Several days ago I wrote a piece talking about qualified plans, better known as IRA’s and 401(k)’s. It was titled 401(k)’s IRA’s & Urban Myths, and discussed some of the false beliefs many people have on the subject. It also brought an alternative to the table — investment grade insurance.
Though you should read the post to get context, in a nutshell here’s what I said.
By putting your tax deferred money into qualified plans you’re setting yourself up for a nasty surprise upon retirement. Your income will be taxed at a rate for which most folks won’t have planned. Therefore, they should stop contributing to those plans and begin putting that money instead, into investment grade life insurance. It’s not really for the insurance, but has some really cool results — especially when compared side by side with qualified plans.
For instance, the income produced by the insurance which from now on will be called FIUL – Fixed Index Universal Life, is tax free for life . You’ll notice maybe what it’s not – a VUL or Variable Universal Life. One guy decided I was talking about VUL’s — wrong again. He was a reasonable guy, wanting to maybe hear from my in-house expert. He will. I often find it entertaining the way some wish to compare apples to lizards when they disagree. One such example is a guy who wanted to compare the results of $350/mo into FIUL’s vs $750 into his qualifed (employer matching) plan. As good as your investment guy might be, nobody is going to beat someone who is investing more than twice the amount as the other guy. It’s a silly comparison. Now to give him the benefit of the doubt, I did compare taking $350/mo vs $500/mo — and the 401(k) lost big time. (For the record, the annual after tax retirement incomes were the same, but the FIUL income was available for life, not subject to rising future taxes, and upon the death of the taxpayer there was literally no tax owed, as it wasn’t part of his estate in the first place.)
I will tell you that even when a worker puts in $500/mo in their 401(k) and are matched 50% with an additional $250 by their employer, they still lose when compared to what they could have accomplished with a FIUL — at only $500/mo. Only when an employer matches your contributions dollar for dollar do you come out better staying with your qualified plan — and so few employers do that today. And when they do, it’s usually limited to something like 3% of the employee’s salary. If that’s all they’re matching, it’s a safe bet, my way will still beat them, depending upon how much the taxpayer can afford to contribute annually.
Anyway, it seems some folks feel threatened, when someone comes along and moves their food dish. One guy who runs a company providing 401(k)’s for their employees was miffed about this quote:
First, immediately stop contributing to your 401(k) — it’s a scam.
I stand by that statement, but the comment also included a request that I stop throwing hand grenades. He said the statement should have been more qualified. Since there are two exceptions to the ‘scam’ remark, I’ll grant him that point. But throwing grenades? How hyperbolic do we have to be to make a point? At least be funny on purpose. π The reality is 9 of 10 folks who reach retirement having counted on their 401(k)’s for security are going to be bitterly disappointed. It’s not even a mild stretch to say the world ‘scam’ is going to enter their heads when it dawns on them how they were misled by this approach to retirement planning.
He cloaked his comments under the guise of demanding ‘transparency’ which is a blogging cover-all communicating nothing in most cases. But that’s another post for another day.
I’ve commissioned (good one, eh?) my in-house guy to write a two page Word doc covering what I said in the post. It puts to rest, once and for all, all the woefully incorrect and misleading claims and complaints voiced via comments.
It all boils down to the following
- Qualified plans are taxable as soon as you take the money out — FIUL’s are not.
- Qualified plans will be taxed to death upon your passing — FIUL’s aren’t even a part of your estate — period.
- Qualified plans are subject to penalties in addition to taxes if withdrawn ‘early’ — FIUL’s are not.
- Qualified plans will force you to take money at certain ages — FIUL’s will not.
And those are just the highlights.
When I was young and used to argue with Dad about real estate and business in general, there would come a point at which he’d just start laughing out loud. It would never fail to infuriate me. He would then push me over the edge with his favorite M*A*S*H analogy.
One time Colonel Potter was trying to convince Hawkeye and BJ to be nice to Frank (Major Burns) who was a constant thorn in their sides. Potter said, “Look, I realize there are some things Frank doesn’t know, but he’s a decent guy. Can’t you just get along?” To which Hawkeye responded, “But Colonel, it’s so damn hard to keep up with everything Frank doesn’t know.”
When I’m wrong I’ll admit it quickly. My perfect record was wrecked long ago. But please, when you think I’m wrong, coming in with guns blazing, and venom flying makes you look foolish when you have no clue what you’re talking about.
Grandma warned me as a very young man that when folks begin their side of a debate with loud voices and character assassination, it means one of two things — either they realize their point is fatally weak, or they simply don’t know what they don’t know. Either way they tend to look foolish when the facts finally come out.
With the exceptions of Roth IRA’s and those plans in which the employer is matching (in an unlimited fashion) their employees’ contributions dollar for dollar, going the FIUL route is by far the best way to go. Those who debate this fact of life no doubt still believe carburetors are superior to fuel injection — fuel injection?. Oh crud, now I’ve moved another food dish. π
If you wish to get a copy of my financial advisor’s two page explanation of what really happens when you compare these two schools of thought, I’ll be more than happy to send it to you. Just email me (I will not keep your email address) requesting it, and I’ll get it to you quickly. Better yet, why don’t you give Doug Johns a call? His office number is 858-481-1168.
And Eric — I’m sending you this document first. Thanks again for the original question.
Michael Wurzer says:
Jeff, thank you for acknowledging the exceptions to your earlier arguments.
June 5, 2007 — 3:14 pm
Michael Wurzer says:
Jeff, thank you for acknowledging the exceptions to your earlier claims.
June 5, 2007 — 3:15 pm
Brian Brady says:
I want that illustration/explanation, Jeff.
June 5, 2007 — 8:46 pm
Brian Brady says:
Thank you, Jeff. That information is likely to incite a generation to revolution.
June 6, 2007 — 1:47 am
Michael Wurzer says:
Brian, I’m curious which aspects of the plan you found most likely to be revolutionary. Using Jeff’s four key points:
Qualified plans are made before tax, FIUL’s are not. As Jeff points out, the investment returns are the same for both types of plans, unless the tax rates are different at the time of investment versus withdrawal. Betting that tax rates will be higher or lower at those times is reasonable but diversification of bets is likely worthwhile, particularly if the 401k includes an employer match.
This doesn’t change the amount of the investment return, which can then be invested how you want, even in an FIUL.
FIUL’s have the cost of insurance and qualified plans do not. Also, FIUL’s limit your returns, qualified plans do not.
This seems to be the best reason for choosing an FIUL, but it doesn’t seem likely to spark a revolution given that most people will not have an estate larger than the $3.5 million exempt amount in 2009. For those who do, they likely are savvy enough not to be shocked by the fact that qualified plans are tax-free going in and taxed on withdrawal.
June 6, 2007 — 5:35 am
Jeff Brown says:
Brian – In my opinion, if they find out about this in mass, qualified plans will visibly decrease in popularity. At that point you will have hit the nail on the head.
Michael – I love your comments, as you’ve inspired a third post – thanks.
Your points are, except for the costs, which are at worst painless, and at best absolutely insignificant, well taken – but of absolutely no impact. My post will explain what I mean by that.
Thanks again.
June 6, 2007 — 8:06 am
Michael Wurzer says:
Great, Jeff, I’m looking forward to the post. In anticipation, I’m hopeful you’ll keep your grandma’s advice in mind regarding loud voices and character assassination. I’m always ready to learn, but it’s much easier when the teacher isn’t calling you a fool. Before this post even, I issued my apology for my hand grenade comment, and, as I said at the time, I’m hopeful we can try to re-focus the discussion on learning based on facts. I linked to some calculators in the comments to your earlier post, and that or something similar seems like a very easy method to provide concrete details regarding all the assumptions behind the claims so that we can easily see where the other is not understanding.
June 6, 2007 — 9:17 am
Chris says:
Interesting, very interesting. How would a FIUL compare to a Roth IRA?
June 6, 2007 — 6:33 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Chris – As I said in the post…..
With the exceptions of Roth IRA’s and those plans in which the employer is matching (in an unlimited fashion) their employees’ contributions dollar for dollar, going the FIUL route is by far the best way to go.
That said, Roth IRA’s still don’t pass the death tax test – a factor which won’t bring smiles to your heirs. Your CPA can help you navigate through all the different rules, which are based on different circumstances – none of which apply to FIUL’s.
Also Chris, you’re limited to how much you can contribute to your Roth – limits which are nonexistent with FIUL’s.
So even though Roth’s look incredibly attractive when compared to regular IRA’s and 401(k)’s — tax law limits how fast you can build it up by contribution limitations.
Anyone can decide to put $500 a month into a FIUL – which would violate the Roth limitations.
Roth, though appearing to be an exception, would, in most cases lose badly to a FIUL. I was being charitable when I made it an exception. The vast majority of the time is simply isn’t.
June 6, 2007 — 7:04 pm
Marco says:
I think Brian is referring to Equity Indexed Universal Life. There is an easy to read FAQ that will answer many questions here:
http://www.indexmarketinggroup.com/faq.htm
I put these together myself although I deal with large annual contributions instead of monthly contributions. AFAIK only Old Mutual and Amerus offer the best retirement income this way. We often tap into home equity to fund these investments…its a killer strategy but that is a whole other conversation!
What i love about EIUL is that you are not limited on the contribution amount. I believe EIUL’s blow away the ‘beloved’ roth for this reason. The ability to start compounding on large sums blow away the contribution limits of roths and typical qualified plans.
Another point of interest:
Minimum guaranteed interest rate! Of course you have a ceiling but if you are chasing returns I wouldn’t do that with retirement money. A minimum is powerful as already mentioned. Now take a look at how Roth’s have done here (pg11 Figure A11)
http://www.ici.org/issues/ret/fm-v15n5_appendix.pdf
Add the “Contribution” and “Conversion” amounts, you can clearly see how much market losses impacted the “Total Assets” of Roths at year end. Protecting your retirement (and home equity, even college and emergency funds) against market losses is very powerful.
I don’t think costs have been discussed so here we go. You are looking at 5 to 7.5% charge on contributions. And around .5 to 1.25% charge annually.
EIUL’s are low cost as long as your advisor knows how to build it properly. This is where we have an issue in this industry. Many advisors don’t know how to properly structure these contracts. If it is not designed correctly, your costs will be high and distributions taxed. Brian, it is a breath of fresh air to find other advisors that understand these concepts…if you need the help of an advisor in the Home Equity EIUL area, let me know π
And finally I wouldn’t call qualified plans scams. They work exactly as indicated. We love them for lack of other ‘trusted’ alternatives. Notice how everyone loved IRA’s but now the Roth is the golden child? The big misconception is that we will pay lower taxes in retirement…which is only true if you went with traditional retirement planning and did horribly at it π
June 6, 2007 — 8:42 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Marco – Bravo!
The only difference you and I may have is not calling the qualified plans scams.
If someone you’re helping lives next door to someone who relied totally on one of the qualified plans, resulting in after tax income far below your client’s, it’s my bet the word ‘scam’ might be too mild a description. The guy with the significantly lower after tax retirement income might be a tad more miffed than that word might imply.
June 6, 2007 — 8:52 pm
TJ says:
I read the report and I am not convinced. Maybe I received a beta copy but it was very poorly written. I am on board with the concepts involved with cash value (and yes, even IUL) policies, but the report didn’t do much to further the case.
This entire line of thinking strikes me as a rehash of Doug Andrew’s “Missed Fortune” books. Again, I am not completely opposed to the concepts, but…well, more convincing please…perhaps some direct comparisons that don’t use inflated values or incorrect assumptions.
Let’s put it all into the hopper and then see what shakes out!
June 8, 2007 — 12:41 pm
TJ says:
What happened to the follow up on this?
June 19, 2007 — 9:47 am
Jeff Brown says:
TJ – It’s coming, most likely this week. I’m sorry for the delay, but my business consistently takes me out of state, not to mention the local stuff.
It’s coming – making a living has kinda interfered with my timing.
June 19, 2007 — 10:29 am
satish says:
please send me the copy. I would like to read it
June 21, 2007 — 8:54 am
TJ says:
Any update on this?
July 8, 2007 — 2:07 am
Jeff Brown says:
TJ – Absolutely. Between my travel schedule, a death, and just plain life, I’ve been away from Bloodhound. This week I’m in Boise, but I think I’ll be able to finish this subject off once and for all on or before the end of this week.
Thanks for your patience – I’ve been chomping at the bit myself. π
July 8, 2007 — 9:32 am
TJ says:
Still hoping for something here…
July 18, 2007 — 9:46 pm
Jeff Brown says:
TJ – Me too. π My schedule has been prohibitive. Today I was on a roll with the post, and Greg’s host began having problems. Murphy lives.
I’ve got the numbers, and am hoping to have it published between Friday and Tuesday – Lord willing and the creek don’t rise.
July 18, 2007 — 10:53 pm
Robert Wallend says:
Hi Jeff,
Just recently came upon your blog postings from which I’ve garnered some valuable info. Many thanks.
Referring to “Keeping Up With Everything Frank Doesn’t Know” posted: Tuesday, June 5th, 2007 – I would be grateful to receive a copy of your financial advisor’s 2-page explanation of what really happens when you compare the perforamnce of a EIUL to 401K Gov’t Plan.
I’ve already passed on your blog site to several associates.
It’s refreshing to find a site such as yours – and, I compliment you for “Telling It Like It Is”.
ROB WALLEND
Note: Earlier Email address had typo. This post shows correct address. Sorry!
December 7, 2008 — 7:33 pm
Jeff Brown says:
Hey Rob — That document perished in a database suicide earlier this year. Sorry
That said, if you wish, I can refer you to the horse’s mouth, an expert in Tampa, Florida who’ll surely take excellent care of you.
December 7, 2008 — 8:30 pm