SphinxnihpS
Diamond Member
- Feb 17, 2005
- 8,368
- 25
- 91
So, Sphinxnihps, what percentage of all Americans do you think would benefit from whole life? (vs. term & investing the difference) 2%? 3%?
I completely agree with you that it's a wise decision for some people, but for the vast majority of people (I think you even mentioned something about not for middle class without dependents), it's a poor choice.
I don't know. I wasn't necessarily advocating it, and I certainly was not advocating it for most people. I was just trying to refute some misconceptions (it is always bad, LI is a scam, etc.) and some factual errors (it works like this, no it doesn't). Most of that had little or nothing to do with the OP.
I can say that 100% of the people who will "enjoy" a taxable estate ($5,000,000 of adjusted net worth per person on death this year, and only $1,000,000 starting in 2012) should probably at least consider it as an option for paying estate taxes. Without some means of paying for this tax in cash, the sale of assets, businesses, and real property will be forced in probate.
Tell me how many people will be worth $1,000,000 when they die, and you'll be close to your answer, at least until they change the law.
Part of the problem is that this is often not known until later in life, and by then the people are old and LI becomes prohibitively expensive even if they are perfectly healthy.
I'd say if you earn 6 figures and are over 35 you should think about it, and by think about I mean get objective advice. You will not get objective advice from anyone who sells it.
You have to remember though, it is NOT an investment even though you get a return, so comparing it to market yields is somewhat apples and oranges, and there is some definite value to the product itself, its special tax treatment, and the fact that it can not be cancelled (unless you don't pay).
