Q&A: Should your retirement savings plan include life insurance? Here are some pros and cons

Dear Liz: Are indexed universal life insurance products worthwhile, and how do they compare to a Roth IRA?

Answer: Both offer the potential for tax-free distributions in retirement, but indexed universal life insurance is a complex product with high expenses that’s not a good fit for most investors.

With a Roth IRA, virtually all of your money can go toward your retirement investment. (Most investments have fees of some kind, but you can minimize those by using exchange traded funds or low-cost index funds.) With permanent life insurance, some of your money goes toward paying premiums for the death benefit and other administrative expenses, including commissions for the person who sells you the policy. The remaining cash can be invested in accounts that are tied to the performance of a stock market index. Your principal is guaranteed, but the amount you earn is subject to caps.

Financial planners generally recommend that you first max out other retirement savings options, such as 401(k)s and IRAs, before considering investing through a life insurance policy. Also, you should be someone who needs permanent life insurance — the kind that is meant to cover you for the rest of your life. (Term insurance, by contrast, is a much less expensive option meant to cover you for a set term, such as 20 years.)

Some people do need permanent coverage. Their estates may be large enough to incur estate taxes that they want to pay with insurance, for example. Or they may have a special needs child who will require ongoing support. If you need permanent coverage, consider hiring a fee-only financial planner to help you sort through your options.

Q&A: Vehicle insurance coverage limits

Dear Liz: You recently answered a question from someone who lent a van to a friend for more than a year. You mentioned the borrower “may have benefited from free insurance coverage if you continued to pay those premiums.” Some insurance companies limit the time they extend coverage when a car is driven by someone other than the owner or immediate family. Our insurance has a four-month limit.

Answer: That’s a good point. Insurers often require that anyone who regularly uses a vehicle be added to the insurance policy as a driver. In addition, someone who borrows a vehicle and who is otherwise uninsured might want to consider getting a non-owner insurance policy. This wouldn’t cover damage to the vehicle but would provide liability coverage in case of an accident.

Q&A: Old uncashed insurance policies

Dear Liz: What advice can you provide to people when they stumble on old life insurance policies that may never have been cashed in?

Answer: My siblings and I have personal experience with this after coming across two policies in our late father’s papers. We learned one policy had indeed been cashed in, but the second — purchased in the 1930s, with a face value of $5,000 — was still in effect.

You typically can use a search engine to determine if the insurer is still in business or if it has changed its name or merged with another company. (Not surprisingly, the insurer that issued the 1930s policy had been involved in several mergers in the intervening decades, but it took just seconds for us to find the current incarnation.) If you’re having trouble tracking down the company, contact the insurance regulator in the state where the insurer was originally located.

Once you have the current insurer name and contact information, you can call and ask if the policy is still in force. If the policy has value, the insurer can instruct you how to make a claim.

Q&A: Social Security is insurance

Dear Liz: My wife died in March 2020. I receive nothing from her Social Security (other than $255) and will receive only a portion of mine due to the windfall elimination provision. Is there anything I can do since I am receiving none of what she paid into Social Security and only a fraction of mine?

Answer:
In a word, no. If you’re receiving a pension from a job that didn’t pay into Social Security, the government pension offset reduces any Social Security survivor or spousal benefit by two-thirds of the amount of your pension. If two-thirds of the amount of your pension is greater than your survivor benefit, you don’t get a survivor benefit.

Is that an outrage? Perhaps, if you think that Social Security should act like a retirement account. In reality, it’s insurance. (The formal name for Social Security is Old Age, Survivors and Disability Insurance.)

With a retirement account, what you take out usually bears some relationship to what you put in. With insurance, that’s not necessarily the case. You may take out more than you put in, less or nothing at all.

Many people pay Social Security taxes for decades but ultimately get more from a spousal or survivor benefit than from their own work record. Then there are those, like you, who have their retirement benefit reduced, or a survivor benefit eliminated, because they have a generous pension from a government job that didn’t pay into the Social Security system. In these cases, it can feel like the Social Security taxes paid — the “premiums,” if you will — have been wasted even if financially you’ve come out ahead.

Q&A: Long-term-care insurance

Dear Liz: I’d appreciate your thoughts about long-term-care insurance programs. Ours has just announced a 52% rate increase with a possible 25% increase next year. Although I realize that none of us can predict the future, are there any guidelines you can suggest for deciding whether, for example, an 80-year-old in good health needs the maximum 10-year coverage or can get by with a three-year coverage period?

Answer: Most people over 65 will need some kind of long-term care, but most need it for less than three years. You may want to err on the side of caution and opt for a longer coverage period if you have a family history of dementia.

Q&A: Getting sister’s house without a will

Dear Liz: When I retired in 2018, I rolled over my 403(b) teachers retirement account into a traditional IRA and made my sister sole beneficiary. I sent her a copy of that beneficiary statement showing her name, her percentage (100%), and my account number. My sister later told me in a phone call that she wished to bequeath me her house should she predecease me. She explained she didn’t have a will but she made her feelings known to our older brother. Even if I were on speaking terms with our older brother, I would find this arrangement naive. Knowing my sister, she actually believes this method is the right way to proceed with her wishes. I’m asking you to be Dear Abby, perhaps, but what do I do?

Answer: You can explain to her that if she doesn’t have a will, the laws of her state will determine who gets her house regardless of what she intended. If your sister does not have a spouse or children, and your parents are dead, you and your brother would probably inherit the home as well as the rest of her estate. You would have to negotiate what to do with the house, which could be difficult if you two still aren’t speaking.

If you can’t get her to write a will, there may be another option. Many states allow “transfer on death” deeds, which are forms that allow people to name a beneficiary for their home. This would ensure that the house is left to you and that it avoids probate, the court process that otherwise follows death.

Q&A: Rising insurance premiums

Dear Liz: I’m an insurance agent specializing in long-term-care policies and just read your advice to the woman who was upset about how much her premiums had risen. Her premiums were $2,400 annually starting when she was 55 but are $4,470 now that she’s 77. First, thank you for noting that these premium increases are because insurance companies didn’t expect people to live so long and nursing home rates to increase so much. Please also tell your reader that, at her age, her premium for the coverage she has now would be well over $12,000! She bought early and she’s definitely getting a ridiculously low premium for the coverage she has. I’m sorry that she’s on a fixed income, but ask her how she’ll pay for a $60,000-per-year stay in a nursing home. If she can’t afford her premium, she should reduce her amount of time covered, not the amount of dollars covered.

Answer: Let’s be clear about who’s at fault here. It’s not the people who bought long-term-care insurance policies and expected them to remain affordable.

Insurers are supposed to be experts at predicting risk, but they made incorrect assumptions about how many people would drop their policies (known as the lapse rate), how many would file claims and how long those claims would last. Insurers also overestimated the returns they could get on their bond investments, which also help determine premiums.

All these stumbles have led to repeated premium increases that have threatened to make coverage unaffordable right when people need their coverage the most.

This woman is well aware of the high costs of long-term care; that’s why she bought the policy in the first place and kept paying it all these years. Her premium might seem “ridiculously low” to you, but anyone with an ounce of empathy could understand that $4,470 is a huge chunk of change for most seniors.

Keeping her coverage means giving up some of the benefits she was promised and had been counting on. Reducing the number of years the policy protects her, for example, could make her premium more affordable but leave her exposed to devastating costs if she needs many years of care.

This is a crappy situation for people who were trying to do the right thing. They don’t deserve to be sneered at for being upset about it.

Q&A: High earners need to watch out for Medicare surcharge

Dear Liz: When I retired at age 70, I anticipated receiving the maximum available Social Security benefit payment because I had paid in the maximum tax for my entire career. I did not anticipate the heavy hit my spouse and I would take in monthly income-adjusted Medicare “premiums.” (I say “tax” is a more appropriate description.) We now pay over $500 per month each, or more than $12,000 per year! I know I am blessed to have the income I have in retirement, but that is because we were thrifty and worked hard and saved.

Answer: Many high-income retirees are unaware of “IRMAA,” or Medicare’s income-related monthly adjustment amounts, so they can come as a bit of a shock. These adjustments begin when modified adjusted gross income exceeds $85,000 for singles or $170,000 for couples. At that level, Medicare recipients pay an additional $53.50 for Part B, which covers doctor’s visits, and $13.30 extra for Part D prescription drug coverage, on top of their regular premiums. (Regular premiums for Part B are $134 a month, while premiums for Part D vary by the plan chosen.) The adjustments increase as income rises until they max out at $294.60 for Part B and $74.80 for Part D when modified adjusted gross income exceeds $160,000 for singles or $320,000 for couples.

Medicare Part A, which covers hospital visits, remains free for all Medicare beneficiaries.

That $12,000 a year may feel like a lot, but healthcare is expensive in the U.S. Annual premiums for employer-sponsored family health coverage reached $18,764 last year.

Q&A: How to find out if a car has flood damage

Dear Liz: You’ve been writing recently about how to find a good, cheap used car. Can you write about how to research whether a car has been damaged in a flood?

Answer: Carfax, which provides vehicle history reports, offers a free flood check in the “resources” section of the site’s press center.

Flood-damaged cars that have been totaled by insurance companies are typically sent to auto recyclers for dismantling but some wind up back on the market. These cars are supposed to have salvage titles that make clear their dubious histories, but it’s relatively easy for unscrupulous sellers to register the car in a different, more lenient state that obscures its past. This is known as “title washing.”

Carfax’s service can help you spot the damaged cars, as can your own senses. A car that smells like mold or strong cleaning solution (to cover up the mold) is a bad sign. Carpeting or upholstery that’s obviously newer than the car can indicate it’s been replaced after flood damage. Look in the glove box and under the seats for mud or silt. A sagging headliner on a newer car is another red flag.

A good mechanic can help you spot problems if you’re not sure. If the seller won’t let you take the car to your own mechanic for inspection, don’t buy it.

Q&A: The woes of this car-less worker can’t be fixed with junkers or leasing schemes

Dear Liz: My spouse and I are in Chapter 13 repayment bankruptcy and have a few more years to go. We’re obviously on a tight budget.

My spouse has the reliable car, but I’ve already paid $1,500 cash each for two junkers and it’s caused major stress. I know we can petition the court and be allowed to get financing, but we do not want to and can’t afford to on our budget.

I am, however, up for an evaluation and raise soon at the small, private company where I work.

I am thinking of asking that instead of a raise, they lease a vehicle for me. I do travel sometimes for business so it could be legitimized in that sense. If they leased a vehicle for, say, $200 a month, that would be close to the raise I’m expecting.

The real question is how to handle insurance and liability. Is it possible for my company to lease a vehicle but have the insurance liability fall on me, meaning would I be able to insure it under my own policy though the lease would be through the company?

Answer: Probably not.

A personal auto policy might not even cover your own car if it were used primarily for business. Personal policies typically wouldn’t cover a car owned or leased by your employer.

Also, businesses usually need more liability coverage than most individuals carry, since companies can be bigger lawsuit targets. You can ask for a leased car in lieu of a raise, but expect the cost of the insurance to be part of the calculation and be prepared for the company to decline.

It’s unfortunate you bought two junkers in a row, because the amount you ultimately spent could have bought you one decent car.

Car comparison site Edmunds has advice for finding reliable vehicles for $2,500, which it says is a reasonable budget for buying a solid car.

The vehicles are likely to be 10 to 15 years old and may have over 150,000 miles on the odometer, but if they’ve been well-maintained they can be reliable rides for several more years.

You’re likely to get the best deal via a private party sale, and you’ll want a good mechanic to check out any car before you buy. Your mechanic may even have a lead or two on cars that could be good candidates.

Your raise may allow you to revisit the idea of financing a car, albeit at a high interest rate.

As you know, you won’t be able to buy anything extravagant, and the purchase will have to be approved by both your trustee and the court. If the car is a necessity for you to get to work and you’ve been in your repayment plan at least two years, you have a good chance of being allowed to finance it.

If the car is not a necessity, you may have other options.

If you live in a city, a transit pass may get you to most of the places you need to go and you can rent a car or use a ride-sharing service when you need more custom transportation. Many people have discovered that cars are a costly hassle, and they live just fine without them.