Its better!!

Life insurance with cash value could be opened for child 15 days old 😁 My favorite is IUL.

You are welcome

So,keep up your study. there's so much more.

I always put my clients in gpt

Hi Mark, I'd like to answer this for you. First of all, 401k's and Roth's are different in one key aspect: the former uses pre-tax dollars while the later uses post-tax money. Besides taxes, both of these have administrative fees. Index Universal Life policies (iUL's) also have fees + costs of insurance, however, all of these financial vehicles are pretty much equal with about 1.5% total costs. (many factors excluded here: age, amounts, time, tax rates, etc.) Here are the advantages of the iUL over the other two: 1. No downside - you cannot be credited less than 0% which means your money is not at risk. During times of economic distress, such as the 2008 recession, you would not gain any money, but you wouldn't lose any either. 2. Death Benefit - What happens to the money in your 401k or Roth IRA if you die? It would usually go to your beneficiary, but they will be taxed. With the iUL, not only would they receive your cash-value, but they would also get the entire death-benefit! And it's all TAX-FREE!! 3. Living Benefits - Most iUL's include Living benefits which can be used while you're still alive, such as: Chronic Illness riders and Terminal Illness riders which give you access to your money if diagnosed with either of those ailments. These riders are usually FREE : ) I'd love to explain more, of you're interested.

@@dandi12100 Did you notice? I did not say, 401(k) and Roth IRA, I said ROTH 401(k) and Roth IRA, so in those cases, you pay taxes up front not upon withdrawal from the funds. Regardless, you did not answer my question. It is my understanding that you do not ever pay taxes on premiums going into a whole life policy nor the growth of the invested premiums nor the death benefit. Therefore, I want to know which is greater: the total cost of underwriting, insurance company expenses, commissions, et. al. for a whole life policy, or, (assuming say a 30% tax bracket) the cost of taxes + load fee for a traditional mutual fund?? Obviously there are some variables here but I am looking for you to give me a sense of which is greater.

@@marksmith4892 You're right, I did overlook that about Roth 401k, my apologies. Here's my experience: aome iUL fees reduce and go away over time. I believe fees for other investments are recurring year over year. As far as commissions, the Life agent usually makes a one-time annual commission and very little the second year, while financial advisors/planners make the same commission (paid by you) year over year as long as they manage your money. One other thing I forgot to mention: LIMITS 1. Not everyone qualifies to have a Roth IRA. If you earn too much money, you cannot have a Roth. 2. Even if you do qualify, you are limited in the amount you can fund the acct ($6k annually) 3. In a Roth, you would get penalized for withdrawing money prior to age 59 1/2. * Life insurance does not have those limitations, nor penalties I encourage you to read "The Power of Zero" by David McKnight (only 90 pages : )

@@dandi12100 I do understand all of those things and you are right about the annual limit on a Roth IRA but with Roth 401(k) the annual limit is a very healthy $19,500 for a single person. Also, even if you make more than the annual salary max to qualify for a Roth IRA, there is a backdoor method where each year you can set up a traditional IRA and then at the end of each year roll it over into a Roth IRA, problem solved. Why didn't you mention this? Maybe because you're selling insurance. Regardless, if a person makes so much that he'd have to take this step and the tax advantages of life insurances still exceeded the sum of all the costs then, potentially, it would still be advantageous for such a person to dump money into whole life. I understand that expenses & commissions reduce and go away, and consequently I do not find persuasive the argument presented by opponents to whole life that in the first few years they take all the premiums for expenses & commissions and that break even is at year 10 because as you say most of these expenses then rapidly taper to almost zero for the remainder of the life of the policy whereas in a traditional investment vehicle like a mutual fund, if a person had a large income such that he were in, say, a 30% tax bracket, he would have to continue paying that 30% every. single. month. So in the net, a whole life purchaser would hope, in terms of Time Value of Money, the difference between WL expenses & commissions and traditional investment taxes would be at least zero or perhaps even positive. I am disappointed that once again though you did not answer my question. What is the sum of all those expenses & commissions??? Show me that it is equal to or less than the sum of all the taxes one would pay into a traditional mutual fund.

@@marksmith4892 @Mark Smith Okay, but first, let's not get confused by the different types of cash-value life insurance. There is Whole Life, Universal Life, and Index Universal Life. I am not a fan of WL for two reasons: interest credited is usually fixed (2% - 4%) and the premiums are also fixed (you can't contribute more, you can't contribute less). The UL offers the same fixed but low rate as the WL. The iUL offers a range, from 0% on up. Some companies today are paying up to 17%! Both UL & iUL offer "Flexible" premiums. This is important because Doug Andrew is always touting the "MAXIMUM FUNDED" iUL. The problem is TIME. The longer you keep the iUL, the less the cost over time. The fees involved are: admin fee,, policy charge, premium fee and cost of insurance. Some fees are forever, some reduce then go away, and the cost of insurance actually increases every year based on age. You would have to compare illustrations, side-by-side and look at your returns at certain times: 10, 20, 30 years, etc.

Nope I have a client putting 100 a month

@@aaronmputu2598 i live in nyc and tried to get one but apparently nyc has the strictest regulations when it comes to IULs

@Jessie, yes New York has made it difficult for insurance carriers. There are some options, you may want to schedule some time with an IUL specialist who can answer more of your questions and help you with this question: 3dimensionalwealth.com/getstarted/

@Jessie, NO. However, IUL's must be funded and structured correctly in order for it to work long term. Not funding an IUL properly can be misleading and frustrating later. On the other hand, a properly structured IUL can be the best thing ever.