One that's not written with more holes than swiss cheese. For example; cancer; there are a lot of exclusions where the client can get cancer and not receive a dime or receive less than the max benefits.
Question: have you read the actual CI policies you sell, or just the brochures?
------------------------------------ Health Insurance Agents: Training, Support, Discounts, E&O for $440 www.ihiaa.com
Life insurance, no. Pretty hard for a carrier to deny a life claim (assuming you don't have a fraudulent app).
You seem to be reluctant to reveal the CI policy you use. Perhaps it is because it is not as strong as you indicate. The ones I have seen, mostly used in worksite, have very little chance of paying off. Once you read the qualifications for getting your claim paid the possibility of seeing dollars from the carrier are slim.
Also, most of the CI plans are riders to life policies, or else, they are variations of life policies. That means the benefits are taxable.
So you pay out $50k but then Uncle Sam hits them with a $15k tax bill.
I use AIG and MOO, they are health based products. I do have life based products and use them because their underwriting is a little easier. Not fluff products and not worksite. Standalone. I guess if I hadn't known people that had greatly benefited from them I might be closed-minded as well.
And I did have a client where the doctor told him he "might" have had a stroke that tried to collect and they didn't pay the claim. He understood why they didn't pay but I guess that could be judged as the insurance company being difficult???
Let me see if it's taxable and I get a check for $50,000 and have to give the government $15,000 I'm going to say no thanks I don't want it because it's taxed.
I agree about worksite benefits. Expensive and they don't pay crap.
Originally Posted by somarco
DI riders?
Fluff.
Life insurance, no. Pretty hard for a carrier to deny a life claim (assuming you don't have a fraudulent app).
You seem to be reluctant to reveal the CI policy you use. Perhaps it is because it is not as strong as you indicate. The ones I have seen, mostly used in worksite, have very little chance of paying off. Once you read the qualifications for getting your claim paid the possibility of seeing dollars from the carrier are slim.
Also, most of the CI plans are riders to life policies, or else, they are variations of life policies. That means the benefits are taxable.
So you pay out $50k but then Uncle Sam hits them with a $15k tax bill.
I work with two Certified Financial Planners that totally disagree with an HSA not being part of a financial plan for retirement.
Mutual Fund investing is available with some HSA accounts.
Quote=healthagent;56910]I don't follow. Under your method return is the entire point. Your system collapses if the return is say 2.9% (probably the average HSA return - or less) since it doesn't keep pace with inflation and their net return is zero.
I like it better when they were Nationwide Farm Bureau personally have the insurance will be switching to Blue Cross Lumenos Plan shortly.
I like the plan design just nightmare dealing with Health Net. Feel Bad for Farm Bureau it is great plan design just the underwriting has changed and have nothing but bad luck with them.
Which is my advice - if you have more money in your HSA then your OOP you're crazy.
That makes no sense to me. If I have a serious illness and I pay my $3000 deductible with my HSA money and it empties out the account, then I have to start over from zero next year.
I don't when I'm going to need it and how much I'm going to need. It doesn't hurt to put as much money as possible in an HSA. After 65 you just pay taxes on withdrawls.
There really is no downside risk to keeping money in an HSA.
I have clients that plan on max funding their HSA every year. Seems to me to be smart financial planning in some scenarios and as there become more HSA trustees investment options will expand. Saving for post 65 medical costs in a tax advantaged manner makes a lot of sense.
I think we all know that there are many other vehicles for tax deferred savings. BUT, which one of those will allow me to pull my money out at any given time with no penalties? It is just a small piece in one's strategy - I am perfectly healthy now, lat year my health care costs (covered by insurance) were just under $100. But I get accupunture, massage and the occasional over the counter stuff. Instead of using my HSA funds for that and putting my cash in my checking account or emergency fund I let it sit in the HSA where it can be earning a decent return in mutual funds. Then, when I need it, I can write myself a check. Wheather I need it next year to pay for a vacation or to put it into another retirement account - the point is by letting it sit there I am forcing myself to save which can aid me in maxing out the other options available. Since, most of you to be far more knowledgeable than I took for granted that you would read that into my statement.
Last edited by schealthagent : 03-14-2008 at 03:31 PM.
Reason: incomplete
Roth - pull out contributions at any time without penalty. Does nothing to reduce current tax liability.
HSA - pull out funds at any time without penalty if used for qualified medical & long term care expenses (including LTCi premiums). HSA deposits reduce current tax liability.
Fidelity Investments calculates a retiree will need $225k to fund post 65 medical expenses. The HSA gives them current tax benefits + funds accessible for future medical needs.
The HSA is not a substitute for 401(k), Roth or other retirement savings vehicles but it is superior to either of those for funding current & future medical needs.
To each his own. That's what I love about this business. We all have different opinions and can do things our own way. That's why I went independent because I had greedy managers telling me which products to sell. Made me very leary.
I agree with your concept of an HSA with CI and and an Accident policy. It would appear to cover most of the possible exposure. BTW, I have an ex-girfriend named O'Leary; I should have been leeryof her!