To all of those saying "I'd rather do it on my own," you're definitely taking a huge chance, and more than likely are throwing a ton of money away. There are certain fields where you can do things on your own. However, insurance isn't one of those fields that would be advisable to take that course of action. The laws/rules are sky high, and many of these laws and rules change every single year. Trust me, even if you don't think you're throwing money away, you more than likely are. Whether you choose a broker or captive agent captive agent, I would recommend using a professional who has in depth knowledge. I mean, it's free, anyway. Insurance is similar to the legal/lawyer field. If I had a case, I certainly wouldn't want to represent myself.

It is not a valid argument to me to say that the “administrative pain in the ass” is a reason to ignore the tactic. It’s a pretty simple procedure and certainly not worth paying all the extra costs of a whole life approach just to avoid. Yes, you have to be careful if you have Traditional IRAs, but there are ways around that too. No, it’s not for everyone, but I would much rather try to make the backdoor Roth work first than immediately jump to whole life.

Most of the time people selling against whole life state ” the guaranteed portions never materialize so assume no dividends are paid and let’s assumes you’ll get a 9 percent return in a mutual fund had you invested the difference”. This reasoning is total BS , all major mutuals have paid dividends over the last 150 + years and if you are in a mutual fund getting a higher return than 6 percent it is incredibly high risk and unrealistic long term. Also whole life tends to do much better in market downturns. they also make their money on forfeited policies, loans and pool payouts so their returns are not “totally” tied to the market performance.
Your premise is that whole life insurance is a bad investment. Fine, however, it is not a bad purchase. It is insurance and when thinking about the defined purpose of insurance then it can be a different story. Your electric service is a bad investment but think of the difficulty in living without electricity. Sure you could invest the bill amount each month into a nice Roth IRA but we seek the benefits of the service and willingly pay the bill. I suggest that people look at insurance the same. In my case and for my intent, whole life insurance was prudent. Like any car lease deal or stock purchase, there can be good and bad deals; one should not declare all forms at all points in time to be definitive. I gifted my child a whole life policy. The rates for a young person are as good as they get; she will never have insurance bills nor be without insurance. There is much left to explain but in short her $25,000 baby policy is growing $1,000 per yea. She will never have to pay a premium but will have $225,000-$350,000 payout one day while providing some protection also during the income/mortgage/child rearing adult years because I purchased it for her at the cost of $120.25 per year! No way could a poor farm kid without inheritance or wealth and limited income but high student loan debt create that kind of wealth for his children in the immediate or most vulnerable time period. To leave her in the same boat, as my parents did, is in no way wealth building. I got married and had mortgage, student loans, and large term life insurance bills because to go without any seemed irresponsible having no wealth but whole life was too expensive. So yes, it is far from a great investment but it is the most responsible gift I ever gave my child. It will not depreciate like a car and it is more certain than lottery tickets! Could I really produce that protection for her with liquidity via investing for only $120 per year? Tip: an insurance agent once told me (he should not have mentioned it) they have NEVER paid out on a life insurance policy because people always eventually let them expire and quit paying on them. Rates are so cheap for young healthy people because they are not likely to die. So this is also an exercise in discipline and responsibility not just finding the right stream to pan for gold. 

Disability- what happens to your retirement plan contributions if you want to work but can’t? Your employer can’t even contribute for you… It’s illegal. Oh, a life insurance company will pay the premium for you along with any additional money that you scheduled to dump in… And continue to contribute forever if your remain disabled (if done right). That is called a “self-completing retirement plan.”
Thanks for reaching out Wanda. The answer really depends on the specifics of your policy, your personal goals, and your overall financial situation. To be completely honest, if you’re already 13 years in and continuing to pay the premiums isn’t too much of a burden, keeping the policy may actually be the best choice going forward. But the only way to know for sure is by doing a detailed review. That is something I could do for you, and if you’re interested you can email me at matt@momanddadmoney.com to get the conversation started.
Good question. My first response is that if you’re looking for pure life insurance protection, it’s likely that term insurance will be a better product for you than whole life. It can depend on exactly what kind of protection you need, but that’s generally the case. Second, I have an entire series on life insurance that will help you figure out how much you need, and it does factor in inflation. Here’s the link: New Parent’s Guide to Life Insurance.
Example a 30 year male old non-smoker can purchase a small 25,000 policy for 34.97 a month, by adding an additional 10 a month or paying 44.97 a month he will have after the 1st year $25,649 death benefit, this will increase every year. After 20 years he will have $41,492 death benefit non guaranteed death benefit or a $32,258 guaranteed death benefit. The difference in death benefit is the non guaranteed assumes dividends. This company has been around for over 100 years and every year has declared a dividend, which is important to note despite not being guaranteed there is a high probability the person will end up better off than the guaranteed. After 30 years the death benefit will be $52,008 at this point (or any point whatsoever) the person can decide to take reduced paid up insurance,at this 30 year mark if they take RPU they can keep 45,485 of insurance for the rest of their lives, this amount will keep going up as long as the company keeps issuing a dividend. i think this is so cool. The person has paid $16,200 over those 30 years and the coverage is way more than that, a few cents on the dollar.
I don’t fault the salesman for wanting/needing a commission for their work. It’s their livelihood. But understanding where your money is going is an important part of making smart decisions as a consumer. In the same way I wouldn’t intentionally overpay for a toothbrush just so that the toothbrush company could make some money, I’m not going to intentionally overpay for insurance purely for the salesman’s sake. There are plenty of circumstances where paying a commission is worth it for the value of the product. And there are plenty of circumstances where it is not. Understanding the difference is important.
Hi Matt, Im, 41yrs old and have 8 yrs old daughter, My friend told me to get life insurance so that if something happen to me my daughter will get something and now I have schedule to AAA life Ins. next week. I’m not sure what to do. Can you please give me an advice coz I’m confuse now since I read a lot of things in this article. Thank you so much and have a wonderful day.
Yes, backdoor Roths are capped at $5,500 per year. Still, I think they’re a better first option than whole life for all of the reasons mentioned in the post. Exposure to market risk is not an inherent problem, and is also not a characteristic of Roth IRAs. A Roth IRA is just a type of account within which the individual can invest however they want. If they want to be exposed to market risk (something that many people deem desirable), they can be. If not, they don’t have to be. It’s up to them.
To say a life insurance company is not a diversified portfolio is a hard statement to agree with. Life insurance companies own 18% of the corporate bonds issued in the United States. These a multi-billion dollar diversified portfolio’s of fixed income securities WITH NO INTEREST RATE Risk. It is true that it takes time to accumulate cash value, however, there isn’t a passive investment strategy that doesn’t take time to create wealth.

Coverage that suits you. Comprehensive and collision coverage is just the beginning. Our policies also give you the flexibility to dial up (or down) your peace of mind. Choose from new car replacement2, special parts replacement3, enhanced rental car damage coverage4, and more. And because there’s only one you, receive identity theft protection5 at no extra cost.
Full Circle, one time I thought whole life insurance was great. Then I cashed it in, bought at least 5 new automobiles, a house, a couple motorcycles and more bullshit. Then I learned how to properly use life insurance as a bank, instead of borrowing money from a bank, I borrow the money from myself and pay myself back what I would have paid banks. I get to collect all the interest I would have paid the banks. I get to grow my money tax free. I get to pass my hard earned money on to my family tax free. The key is understanding Whole life vs creating your own banking system.

And if you want protection from premature death, then you get term life insurance. Very few people have a need for life insurance protection throughout their entire lives. And if you do end up needing it, you can convert your term policy at any time. So no, whole life is not a good option for this kind of protection for the vast majority of people.
Hi Matt, Enjoyed the article. I agree with a lot of what I have seen up here, both by you and other commenters. I believe that a lot of the typical Dave Ramsey advice applies to the vast majority of the population, who can’t afford to pay $500 month premiums w/$500 month overfunds. Yeah, if you’re in a position where that amount is no more than 20% of your savings, wow & congrats, and it could possibly be a good idea. But that’s like 50% of mine. As someone who is new to investing and just a year out of school, I recently sat down with a guy from one of the more respectable companies in the WLI market. I truly believe it would have been a good deal for a very select group of individuals, but for me, there were two main turn-offs. First, I simply couldn’t commit to send such a large portion of my savings for the next 10, 20, or 30 years. But secondly, I just didn’t fully understand the policy. From other comments, I think others are in the same boat. These things are confusing, I asked lots of questions but still it just didn’t make sense what was going on with every level. I’ve done my research on saving/investing, and gotten a pretty good grasp so far of my strategy, but my mind still just hasn’t fully grasped WLI. So I backed off. And I’d encourage everyone to do the same – if you don’t know exactly what it is that you’re doing and can’t understand or explain it, then don’t get in to it.
Policies not available in all states. Suicide, misstatement and misrepresentation restrictions may apply. All applications for insurance are subject to underwriting qualification by the specific insurance company to which the application is submitted. Availability of premium rates and policy forms may be changed by each insurer without prior notice. Florida residents, please review carrier and product details here.
Any person acting as an insurance agent or broker must be licensed to do so by the state or jurisdiction that the person is operating in. Whereas states previously would issue separate licenses for agents and brokers, most states now issue a single producer license regardless if the person is acting on behalf of the insured or insurer. The term insurance producers is used to reference both insurance agents and brokers.
Hi Matt – my 3 kids (now all in their 20’s) had whole life policies opened for them by Grandpa 20 years ago. He has been paying a fixed annual payment of $240, but it’s now up to me (the kids are just starting out and don’t have a cent to spare). My first thought is to have them cancel and take the cash value (~7k each), but in looking at the policies (for the first time) it looks like at this point they are getting a decent cash value return – each of the last 3 years it’s been about 4.2% PLUS the $240. AND the dividend the last few years has been almost as much as the annual payment – but has been buying more insurance (that they don’t need). Is it possible that if you suffer through the first 20 years, it then becomes a good investment? especially if I redirect the dividends to the cash value or a premium reduction? Great article by the way.
Hi Christine. First of all, thank your for stopping by. Second of all, please don’t beat yourself up over this. Life insurance salesmen are trained to make these policies sound REALLY attractive and their arguments can be quite persuasive. I actually found myself feeling close to convinced about one of these policies a few years ago before coming to my senses.

Life Insurance

×