Maximum Premium Indexing Curtis Ray

[Skypilot]

For any of you who are not familiar, Curtis Ray promotes a system of using leveraged loans to then fund an IUL.
He specifically shows Mutual Of Omaha as his IUL carrier. His concept is similar to the Infinite Banking Concept where an insurance policy's cash value is used for other purposes, such as paying off debt, buying a new car etc. The MPI system however advocates taking out a loan and reinvesting it to an IUL.
My question is this: It seems to me 2 policies would be required. A whole, or permanent policy to act as "The Bank", then an IUL (Let's assume Mutual Of Omaha), to act as the IUL that receives the loan proceeds.
Since nowhere do I see any mention of multiple insurance carriers in his presentation, I am wondering if he is doing one of 3 things:
A-Is he using 2 different carriers? One for Permanent. One for IUL
B-Is he using only Mutual Of Omaha, but still 2 policy's from them? A whole and an IUL?
C- Has Mutual of Omaha developed a product that acts as a whole life policy, which can then be borrowed against, and have proceeds moved into an IUL all somehow in someway in the SAME product?

Any help would be appreciated!

 

[Tahoe Ray]

For any of you who are not familiar, Curtis Ray promotes a system of using leveraged loans to then fund an IUL.
He specifically shows Mutual Of Omaha as his IUL carrier. His concept is similar to the Infinite Banking Concept where an insurance policy's cash value is used for other purposes, such as paying off debt, buying a new car etc. The MPI system however advocates taking out a loan and reinvesting it to an IUL.
My question is this: It seems to me 2 policies would be required. A whole, or permanent policy to act as "The Bank", then an IUL (Let's assume Mutual Of Omaha), to act as the IUL that receives the loan proceeds.
Since nowhere do I see any mention of multiple insurance carriers in his presentation, I am wondering if he is doing one of 3 things:
A-Is he using 2 different carriers? One for Permanent. One for IUL
B-Is he using only Mutual Of Omaha, but still 2 policy's from them? A whole and an IUL?
C- Has Mutual of Omaha developed a product that acts as a whole life policy, which can then be borrowed against, and have proceeds moved into an IUL all somehow in someway in the SAME product?

Any help would be appreciated!

The whole two policy thing wouldn't work so I doubt that's what he's doing.

I think that the "leveraged loan/line of credit" that he mentions is just the cost of the loan from the IUL. The funding comparisons that he uses vs. a 401k is showing the policy being funded with out of pocket dollars, not a loan. You're "paying yourself" from the policy.

I could be 100% wrong because I'm not really familiar with the system, but I'd be surprised if anyone was advocating a 2 policy system since the math won't work out.

 

[IUL guru]

He is using one policy for everything. You dont need two policies to make this work. You are taking out a loan and instead of using it to buy something you are just putting that amount back into the policy.

 

[Denzel Rodriguez]

He is using one policy for everything. You dont need two policies to make this work. You are taking out a loan and instead of using it to buy something you are just putting that amount back into the policy.

So you would need initial upfront capital to start with at least to make an impact with this particular strategy I’m assuming.

 

[IUL guru]

A higher initial would help with growth but it's not required. Even with no upfront capital the MPI system works great.

 

[bobson]

If you intially fund up to the MEC limit how does this work?

 

[IUL guru]

It depends on how you set it up. Option 1 you have an initial lump sum you are putting into the account plus a premium. The lump we split up over two years and then year three we use the loan feature to pay the rest. Option 2: No lump and strictly premium, you would need to go through underwriting again to increase the MEC. I hope that answers your question.

 

[bobson]

It depends on how you set it up. Option 1 you have an initial lump sum you are putting into the account plus a premium. The lump we split up over two years and then year three we use the loan feature to pay the rest. Option 2: No lump and strictly premium, you would need to go through underwriting again to increase the MEC. I hope that answers your question.

So if you are max funding an annual premium, then this only works if you buy more insurance?

 

[phoenixlord]

So if you are max funding an annual premium, then this only works if you buy more insurance?

As if the IULs were not bad enough, now people want to leverage these. Doesn't this remind you of 2008 sub-prime mortgage crisis waiting to happen? This will end very badly

 

[phoenixlord]

A higher initial would help with growth but it's not required. Even with no upfront capital the MPI system works great.

This system works great, huh! Care to show illustrations?