In response to Sheryl J. Moore’s article: “Indexed life as a replacement for indexed annuities?”
Could you provide an actual reason why it cannot be used to supplement a client’s other retirement savings vehicles? You say suitability, but 90 percent-plus of IA prospects have a need for permanent life protection.
Why would it not be suitable to utilize an overfunded IUL for this purpose? As long as a steady income of loans was taken, the DB will usually be around the initial issue amount at bare minimum.
Your extremely brief article has made a lot of generalizations without any real evidence to back them up. Does your opinion of IUL extend to WL as well?
I didn’t say that indexed life should not be used to supplement other retirement vehicles. I said that you should not ever sell indexed life as an alternative for an indexed annuity, if the need for life insurance does not exist. Where did you get your statistic regarding “90-percent-plus of IA prospects” needing permanent life protection? Our sales data shows that the average issue age for indexed annuity purchasers is 63. Most people have already purchased their life insurance coverage long before attaining this age.
What if a “steady income of loans” is taken to the point where the policyholder has a taxable event?
Yes, my opinion on this issue extends to all forms of cash value life insurance. If the client only needs a retirement accumulation/payout vehicle, cash value life insurance should not be the product that is considered as a solution.