A family income policy pays a monthly income for the remainder of the term, in the event of premature death of the policyholder.
For example, a male at age 30 can take a 30 year policy to provide a family income of $3,000 a month for an annual premium payable of $1,068 (based on my benchmark).
If death occurs at the start, the policy pays $3,000 a month for the 30 years, or a total of $1,080,000 (i.e. more than $1 million). If death occurs at end of 10 years, the income benefit is payable for 20 years (total of $720,000). If death occurs at the end of 20 years, the benefit if payable for 10 years (total of $360,000). If premature death does not occur, the policy expires at the end of 30 years, without any cash value.
The policy can be taken to provide a lower monthly benefit at a proportionately reduced premium. For example, the premium payable for a monthly benefit of $1,500 is $534.
The advantages of this policy are:
1. It provides a very large benefit at an afforable premium
2. It pays a monthly income, so the family does not have to worry about investing a lump sum payment.
3. The policyholder can invest the savings in a low cost, diversified investment fund to earn a higher return, compared to a whole life policy.
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Term insurance replaces loss of earnings
Dear Mr. Tan,
My insurance adviser said that a term insurance policy will expire at the end of the term and after that, I will not have any more life insurance coverage. She said that it is better to take a whole life policy, as it provides coverage for the whole of life. I am undecided. What is your advice?
REPLY
Most people need life insurance to cover the loss of earnings in the event of premature death. They need the life insurance policy coverage only during their working life. The policy pays a benefit to replace the lost income and take care of the family needs when the children are still young.
When a person retires from work, there is no need for life insurance, as there is no lost earnings to be covered.
If you take up a term insurance policy, you pay a premium of about one-tenth of a whole life policy. This allows you to take a larger sum assured and protect your family more adequately. You need life insurance up to age 65 only.
You will find that a decreasing term insurance to be suitable for your needs. The sum assured starts at a high amount and decreases each year over the term. The premium is less than half of a level term insurance policy. You only need to pay about 5% of the premium for a comparable whole life policy.
Although the sum assured decreases each year, it is adequate for the family as the children have grown one year older, and need to be financially supported for a shorter period. The family would have accumulated one more year of savings with each passing year.
For example, a male at age 30 who takes a whole life policy to cover $300,000 has to pay a monthly premium of $500. This person can take a 20 year term insurance policy covering the same amount for a monthly premim of only $50. For a decreasing term insurance policy, the premium is about $25 a month.
If he takes a 30 year term insurance policy, the premium will be about $100 (for level term) and $50 (for decreasing term). They are much lower than the premium for a whole life policy.
There is another policy, called the family income policy, that pays the benefit as a monthly sum (say $3,000 a month) for the remainder of the term. I shall explain this policy in more detail separately.
Read this FAQ:
http://www.tankinlian.com/faq/choice.html
My insurance adviser said that a term insurance policy will expire at the end of the term and after that, I will not have any more life insurance coverage. She said that it is better to take a whole life policy, as it provides coverage for the whole of life. I am undecided. What is your advice?
REPLY
Most people need life insurance to cover the loss of earnings in the event of premature death. They need the life insurance policy coverage only during their working life. The policy pays a benefit to replace the lost income and take care of the family needs when the children are still young.
When a person retires from work, there is no need for life insurance, as there is no lost earnings to be covered.
If you take up a term insurance policy, you pay a premium of about one-tenth of a whole life policy. This allows you to take a larger sum assured and protect your family more adequately. You need life insurance up to age 65 only.
You will find that a decreasing term insurance to be suitable for your needs. The sum assured starts at a high amount and decreases each year over the term. The premium is less than half of a level term insurance policy. You only need to pay about 5% of the premium for a comparable whole life policy.
Although the sum assured decreases each year, it is adequate for the family as the children have grown one year older, and need to be financially supported for a shorter period. The family would have accumulated one more year of savings with each passing year.
For example, a male at age 30 who takes a whole life policy to cover $300,000 has to pay a monthly premium of $500. This person can take a 20 year term insurance policy covering the same amount for a monthly premim of only $50. For a decreasing term insurance policy, the premium is about $25 a month.
If he takes a 30 year term insurance policy, the premium will be about $100 (for level term) and $50 (for decreasing term). They are much lower than the premium for a whole life policy.
There is another policy, called the family income policy, that pays the benefit as a monthly sum (say $3,000 a month) for the remainder of the term. I shall explain this policy in more detail separately.
Read this FAQ:
http://www.tankinlian.com/faq/choice.html
Comparing Anticipation and Revosave
COMMENT POSTED IN MY BLOG
Despite the fact Mr Tan has repeatedly said he delivered products that give good value, he designed the Anticipation plan when there were better value products like Endowment around. Anticipation is Revosave's predecessor. Personally, I find this an irony. I hope Mr Tan do not take offence in me bringing up this blunt fact.
REPLY
Here are the facts.
1. The Anticipation plan was designed 25 years ago.
2. It pays a lower rate of commission compared to similar plans in the market
3. It offered an attractive return to the policyholder, more than 4% per annum
4. The return on Anticipation is similar to Endowment plan, as the payout is every 3 years.
I am not familiar with the Revosave plan. Some people said that it offers a poor return, which is much lower than the Endowment plan. It is also quite confusing to the customer. I would not have designed such a product, as it goes against my belief on what is good value for the customer.
In today's environment, it is better to invest in a low cost, diversified fund. The saving plan is more flexible. Read this FAQ:
http://www.tankinlian.com/faq/savings.html
Despite the fact Mr Tan has repeatedly said he delivered products that give good value, he designed the Anticipation plan when there were better value products like Endowment around. Anticipation is Revosave's predecessor. Personally, I find this an irony. I hope Mr Tan do not take offence in me bringing up this blunt fact.
REPLY
Here are the facts.
1. The Anticipation plan was designed 25 years ago.
2. It pays a lower rate of commission compared to similar plans in the market
3. It offered an attractive return to the policyholder, more than 4% per annum
4. The return on Anticipation is similar to Endowment plan, as the payout is every 3 years.
I am not familiar with the Revosave plan. Some people said that it offers a poor return, which is much lower than the Endowment plan. It is also quite confusing to the customer. I would not have designed such a product, as it goes against my belief on what is good value for the customer.
In today's environment, it is better to invest in a low cost, diversified fund. The saving plan is more flexible. Read this FAQ:
http://www.tankinlian.com/faq/savings.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)