never seen a WL policy become a MEC unless it was a single premium policy designed specifically to be one. Premiums never change, and a WL policy never lapses as long as premiums are paid.
You cannot say that about any form of UL. While the policyowner may never change the premium amount he pays, the COI inside the policy rises every year and will certainly exceed the planned premium within 10-15 years of the issue date in most policies. About the only way to avoid this is to maximum fund a UL policy. The problem with that is most people cannot afford to do so, and they compromise with a minimum premium -- to their peril.
GPT vs CVAT? The policy premium will determine which of these two tests is most beneficial. The higher the face amount, the more likely CVAT will be used. And it's usually not the agent who make that choice, but the illustration software. While the agent might present a sales illustration with GPT, the insurance company could deliver the policy based on CVAT.
There is NO "increasing costs of insurance" in a UL policy
You are absolutely correct. Problem is, very little individual UL is ever sold with a max funded premium -- because the average insurance consumer is unable to afford that. The most common exception is UL sold to corporations to backstop nonqualified deferred compensation plans. Those folks can generally afford the required premiums.IMO, the correct way to sell UL is to max fund it
I'm sure you have. And that's fine. Except that what you refer to as "max funding" is, in reality, "overfunding". When you use WL as it is intended by its design, it cannot be "overfunded" unless dividends are added to cash value, which causes them to become taxable to the policyowner.Ive ran hundreds of WL illustrations and it is extremely possible to MEC a WL when max funding it.