indexed universal life

What “Tax-Free Retirement” by Patrick Kelly Says for Doctors

Leave a Comment / January 29, 2021

by Michael Goodman

Tax-Free Retirement by Patrick Kelly

Way back in 2011, I reviewed the book, “Tax-Free Retirement” by Patrick Kelly and gave it a strong recommendation. That review is one of the most popular pages on my site. Now that my practice is focused on doctors, I thought this would be a good time to look at what Mr. Kelly’s book recommends for doctors.

Chapter 20

In chapter 20 of Patrick Kelly’s 10th Anniversary version of “Tax-Free Retirement” (2017), Patrick writes, “Doctors have many unique attributes. And in my opinion, their unique attributes are what makes this group one of the most significant to benefit from the strategies in this book.”

He then lists four reasons why doctors are a great fit for using an indexed universal life policy (IUL) for retirement planning.

“Reason #1

Most doctors make more than $196,000 per year, which is the phase-out limit for being able to contribute to a Roth IRA. Therefore, they have no truly viable tax-free retirement option available to them other than life insurance.” (NOTE: in 2021, a married couple making over $208,000 cannot contribute to a Roth IRA, while the maximum deposit is only $6,000 unless you’re over 50 years old)

“Reason #2

Doctors are specialists. They have given their lives to be the best at what they do – and they are. However, this level of specialty often leaves little time for less urgent activities such as retirement planning”

“Reason #3

Doctors are often taken advantage of by snake-oil salesmen in the financial realm hocking half-baked, poorly-formed investment strategies promising wonderful returns.

“Reason #4

Doctors generally need a lot of life insurance for three reasons. One, they need to protect a large income for their families. Two, they usually carry high debt. Often this is due to starting out in debt from large medical school bills and low wages during their residency and internship years. Three, doctors as a group have one of the lowest life expectancies of any profession.”

Bottom Line

Most doctors that work at a hospital have a contract that provides a life insurance policy (usually a term policy) and a retirement plan of some sort (usually a 401k plan these days). But the life insurance policy often leaves them under-insured and the qualified retirement plan is likely to create an income tax problem later. Doctors in private practice usually have to pay for everything themselves, or through the organization that owns the practice.

When comparing the various options available to doctors that want to supplement the benefits in their contracts, or create a retirement plan by themselves, Patrick Kelly says on page 147 of his book there is “one superior option – life insurance!” Explaining why, he summarizes that life insurance offers an “unlimited contribution potential,” “grows without annual taxation,” “takes no time to manage,” “provides a huge sum of money to the physicians family in the case of an untimely death,” and “best of all, if structured properly, the policy can allow access to future money tax-free.”

What’s not to like?

Cash to Cover the Expenses of a Lifetime Without Market Risk

Leave a Comment / January 23, 2021

by Michael Goodman

From birth to death, there are times for all of us when we can use some extra cash. It might be for college expenses, unexpected medical bills, a wedding, buying a home, a great vacation, the cost of raising a child (or children!), and having enough money for a great retirement.

This video discusses a place to save money for those expenses without market risks.

Wall Street Math

Leave a Comment / October 21, 2014

 

WALL STREET MATH

By Michael Goodman

On January 1, 1984, the S&P 500 stood at $164.93. Over the next 30 years,
it grew to $1,848.36. The annual returns were: (read down the first column, down the second column, etc)

1984 – 1.4% 1994 – -1.5% 2004 – 9.0%
1985 – 26.3% 1995 – 34.1% 2005 – 3.0%
1986 – 14.6% 1996 – 20.3% 2006 – 13.6%
1987 – 2.0% 1997 – 31.0% 2007 – 3.5%
1988 – 12.4% 1998 – 26.7% 2008 – -38.5%
1989 – 27.3% 1999 – 19.5% 2009 – 23.5%
1990 – -6.6% 2000 – -10.1% 2010 – 12.8%
1991 – 26.3% 2001 – -13.0% 2011 – -0%
1992 – 4.5% 2002 – -23.4% 2012 – 13.4%
1993 – 7.1% 2003 – 26.4% 2013 – 29.6%

If you total these up and divide by 30, you will get an average return of 9.84%
(not including dividends). But did the S&P 500 actually grow at a rate of
9.84%? Using my HP Business calculator to do the time value of money calculation,
I find that when $164.93 grows to $1,848.36 over 30 years, the actual annualized
rate of growth is 8.39%. What’s up?! Why is the actual growth rate 1.5% LESS
than the average rate? The answer is Wall Street Math.

Anytime you average a series of numbers that includes negative numbers, this
problem will arise. Just think about this simplified example. If you invest
$100 and it goes up 10% in the first two years, then goes down 20% in the third
year, what is your rate of growth? The AVERAGE of these three years is zero%
(10, 10, -20 = 0/3= 0%). But did your investment actually break even? NO! Your
$100 goes up 10% to $110 after one year; goes up 10% to $121 after two years;
then goes down 20% to $96.80 after the third year. You lost $3.20 over the three
years, a “growth” rate of -1.07%. When an investment goes down by
ANY amount, it must go up a HIGHER percentage to break even. If a $100 investment
goes down 20%, you now have $80, right? It now needs to go up by 25% just to
break even ($20/$80 = 25%).

The point of this is that it’s not unusual to hear Wall Street guys talk about
the average growth rate of the market over a period of time. BEWARE of averages
used to describe the growth rate of securities when there is a chance of loss.
Those numbers are NOT accurate.

How does this apply to your retirement and IUL’s (indexed universal life policies)?
If you turn all of those red negative numbers above into zeros, then change
the growth numbers that are larger than 14.5% into a 14.5 and average the numbers,
you get the growth rate of an IUL with a cap of 14.5% and a guaranteed floor
of 0%. That growth rate was 8.56% during the same years that the S&P 500
was growing at 8.39%.

Keep in mind that all IUL’s are not the same. Just as your investments in the
market have costs and fees, part of the premium paid for an IUL also goes to
fees and the cost of insurance. Every company charges different amounts for
the cost of insurance and other fees, and many companies have caps that are
less than 14.5%. To get an IUL with the lowest costs from a strong carrier, your agent must work with the right insurance companies and he’s got to know how to design a policy that
maximizes growth of the cash value.

The only way to know how an IUL compares to other financial options is to speak
with a good agent and get a quote/illustration. If you’re in the state of California,
send me a note HERE.

Michael Goodman

Life Insurance Agent in Santa Clarita, CA