Rollup for 29yo Client Until Retirement?

[scagnt83]

Is anyone aware of an IA that provides a rider with rollup that a 29yo can have rollup until age 60 or 70??

The ones that go past 20 years of rollup (that I have found) are only available for age 40+.

The ones that will issue for younger ages only rollup for 20 years max...


Any suggestions?

 

[TxsRang3r]

Allianz Mdex X goes forever.

 

[scagnt83]

Allianz Mdex X goes forever.

In SC min issue age is 40 I was told..

 

[TxsRang3r]

I've looked at the Allianz SI3 guide and Mdex X guide and am not seeing any SC specific variations, but I'll confirm Monday to make myself 100% sure. That's the only company that comes to mind.

 

[TxsRang3r]

Confirmed with AZL today. Mdex X on 29 yr old in SC is good until age 90 max.

 

[scagnt83]

Thanks for the info!

 

[TRSecurity]

National Western Life's "Income Outlook."
Security Benefit Life "Secure Income."

 

[ScottLFB]

The Natl Western will roll up at 5% compounding with multiple resets. But, here's the thing... We've been doing multiple FIAs for clients in their 30's and I've done the math. You have to figure out if there's a trade off between using an income rider on the initial product for 30-35yrs or whether it would be best to put the client in a 10-12yr product with decent caps and then you can roll it again in the client's early 40's. Not only can you get another sale out of it this way but three key points to look at:
1-29yr olds typically are dealing with their "big expense" purchases or run into more emergencies and may need access to the money
2-If you can get the client to their early 40's then you can use the bigger income rider, which will catch up and out perform what the few smaller riders with under 40 issue age will do for them.
3-The Products have been improving and new FIAs with more and more bells and whistles are coming out every year. A lot can improve/happen by the time this client hits age 40..

 

[scagnt83]

We've been doing multiple FIAs for clients in their 30's and I've done the math. You have to figure out if there's a trade off between using an income rider on the initial product for 30-35yrs or whether it would be best to put the client in a 10-12yr product with decent caps and then you can roll it again in the client's early 40's. Not only can you get another sale out of it this way but three key points to look at:
1-29yr olds typically are dealing with their "big expense" purchases or run into more emergencies and may need access to the money
2-If you can get the client to their early 40's then you can use the bigger income rider, which will catch up and out perform what the few smaller riders with under 40 issue age will do for them.
3-The Products have been improving and new FIAs with more and more bells and whistles are coming out every year. A lot can improve/happen by the time this client hits age 40..

Your thoughts are along the same line as mine.

I am winding down a 401k for a business and trying to capture its assets. I briefly went over riders as part of a group presentation and he was interested, so I figured I would give it a shot to see if it made sense.

The main advantage I see would be the mortality tables being used for the income %.
I will be willing to bet that when he is 60 %s will be lower than they are now at 60.

Im not saying that it would be disproportional, but it still might make a case for the rider on a young person.

When you did the math did you take into account extended mortality tables in 30 or 40 years?


He ended up not wanting to go with the rider, and I certainly didnt push him towards the rider at all.
But the idea still intrigues me....

 

[ScottLFB]

I'm sure mortality tables will be extended in the 20-40yr timeframe you are talking about as undoubtedly people will be living longer at that point. But I was referring to an income rider now (issue age 29) versus and income rider later (age 40+) for the increased rates resulting in a larger compounded benefit base/Income Account at retirement. Keep in mind that if mortality tables increase 30yrs from now it has no effect on inforce policies since the payout factor table is guaranteed at policy issue. Lower Income Factors will only effect new policies at that time.