We would love to hear from you. Click on the ‘Contact Us’ link to the right and choose your favorite way to reach-out!

wscdsdc

media/speaking contact

Jamie Johnson

business contact

Victoria Peterson

Contact Us

855.ask.wink

Close [x]
pattern

Industry News

Categories

  • Industry Articles (21,155)
  • Industry Conferences (2)
  • Industry Job Openings (35)
  • Moore on the Market (414)
  • Negative Media (144)
  • Positive Media (73)
  • Sheryl's Articles (800)
  • Wink's Articles (353)
  • Wink's Inside Story (274)
  • Wink's Press Releases (123)
  • Blog Archives

  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • September 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • May 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • February 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • July 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • August 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • November 2008
  • September 2008
  • May 2008
  • February 2008
  • August 2006
  • The Private Pension Plan

    April 12, 2017 by Richard Myerson, CPA, CLU, ChFC

    A colleague of mine has a wonderful expression: “tax the seeds, not the harvest.” It certainly makes intuitive sense, regardless of the underlying metaphorical product or service. But it has very special consideration when applied to wealth accumulation options.

    Consider this: there are only three components to any investment: the deposit, the growth (or gain), and the distribution. And in every investment, at least one of these components must be taxed. For tax-qualified investments (e.g., 401k, 403b, IRA’s, Profit-Sharing, and Defined Contribution and Benefit Plans), the taxes are paid on distributions, while the deposit and the gains are tax-deferred. For assets outside of a qualified plan (or life insurance policy), the taxes are paid pre-deposit and on the gains as they are accumulated or distributed. Using a life insurance alternative, the taxes are paid only pre-deposit.

    Further, consider this: in 2016 the federal government raised $3.3 trillion in taxes and spent $3.9 trillion. Approximately $2.4 trillion went to mandatory programs (social security, Medicare, etc.) while $584 billion went to defense. Only $600 billion went to discretionary programs. The balance was interest on our national debt1. So ask yourself this question: if our spending continues to outpace our revenues (at least in the near-term) and interest rates rise alongside our debt, how long will it take until there is no availability for any discretionary spending? Which naturally leads to the more consequential question: what will the income tax rate be at your retirement?

    Pre-Tax Strategy

    From an early investment age, many of us are taught the advantages of saving money on a pre-tax basis into a qualified plan. However, most individuals, many wealth advisors, and even some tax advisors are not familiar with the extraordinarily tax-efficient benefits of using a life insurance “wrapper” to grow and distribute assets.

    This article explores these benefits, and in particular, looks at and responds to the most common objections to using a life insurance “wrapper” to grow and distribute assets. If intelligently engineered, the often disparaged “drag” on the growth from mortality charges and other expenses become incidental to the long-term tax-efficient advantages of the strategy.

    Taxes are the origin of the advantages underlying the use of this strategy for wealth accumulation. The IRS tax code may just render life insurance the final great, legal tax-avoidance strategy. Why and how? First (and most importantly), the death benefit paid on a life insurance policy is typically tax-free. The “typically” stipulation is added to take into account those very limited instances when a policy owner can unintentionally cause the death benefit to be taxable.

    Second, the gains inside the policy accumulate on a tax-deferred basis. Third, these gains can be accessed and distributed tax-free. One must be careful in all the above cases to ensure no violation of rules that would modify the tax advantages of the policy. If the rules are properly followed, we have life insurance tax bliss.

    Commonly, these plans are called Non-Qualified Plans or Private Pension Plans, and we use them in both a business environment and for individual wealth accumulation. The terminology comes from the distinction that there are no government rules or regulations controlling participation, limiting the amount of contributions or timing of withdrawals, or creating penalties for violating any of the Qualified Plan rules.

    •  In a business environment, the strategy is used to recruit, retain, reward, and retire key executive management and talent. There are a variety of different structures to creating the plan, but all of them involve two components: the agreement between the employer and employee, and the funding mechanism (in this case, life insurance, to provide the promised benefits). The two components are, and, must, out of necessity, be mutually exclusive to avoid current income tax to the participant. Great care must be taken here to avoid falling foul of certain rules, whereby the employee could be attributed with phantom income in the event of triggering a “constructive receipt” landmine.
    • On an individual basis, The Private Pension Plan lines up alongside the client’s Qualified Plans and non-qualified other investments, and becomes a component of their overall retirement portfolio.

    In my practice, whether we’re funding the strategy within a business environment or for personal use, we use the same funding mechanism: Maximum Funded Equity Indexed Universal Life Insurance. Essentially, the engineering of this strategy can be broken into three parts:

    Equity Indexed
    This component of the strategy allows premiums being invested in the strategy to be linked to an index (e.g., the S&P 500) in the form of options acquired in the index. After the cash (less costs and expenses, as discussed below) is deposited into the contract, the index is measured on an initial measurement date, and is then measured (usually) one year from that measurement date. If the index increases over that period, the net deposited funds increase at the same rate – up to a maximum cap determined by the carrier for each year’s segment. If the index decreases during that same period, there is either no impact on the net deposited funds, or they could be credited with a minimum floor set by the carrier. (There are a broad number of crediting strategies with the S&P 500, 0% floor being the most ubiquitous.) At the end of each period, any gain is “locked in,” and the next segment begins, with another deposit being made in years two, three, four, etc. The gains earned each year can never be lost. Currently, most companies’ cap rates are between 10% and 13%. The product is designed for those individuals who would like upside market participation, but want to avoid market downside swings.

    Universal Life Insurance
    The life insurance component creates the significant tax advantage of the strategy. While the contribution to the private pension plan is not a deduction from current income tax, similar to that of qualified retirement plans, the gains earned inside a life insurance policy grow on a tax-deferred basis. However, unlike a qualified plan, when taking money out of a life insurance policy, the distributions can be made to be 100% tax-free, if certain rules are properly followed. And as previously noted, unlike qualified plans, there are no rules as to how much money can go into the plan and when money can be distributed from the plan.

    Maximum Funded
    The Internal Revenue Code allows us to deposit cash into a life insurance policy, have that cash grow on a tax-deferred basis, withdraw that cash tax-free, as long as certain tests are met. These tests are designed to avoid a Modified Endowment Contract (MEC), which, if established, would nullify much of the tax-efficiency of the strategy. Therefore, we plan for the policy to have the smallest death benefit relative to the cash being deposited, and hence have the lowest possible costs and expenses while still avoiding a MEC.

    • Equity Indexed Life Insurance is the fastest growing cash-value accumulation product in the U.S.2. This is no surprise given its tax-efficiency, safety, and flexibility, combined with the ability to achieve higher yields than whole life or ordinary universal life could offer, all without the risk of market volatility. So it begs the question: why isn’t this strategy used by wealth advisors and recommended by all tax advisors to their clients? It’s a simple question with not such a simple answer.

    Typically, there are one or more of the following issues surrounding the strategy:

    • Complexity: many advisors, even some in the life insurance industry, are unfamiliar with the complexities that go into the product, and do not wish to appear less than competent in the eyes of their clients.
    • Buy Term and Invest the Difference: this is the antiquated and tired refrain of those who have not taken the time to understand how the product really works, and simply believe life insurance should never be used as an investment.
    • High Costs and Expenses: life insurance products have high initial costs and expenses. There is no getting around that fact. Another fact: the asset management fees paid over the life of a managed investment portfolio can be more than twice as high as those of a similar life insurance investment, even on a net present value basis.3
    • Us vs. Them: notwithstanding the same client-centric objectives, there exists a “Great Divide” between wealth and insurance advisors when it comes to life insurance as an asset accumulation vehicle. There are understandable reasons for this:
      The inherent age-old industry stigma applied to the life insurance “salesman.” This reality has been created by years of (sometimes deservedly) pounding the life insurance industry for shady sales practices. The psychology of the wealth advisors is to “rise above” a life insurance purveyor (unless specifically requested by the client) and avoid discussing this as an accumulation option.
      Many wealth advisors are not licensed to sell insurance, and those that are not predisposed to having a “one-off” commission hit with assets, thereafter forever removed from their book.
      There is very little, if any, life insurance training provided to asset managers by their firm or broker-dealer, and sales of life insurance are often relegated to intermediaries assigned to the investment firm.
    • Taxes: most tax advisors are interested in finding ways to help their clients avoid current income taxes, but are much less focused on the very real possibility of significantly higher tax rates in retirement.

    If we had a proverbial crystal ball, we might be able to take a deep look into the future and know what the market will do each year, what tax rates will be when we retire, and even how long we might live (although my guess is that most of us have no desire to know the latter). But none of us do know these things and we can only guess, based (hopefully) on rational inputs. And if we’re truly worth our fees or commissions as financial advisors, we need to make sure at least a portion of our clients’ portfolios are protected from taxation at the time of harvest. ◊

     

     

    Endnotes
    1 2015 Office of Management and Budget, adjusted 2017
    2 LIMRA
    3 Calculation based on a 39-year-old contributing $50,000 for 12 years into a maximum funded equity indexed life insurance product and the same amount into a managed investment portfolio with a .075% asset management fee. The fees were present valued over the life of each strategy and measured against the total distributions from each strategy over the same time period.

    Mr. Myerson is the founder of The Myerson Agency, a wealth and insurance planning practice located in Los Angeles. Visit www.myersonagency.com

    – See more at: http://www.lifehealth.com/private-pension-plan/#sthash.fYOVN923.dpuf

    Originally Posted at Advisor Magazine on March 13, 2017 by Richard Myerson, CPA, CLU, ChFC.

    Categories: Industry Articles
    currency