Last week we passed over 300 followers on “My Bersonal View”. To celebrate we are re-posting the article that had the most hits in our history (over 15,000). Would love to get your feedback on the article and on the site in general. Thanks for your support and loyalty. Next stop- 500 followers!
To most of us who understand the insurance world and the real choices available for our clients, the advice that Suzy Orman gives is at best irritating and at its worse negligent. It is virtually impossible for one piece of advice to be the answer for millions of people all at the same time. In our world of financial decisions, each client is like a snow flake, no two are alike and no set of circumstances are the same. In Suzy’s world everyone is the same and everyone should just do what she says. Black or white. No gray.
Yesterday, driving in my car…I was listening to a financial talk show and the caller said “but Suzy Orman says I should just buy term and invest the difference.” To his credit, the host asked the caller several questions to see if that strategy made sense for that individual. The whole exchange got me thinking. Why do so many people like Suzy think that buying term and investing the difference is a good idea? And more importantly, why do they not understand the power of permanent life insurance the way we do?
In my experience, people who say they will “buy term and invest the difference” (BTID) rarely do that exactly. Instead they buy term and spend the difference. The truth is people don’t always understand the savings element of the BTID idea. Initially they may have had the thought of investing the difference, but typically life gets in the way and this is where the BTID idea usually fails, leaving the client with no insurance and no investments.
But, for the sake of this article, lets assume that our client does invest the difference and does stay true to the BTID idea. There are still several problems with the concept that Suzy and her pals tend to brush over or minimize. Perhaps the biggest risk other than the actual investment that the client might choose is the insurability risk. We often say that people are never more healthy than they are right now. This is true in a lot of cases but what it points out is a possible risk that can happen in the BTID strategy. Insurability may be lost in between terms – in other words a client must “re-qualify” for the new term policy each time the term period runs out. If they can’t qualify or if the new policy might be rated, then costs for the term can be significantly higher or worse the insurance could be lost.
Another problem that is often overlooked by the proponents of BTID is the investment risk. And within the investment risk there is also another risk and that is the risk of the tax implications. One of the myths of the BTID strategy is that somehow the investment will always grow and will magically be there when you need it. Unfortunately, and recent history bears this out, investments can be volatile and inconsistent and there are no guarantees that the funds will be available and at their peak when you need them most. In addition, the tax implications of the investment are not often factored in when making the decision. With cash rich life insurance, the tax advantages are simple. The cash value is tax deferred (ie: no taxes due on money as it grows) and the funds in a policy can often be accessed tax-free via policy loans.
The BTID idea needs to be flushed out for each individual and compared side by side to a permanent life solution to determine if it is a good idea for our clients. There are several softwares that do this well and we can provide you with a valid comparison that can help your client make a “good informed” decision. I wonder if Suzy and her friends have ever done this type of analysis?
In our IMO, we are firm believers in the power of cash rich life insurance as part of a long-term plan. But, and this is an important distinction, we would never say that it is right for everyone. Term insurance does have a place and can solve a specific need. But to simply eliminate the idea of permanent coverage as an option discounts the true value of a permanent plan. Financial gurus like Suzy Orman who make blanket statements with no regard for the individual set of circumstances are short-sighted and irresponsible. So yes…STOP! Don’t take Suzy’s word for it…call us and let us help you investigate your next case. You may be surprised what you find out.