Case Examples of When to Use Life Insurance

CONTINUATION:  PART II (CASE 3&4) 

Case Examples of When to Use Life Insurance and The Type to Use! 

Case 3 and Case 4  

Example 3 – The Buy and Sell Funding 

The company has three owners, should one of them die, the surviving partners would have to buy out the survivors of the deceased partner.   They have four choices for the funding of this potential liability.  The agreement states the stock must be purchased by the owners, or the entity:  

1. Sinking Fund 

2. Borrow the money 

3. Payout over a period  

4. Life insurance  

When looking over the costs, life insurance was by far the least expensive compared to the other options, and tere where assorted reasons why some of the options did not make a lot of sense:  

Borrowing the money; if they could get the loan, (doubtful that a bank would loan money to a company that just lost a key owner), it would cost principal and interest and may have an impact on the profit and loss statement.   

Sinking fund; Unless they put money at risk, they would have to settle for an exceptionally low rate of return (near 0). Plus, if death happened sooner rather than later, they would not have saved enough to pay the liability needed to purchase the interest.  Also, the sinking fund would cause them to commit a much larger contributions to the plan, thus eliminating cash to invest in their company.  

Life insurance: This was a cost of 1% of capital for a guaranteed payment. In this case, we could have used term, however, at some point the owners would have to change the plan over to a permanent coverage type of plan.  This would give them a guaranteed premium and longevity to the plan, to fund their buy and sell.   

The liability of purchasing the partners’ shares, is a long-term proposition, possibly lasting generations.   Permanent life insurance was the reasonable choice. The life insurance had “double duty dollars”, allowing them to use the cash value to purchase the partners out in the future when they retired.  

Example 4Keep the Star Key Man 

The owner of a successful business wanted to make sure they enticed the key person running the business to stay with the firm. The key person makes things happen in the firm. It allows the owner to take more time off, create more profits, and they benefit from the efforts of the key person.  

We put in a supplemental retirement plan, just for the key person, and the owner was willing to invest $30,000 into an executive compensation plan.   When the funding was discussed by the team of advisors, which were consisted of the CPA, attorney, the business partner, business consultant, and I, the following suggestions were made:  

– Put money in a mutual fund 

– Give the employee stock of the company 

– Purchase cash rich life insurance program 

– Have company stockbroker build a stock portfolio for the key person 

When it was all said and done, the life insurance program on a permanent basis was the clear winner:  

Reasons:  

– Benefits would be paid tax-free to the employee at retirement 

– The contributions would have little if any impact on the key person’s income tax opposed to the other methods 

– If the key person died before retirement, the insurance plan could complete a tax-free benefit he would have received had he retired, giving his family protection and security. The other options did not have that available.   

– The life insurance plan had guarantees, while the other suggestions did not 

  • The Employer had an arrangement to recover their full cost to the plan, where the other programs had a charge to earnings” against the company.  

Adding it up, the cash rich life insurance was a very clear winner.   

I have given you four uses of life insurance.  In each situation, the question to use term insurance, or permanent comes into plan.  There are a few simple questions to ask:  

A. Is the reason for the insurance permanent or short term. 

B. If it isn’t long term today, will it end up being long term. 

C. If it is determined that the need for the insurance is less than 15 years, without exception use term?  

If the answer is long term, or if it will be long term, I have used term if there was a cash flow issue, but with the idea of changing the plan when cash flow permitted.  

FOR A FREE ASSESSMENT OF YOUR BUSINESS INSURANCE PLANNING TAKE OUR FREE ONE MINUTE ASSESSEMENT!  

You will receive a free report and a free 30-minute conference discussion  FREE INSURANCE ASSESSMENT 

Case Examples of When To Use Life Insurance and The Type To Use!

Part 1

Part One- Two cases using life insurance.   

Over the years I have seen clients and advisors get hung up on which type of life insurance they should purchase, permanent or term insurance, making their situation much more complicated than it must be.   

In this article I want to break down the different situations where life insurance is needed and what type of life insurance I would    recommend.  Again, this is my opinion, but it is based on several facts within the situation.   

Example 1 – Young Business Owner with A Growing Business 

Our client is running a business and is investing much of his discretionary dollars into the business. His wife is a nurse and makes  good income. This helps him support the family while building his business.  

He has two young children, a mortgage, and a business loan. They are not concerned about income replacement at his death, as his wife can work anytime and anyplace as a nurse. However, they are concerned about debt, business debt and the college costs for the kids. The capital required was $1,000,000 

His earnings have been increasing consistently for the past five years, and his business has been stabilizing while growing. The income from the business is more predictable and, in a few years, he feels it will be easier to budget.  

In this case I suggested he purchase a 20-year term convertible term insurance plan.  

  •  The premiums are affordable and low  
  •  the term of the insurance would be adequate 

I could have suggested permanent life insurance under a split dollar or bonus plan however, I felt it would impede his ability to save money in his business and continue to expand. 

Case 2-The Sole Proprietor with No Market 

The problem with owning a sole proprietorship, is in many cases there is no market to sell the business. These small companies create a job for the owner, a salary, and a place to go. It affords them a good standard of living, and enjoyment in their work. The problem, however, is at their death, a long-term illness, or a cash flow crunch, or loss of key employees, they do not have a market to sell too immediately.   

One of the greatest risks is dying while owning the company.  The business is too small for the open market, and normally there are a handful of employees who do not have an interest in or the money to purchase the business.  

This is a time that the estate in many cases needs the cash to settle estate expenses.   

Competitors are more than happy to lend a helping hand by offering 10-20 cents on the dollar for the assets.   

As a planner, I can help them!  

I can arrange to have a buyer ready at any time to provide the spouse or estate of the owner, the going concern value of the business.  

  The payout would be tax free. The cost could be from 1/2% to 2% of the value put on the business.   

If the cost were 1% for example, and the business was worth $250,000, the owner would pay $2,500 a year for this guarantee.  

If the owner decided to sell the business to a willing buyer, the owner would receive back part or all their cost for the arranged guaranteed purchase.   

The “Arrangement” at death is that the spouse/estate would receive tax-free the $250,000 purchase value!    The spouse/estate could also keep the business, and sell the assets or the business (piecemeal, or the whole business). 

If the owner of the business had retired and sold the business to an outsider or another family member, the arrangement would return to the owner all the deposits the business owner contributed to the “Arrangement” over the years, plus a reasonable interest rate to help them in retirement.  

Not a bad plan when you consider the “Arrangement” is guaranteed if the business owner paid their 1% to the arrangement.  

FOR A FREE ASSESSMENT OF YOUR BUSINESS INSURANCE PLANNING TAKE OUR FREE ONE MINUTE ASSESSEMENT!  

You will receive a free report and a free 30-minute conference discussion  FREE INSURANCE ASSESSMENT 

Beneficiary Designations Can Become Very Critical Errors in Your Estate Planning!

 

June  2021  

Beneficiary Designations Can Become Very Critical Errors in Your Estate Planning!   

In all of the years that I have serviced my client’s planning their estates, one of the most important areas of the planning is making sure they are aware of the beneficiaries of their property.   

Many times, they have older life insurance and annuity contracts which haven’t been reviewed over the years, consequently, their family dynamics may have changed, and updating is necessary.  

The life insurance beneficiary and estate beneficiary are not exclusive to the planning.  Other property should always align with the overall planning, however, in this article, I want to focus on some of the pitfalls in naming beneficiaries, as this is, in my opinion, the most common mistake made in planning, not updating beneficiaries.i   

  1. Not thinking about the financial ability of the beneficiary to handle the inheritance they will receive. For example, they could be minors, incapacitated, or just uniformed in their thinking about finances, a bad marriage, and a host of other situations.  That being the case, a trust makes sense as they are flexible to design and can be amended over time. 
  1.  They are an adult, but you just don’t have the confidence that leaving a large sum of money to them is the right thing to do. Example:  leaving $500,000 to a 21-year-old son.  This will usually end up being a nightmare.  Again, a trust can be a great vehicle to control the outcome of paying the lump sum directly. 
  1. Leaving a large amount of money to your elderly sibling, or parents.  They are usually next in line to have to deal with the Medicaid system.  There are other ways of leaving the property to help them for future income and lifestyle needs, which will not jeopardize the asset to the Medicaid system.  
  1. Not naming contingent beneficiaries.  Should the primary beneficiary listed not be living at your death, the assets will pass to your estate versus to the next in line.  Naming contingent beneficiaries guarantees that should your primary beneficiary not be living at your death; the contingent beneficiaries will receive the assets.   
  1. Not naming “per stirpes” to your beneficiaries if you want your beneficiaries’ issues to receive the asset, should the beneficiary not be living.  Example, leaving asset to your child, if living, if not living, to their issues (your grandchildren).  

Tax ramifications are important also, Example, you want your two children to receive $125,000 each from your $250,000 IRA.  Child A has little income and is in the 12% income tax bracket.  They will pay $15,000 in taxes (Fed). Child B is a professional making over $450,000 a year.  They will pay much more in taxes, example 35% or $157,000.1 

Child A will pay $15,000 taxes on the IRA and net:  $110,000 and $150,000 (life insurance) = $260,000 

Child B will pay $37,500 taxes on the IRA and net $87,500 and $150,000 (life insurance) = $237,000 

In this case, more of the IRA could be left to child a with less tax than child b up to $329,000 before they hit the 24% tax bracket.  The equalizer would be to leave more of the life insurance tax free payment to child b, and less of the taxable IRA.  When you work it out, you would help save taxes on the IRA by 11%.   

There are many more Pitfalls which I can share with you, however, these seem to be the most common ones that I run into.   

For a free report on “Six Biggest Mistakes When Setting up A living Trust;” Requestion Report #9 in the Drop-Down menu>. We will send it to you immediately.   

To get your Report #9; “Six Biggest Mistakes When Setting up A living Trust”.  

CLICK Here:         FREE REPORT, Make sure to request report #9 on the drop-down menu.  

BEWARE FINANCIAL ADVISORS: THIS IS AN EASY TAX TRAP YOUR CLIENT COULD MAKE! LEARN A FEW EXEMPTIONS AND YOU WILL STAY OUT OF TROUBLE!

 Recently, we worked on a case which involved an endorsement split dollar plani, where the split dollar agreement involving the trustee   of an irrevocable trust was terminated pursuant to a “rollout. The agreement was between the employer and the trustee (endorsement split dollar). The result would have been a “transfer of value,” in which the death benefit exceeding the consideration would have been taxable income.  

If the split dollar plan were a collateral assignment split dollar, there would not have been a  “ taxable event”, as the sale of the policy would have been made to an exempt party, the insured, (grantor and the insured are one in the same).  Under the endorsement Split dollar, the company was selling to the trustee, not an exemption entity.  

Transfer for value jeopardizes the income tax-free payment of the insurance proceeds. Under the transfer value rule, if a policy is sold for consideration, the death proceeds will be taxable as ordinary income, more than the net premium contribution.  

Besides the outright sale of the policy, there can also be a taxable event if the owner is paid in consideration to change the beneficiary. This would be a transfer of value; thus, the death benefit is taxable beyond the consideration paid for the policy. The consideration paid to change the beneficiary can be any amount.  

Consideration does not have to be money, it could be in exchange for a policy, or a promise to perform some act or service. However, the mere pledging or assignment of a policy as collateral security is not a transfer for value.  

Transfer for Value Exceptions:   

  1. Transfer to the insured 
  1. Transfers to a partner of the insured 
  1. Transfer to a partnership in which the insured is a partner 
  1. Transfer to a corporation in which the insured is a stockholder or officer (but there is no exception for transfer to a co-stockholder.  
  1. Transfer between corporation in a tax-free reorganization if certain considerations exit.  

A bona fide gift:  is not considered to be a transfer for value, and later payment of the death proceeds to the donee will be paid income tax-free.   

Part sale and gift transfer actions are also  protected under the so-called “transferor’s basis exception”  which  provides that the transfer for value rule does not apply where the transferee’s basis in the policy is determined  whole or in part by reference to its basis in the hands of the transferor.   

Another transfer for value trap can occur in the situation when you have a “trusteed cross purchase buy and sell agreement”, to avoid a problem of multiple policies when there are more than just two or three stockholders. When the trustee is both owner and beneficiary of just one policy on each of the stockholders, a transfer for value may occur when one of the stockholders dies and the surviving stockholders then receive a greater proportional interest in the outstanding policies which continue to insure the survivors. This can be remedied by either using an Entity Redemption where the Corporation purchases the interest of the deceased stockholder’s interest.  

This can also cause exposure of transfer of value when transferring existing life insurance policies, insuring stockholders to the trustee of a trusteed cross purchase agreement, which does not fall within one of the exceptions to the transfer of value rules.  To avoid this initial ownership problem, the trustee should be the original applicant, owner and beneficiary of the polices.