G
Guest
Guest
I'm a green agent doing my due diligence, as is so often advised on this board by those with much experience. I am slow, studious, and plodding, I suppose, but I wish to be thorough, minimize any mistakes, and therefore operate in the best interest of the client, well within the boundaries of the law, ethics, and insurance company requirements. I greatly appreciate this board and everyone on it.
I have an issue for which I need advice. I understand the need for getting a good contract with a good insurance company. I am more concerned here about the best interest of the client.
An "acquaintance" of mine introduced me to "final expense" small face whole life policies to help "get me started" in the insurance biz. Turns out the local MGA has imposed a monthly AP quote mid-game, and the particular carrier they use is okay with it (and will yank your contract if you don't comply, as has been mentioned elsewhere on this forum). That's fine, just sounds like it's shaping up to be a "churn and burn" shop at the MGA. But that's not what I'm asking about.
It is apparent that the "final expense" market is low/fixed-income elderly folks. It is this market with which I am concerned.
On a "training" sale that I was involved with, to a low-income, elderly gentleman, he had trouble picking a beneficiary (his wife had passed) since, as he put it, "they ain't none of 'em no count - they'll just put me in a box and run off with the money". That's my first concern. It would seem that a whole life policy will pay the beneficiary with no regard to the "final expense" wishes of the now deceased insured.
My second concern regards a Medicaid spend-down, and resulting opening of estate and probate wherein Medicaid can apparently (in NC) attempt to recover "countable assets" from the estate. My understanding is that only $1500 is "not countable" in NC for this purpose. So, in this scenario it would seem to be a risk that all but $1500 of a whole life policy could be lost to this process, after the insured has died.
The angle I'm getting at is security for the insured "while they are alive". In what little information I have been able to find, an irrevocable funeral trust seems to be much more protected, from both unscrupulous heirs and/or State programs. It would seem that the insured elderly person would be much more confident that their "final expense" money would indeed go for the final expenses, especially funeral expenses.
It would seem that funeral homes offer these as pre-need arrangements, with various stipulations and drawbacks (interest earned and/or overage to be kept by the funeral home, etc.), and that there are also "stand-alone" irrevocable trusts that are not tied to a specific funeral home and may not have the drawbacks. And I understand you can do a 1035 exchange from a current CV policy into an IFT.
It would seem the ideal vehicle would be an IFT that could be funded with a life insurance policy that could be paid for monthly and which DB would grow 2-3% per year to keep up w/ inflation. Is there such an animal?
But here are my questions/requests:
What experience do the gurus and experienced agents here have with irrevocable funeral trusts? I have seen 1, 3, 5 and 10 pay, and apparently there is a 10 year policy (same as a 10 pay?). Is there an irrevocable funeral trust that is paid like a whole life policy ie. monthly to age 100 w/ CV/DB buildup at 2 or 3%? If so, then if presented properly, I think most seniors would prefer it, if it was basically the same cost as a WL "unprotected" policy. I know I would. I have heard many times on this board, "sell what you would buy yourself, or for your mother".
What carriers would you recommend for this? IMO's?
To sum up, it seems the IFT offers the senior more "control" and confidence that their expenses will be truly taken care of at their passing. "Final Expense" to me means just that, final expenses, specifically, funeral expenses. If a senior wants to leave a legacy or sum of money to heirs, to me that would entail a regular life insurance policy of whatever face amount. But to me, final expense, in the definition I just gave, does not involve heirs at all. (Although I am in agreement that whatever is left over from an IFT should go to a named contingent benificiary, of course). Am I thinking correctly, or am I way off base from the insurance industry as it stands? Please let me know. I know I still have a lot to study and learn, but I thought I would stop and take a short cut and a breather!
So, I'm simply asking, does it exist, and is there a way to market such an IFT to basically the same market in the same way as "final expense" WL is currently being marketed?
Thank you very much in advance for your comments. I will await your responses and hope for a lively exchange of ideas!
I have an issue for which I need advice. I understand the need for getting a good contract with a good insurance company. I am more concerned here about the best interest of the client.
An "acquaintance" of mine introduced me to "final expense" small face whole life policies to help "get me started" in the insurance biz. Turns out the local MGA has imposed a monthly AP quote mid-game, and the particular carrier they use is okay with it (and will yank your contract if you don't comply, as has been mentioned elsewhere on this forum). That's fine, just sounds like it's shaping up to be a "churn and burn" shop at the MGA. But that's not what I'm asking about.
It is apparent that the "final expense" market is low/fixed-income elderly folks. It is this market with which I am concerned.
On a "training" sale that I was involved with, to a low-income, elderly gentleman, he had trouble picking a beneficiary (his wife had passed) since, as he put it, "they ain't none of 'em no count - they'll just put me in a box and run off with the money". That's my first concern. It would seem that a whole life policy will pay the beneficiary with no regard to the "final expense" wishes of the now deceased insured.
My second concern regards a Medicaid spend-down, and resulting opening of estate and probate wherein Medicaid can apparently (in NC) attempt to recover "countable assets" from the estate. My understanding is that only $1500 is "not countable" in NC for this purpose. So, in this scenario it would seem to be a risk that all but $1500 of a whole life policy could be lost to this process, after the insured has died.
The angle I'm getting at is security for the insured "while they are alive". In what little information I have been able to find, an irrevocable funeral trust seems to be much more protected, from both unscrupulous heirs and/or State programs. It would seem that the insured elderly person would be much more confident that their "final expense" money would indeed go for the final expenses, especially funeral expenses.
It would seem that funeral homes offer these as pre-need arrangements, with various stipulations and drawbacks (interest earned and/or overage to be kept by the funeral home, etc.), and that there are also "stand-alone" irrevocable trusts that are not tied to a specific funeral home and may not have the drawbacks. And I understand you can do a 1035 exchange from a current CV policy into an IFT.
It would seem the ideal vehicle would be an IFT that could be funded with a life insurance policy that could be paid for monthly and which DB would grow 2-3% per year to keep up w/ inflation. Is there such an animal?
But here are my questions/requests:
What experience do the gurus and experienced agents here have with irrevocable funeral trusts? I have seen 1, 3, 5 and 10 pay, and apparently there is a 10 year policy (same as a 10 pay?). Is there an irrevocable funeral trust that is paid like a whole life policy ie. monthly to age 100 w/ CV/DB buildup at 2 or 3%? If so, then if presented properly, I think most seniors would prefer it, if it was basically the same cost as a WL "unprotected" policy. I know I would. I have heard many times on this board, "sell what you would buy yourself, or for your mother".
What carriers would you recommend for this? IMO's?
To sum up, it seems the IFT offers the senior more "control" and confidence that their expenses will be truly taken care of at their passing. "Final Expense" to me means just that, final expenses, specifically, funeral expenses. If a senior wants to leave a legacy or sum of money to heirs, to me that would entail a regular life insurance policy of whatever face amount. But to me, final expense, in the definition I just gave, does not involve heirs at all. (Although I am in agreement that whatever is left over from an IFT should go to a named contingent benificiary, of course). Am I thinking correctly, or am I way off base from the insurance industry as it stands? Please let me know. I know I still have a lot to study and learn, but I thought I would stop and take a short cut and a breather!
So, I'm simply asking, does it exist, and is there a way to market such an IFT to basically the same market in the same way as "final expense" WL is currently being marketed?
Thank you very much in advance for your comments. I will await your responses and hope for a lively exchange of ideas!