Skip to main content

  • Home
  • Who We Are 
    • Our Team
    • Our Philosophy
    • Our Process
  • Our Services 
    • Retirement Planning
  • Podcasts
  • Blog
  • Contact

    You are here

  1. Home
  2. Blogs
  3. Tax-free Retirement - Part 3 - Utilizing a Life Insurance Retirement Plan (LIRP) As Part of a Tax-free Retirement

Tax-free Retirement - Part 3 - Utilizing a Life Insurance Retirement Plan (LIRP) As Part of a Tax-free Retirement

Submitted by Axios Capital Strategies on January 10th, 2021
  • Share on Facebook
  • Facebook Like
  • Linkedin Share Button

In Part 1, we discussed the different types of LIRPs and their basic setup. In Part 2, we discussed some typical engines (crediting strategies) within many LIRPs and how they might interact with market indexes. Here in Part 3, let’s discuss some common enhancements that many LIRPs offer that can make an even greater positive difference in your financial well-being.

I have to admit, these section is going to appeal more to the engineers out there, so you might want to have some eye drops handy for the plethora of upcoming tables. But, no one will be able to say I didn't put forth math in the to support nice sounding financial platitudes. 

Enhancements

Beyond the basic engines discussed in Part 2, many well respected LIRP companies often give enhancements above and beyond the basic crediting strategy. Sometimes these enhancements are built into a LIRP’s contract, sometimes they aren’t. This is why choosing a highly rated, highly respected LIRP company is important. A “multiplier” or a “performance factor” has become a fairly common enhancement, along with a “persistency bonus.” For example, a 10% multiplier above the base strategy return beginning in year 1 and a .75% persistency bonus starting in year 11 is a popular combination.

So, if you have a cap of 12% and the market did 10% in year 1, you get that plus 10%, which is an additional 1 percentage point, for a total of 11% that year. What if the market did 13%, one percent above the cap? You would get 12% plus 10% of that return, being an additional 1.2% for a total of 13.2%. Starting in year 11, a persistency bonus of .75% would be tacked on top of everything, making a 13% market return 13.95% (12% cap, plus 10% (1.2%) plus .75%). If the market were negative in year 11, instead of getting 0% (the floor), you would get .75% (the persistency bonus). Let’s take the cap rate focus strategy discussed in part 2 and do a simplified hypothetical illustration:

  • 12% Cap
  • 100% Participation
  • 0% Floor
  • Annual Reset & Lock In
  • 10% Multiplier Starting in Year 1
  • .75% Persistency Bonus Starting in Year 11

Year

Index Return

S&P 500 Return

$100,000

LIRP--12% Cap, 10% Multiplier, .75% Persistency Bonus Year 11+

$100,000

1

9%

9%

$109,000

9.90%

$109,900

2

-30%

-30%

$76,300

0.00%

$109,900

3

15%

15%

$87,745

13.20%

$124,407

4

11%

11%

$97,397

12.10%

$139,460

5

7%

7%

$104,215

7.70%

$150,198

6

-17%

-17%

$86,498

0.00%

$150,198

7

13%

13%

$97,743

13.20%

$170,025

8

6%

6%

$103,608

6.60%

$181,246

9

19%

19%

$123,293

13.20%

$205,171

10

-9%

-9%

$112,197

0.00%

$205,171

11

5%

5%

$117,806

6.25%

$217,994

12

10%

10%

$129,587

11.75%

$243,608

13

15%

15%

$149,025

13.95%

$277,592

14

2%

2%

$152,006

2.95%

$285,781

15

8%

8%

$164,166

9.55%

$313,073

 

As you can see, the upward ceiling of this strategy, stating in year 11, becomes 13.95% instead of 12%. That truly “enhances” the value over time.

One of my favorite enhancements is a “performance factor,” which is somewhat similar to a multiplier. Typically, a performance factor might start in year 3-5, and be a variable factor that is declared by the insurance company year by year (similar to declaring a dividend). On the conservative side, we’ll illustrate a performance factor of 1.5X starting in year 3. For the record, the least we’ve seen a performance factor is 1.9X and often in the 3-5X range. Let’s use the spread focus strategy discussed in part 2 to illustrate the performance factor enhancement—but remember that these “enhancements” are added on to whatever strategy you are using inside your LIRP.

  • No Cap
  • 5% Spread
  • 100% Par Rate
  • 0% Floor
  • Annual Reset & Lock In
  • Performance Factor 1.5X Starting in Year 3

So, take the positive market return, subtract 5%, lock in and reset. Starting in year 3, do the same but then multiply the return by 1.5. That’s it.

 

Year

Index Return

S&P 500 Return

$100,000

LIRP--5% Spread, 1.5X Performance Factor Year 3+

$100,000

1

12%

12%

$112,000

7.00%

$107,000

2

8%

8%

$120,960

3.00%

$110,210

3

26%

26%

$152,410

31.50%

$144,926

4

15%

15%

$175,271

15.00%

$166,665

5

4%

4%

$182,282

0.00%

$166,665

6

-38%

-38%

$113,015

0.00%

$166,665

7

23%

23%

$139,008

27.00%

$211,665

8

9%

9%

$151,519

6.00%

$224,365

9

36%

36%

$206,066

46.50%

$328,694

10

-9%

-9%

$187,520

0.00%

$328,694

11

5%

5%

$196,896

0.00%

$328,694

12

17%

17%

$230,368

18.00%

$387,859

13

28%

28%

$294,871

34.50%

$521,670

14

2%

2%

$300,769

0.00%

$521,670

15

13%

13%

$339,868

12.00%

$584,271

 

   With the performance factor at 1.5X, this enhancement has significant potential. Again, the lowest we’ve seen the PF is about 2.4X, but we don’t mind     being conservative in our examples.

Just as there are more "engines" than we described in part 2, there are various other "enhancements" available other than these two, but you get the idea. For the sake of brevity, we‘re not going to do an enhanced example of the uncapped, 110% par rate with 5-year lock in strategy. We think you get how it works by now.

In this and every example, the good folks over in compliance require us to tell you that fees would affect both the index fund and LIRP values. These examples are to help you get the concept of how typical strategies within a LIRP might operate. Past performance is never a guarantee or indicative of future results. I mean, no kidding, but we still have to say it.

Strategic Tax-free Allocation

Taking the first three strategies we‘ve discussed, let’s now create a strategic tax-free allocation within your LIRP by dividing a hypothetical $100,000 value into equal parts. We’ll also use historical S&P 500 raw returns since 1976 through 2019. Hopefully no one can fault us for using a 44-year historical return period, though your eyes might start burning. Why since 1976? ‘Cuz.

We’ll also use the performance factor enhancement of 1.5X starting in year 3.

 

Cap Focus

Participation Rate Focus

Spread Focus

•   12% Cap

•  10% Cap

•   5% Spread (No Cap)

•   100% Par Rate

•  140% Par Rate

•   100% Par Rate

•  0% Floor

•  0% Floor

•   0% Floor

•   Annual Reset & Lock In

•  Annual Reset & Lock In

•   Annual Reset & Lock In

1.5X Performance Factor Starting in Year 3

 

 

     

LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation

 

S&P 500 Raw Return

Cap Focus Strategy

Participation Rate Focus Strategy

Spread Focus Strategy

 

Year

Rate of Return

$100,000

12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+

$33,333

140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,000

5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,334

Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average

1976

19.15%

$119,150

12.00%

$37,333

10.00%

$36,300

14.15%

$38,051

12.07%

1977

-11.50%

$105,448

0.00%

$37,333

0.00%

$36,300

0.00%

$38,051

0.00%

1978

1.06%

$106,566

1.59%

$37,927

2.23%

$37,108

0.00%

$38,051

1.26%

1979

12.31%

$119,684

18.00%

$44,753

15.00%

$42,674

10.97%

$42,223

14.62%

1980

25.77%

$150,526

18.00%

$52,809

15.00%

$49,075

31.16%

$55,378

21.48%

1981

-9.73%

$135,880

0.00%

$52,809

0.00%

$49,075

0.00%

$55,378

0.00%

1982

14.77%

$155,949

18.00%

$62,315

15.00%

$56,437

14.66%

$63,493

15.87%

1983

17.26%

$182,866

18.00%

$73,531

15.00%

$64,902

18.39%

$75,170

17.14%

1984

1.38%

$185,390

2.07%

$75,053

2.90%

$66,783

0.00%

$75,170

1.64%

1985

26.36%

$234,259

18.00%

$88,563

15.00%

$76,801

32.04%

$99,254

21.78%

1986

14.62%

$268,507

18.00%

$104,504

15.00%

$88,321

14.43%

$113,576

15.80%

1987

2.04%

$273,985

3.06%

$107,702

4.28%

$92,104

0.00%

$113,576

2.42%

1988

12.39%

$307,932

18.00%

$127,088

15.00%

$105,920

11.09%

$126,166

14.66%

1989

27.25%

$391,843

18.00%

$149,964

15.00%

$121,808

33.38%

$168,274

22.24%

1990

-6.56%

$366,138

0.00%

$149,964

0.00%

$121,808

0.00%

$168,274

0.00%

1991

26.30%

$462,432

18.00%

$176,958

15.00%

$140,079

31.95%

$222,038

21.75%

1992

4.48%

$483,149

6.72%

$188,849

9.41%

$153,258

0.00%

$222,038

5.32%

1993

7.07%

$517,308

10.61%

$208,877

14.85%

$176,012

3.11%

$228,932

9.45%

1994

-1.56%

$509,238

0.00%

$208,877

0.00%

$176,012

0.00%

$228,932

0.00%

1995

34.13%

$683,041

18.00%

$246,475

15.00%

$202,414

43.70%

$328,964

25.75%

1996

20.26%

$821,425

18.00%

$290,840

15.00%

$232,776

22.89%

$404,264

18.67%

1997

31.01%

$1,076,149

18.00%

$343,191

15.00%

$267,692

39.02%

$561,987

24.16%

1998

26.67%

$1,363,158

18.00%

$404,966

15.00%

$307,846

32.51%

$744,661

21.94%

1999

19.53%

$1,629,383

18.00%

$477,860

15.00%

$354,023

21.80%

$906,960

18.30%

2000

-10.14%

$1,464,163

0.00%

$477,860

0.00%

$354,023

0.00%

$906,960

0.00%

2001

-13.04%

$1,273,236

0.00%

$477,860

0.00%

$354,023

0.00%

$906,960

0.00%

2002

-23.37%

$975,681

0.00%

$477,860

0.00%

$354,023

0.00%

$906,960

0.00%

2003

26.38%

$1,233,066

18.00%

$563,874

15.00%

$407,126

32.07%

$1,197,822

21.79%

2004

8.99%

$1,343,918

13.49%

$639,913

15.00%

$468,195

5.99%

$1,269,512

11.43%

2005

3%

$1,384,236

4.50%

$668,709

6.30%

$497,691

0.00%

$1,269,512

3.56%

2006

13.60%

$1,572,492

18.00%

$789,076

15.00%

$572,345

12.90%

$1,433,279

15.28%

2007

3.52%

$1,627,843

5.28%

$830,740

7.39%

$614,653

0.00%

$1,433,279

4.18%

2008

-38.49%

$1,001,287

0.00%

$830,740

0.00%

$614,653

0.00%

$1,433,279

0.00%

2009

23.65%

$1,238,091

18.00%

$980,273

15.00%

$706,851

27.98%

$1,834,239

20.40%

2010

12.63%

$1,394,462

18.00%

$1,156,722

15.00%

$812,878

11.45%

$2,044,167

14.78%

2011

0.10%

$1,395,856

0.15%

$1,158,457

0.21%

$814,585

0.00%

$2,044,167

0.12%

2012

13.29%

$1,581,365

18.00%

$1,366,979

15.00%

$936,773

12.44%

$2,298,360

15.12%

2013

29.43%

$2,046,761

18.00%

$1,613,036

15.00%

$1,077,289

36.65%

$3,140,594

23.35%

2014

11.54%

$2,282,957

17.31%

$1,892,252

15.00%

$1,238,882

9.81%

$3,448,686

14.00%

2015

-0.73%

$2,266,292

0.00%

$1,892,252

0.00%

$1,238,882

0.00%

$3,448,686

0.00%

2016

9.54%

$2,482,496

14.31%

$2,163,033

15.00%

$1,424,715

6.81%

$3,683,541

11.99%

2017

19.42%

$2,964,597

18.00%

$2,552,379

15.00%

$1,638,422

21.63%

$4,480,291

18.24%

2018

-6.24%

$2,779,606

0.00%

$2,552,379

0.00%

$1,638,422

0.00%

$4,480,291

0.00%

2019

28.26%

$3,565,123

18.00%

$3,011,808

15.00%

$1,884,185

34.89%

$6,043,465

22.75%

Average

9.68%

 

11.07%

 

9.83%

 

13.36%

 

11.44%

Actual Return

8.46%

 

10.78%

 

9.63%

 

12.55%

 

11.00%

   

LIRP Weighted Average

11.44%

       
 

LIRP Weighted Actual Return

11.00%

       
 

LIRP Combined Allocation Value

$10,939,458

     

 

 

 
    Allow us to draw a few conclusions from the above. First, using strategic allocations of the various tax-free crediting strategies within your LIRP can    be highly beneficial. Throughout time, any one of these three engines may have performed in a superior manner to the other 2 depending on the market conditions of that year. This can help to smooth out volatility and potentially make for a more predictable return. Also, the stock market does have years in which it beats any one of the index crediting strategies and/or the combined weighted average of them. So? The goal is safe and productive returns. Take a look at the end result. Getting all huffy about that is like pointing out that the losing baseball team scored more runs in one particular inning than your team even though you won the game by 15 runs. Are we really going to poo-poo things over one inning when we won the game?

 

From a pure average return perspective, the spread focus strategy seems to have produced the highest average rate of return in this example. So, why not put everything in that one allocation? Because history is not indicative of future performance or experience. Don’t forget that often-touted-but-true disclosure.

Take a look at 1992:

 

     

LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation

 

S&P 500 Raw Return

Cap Focus Strategy

Participation Rate Focus Strategy

Spread Focus Strategy

 

Year

Rate of Return

$100,000

12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+

$33,333

140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,000

5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,334

Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average

1992

4.48%

$483,149

6.72%

$188,849

9.41%

$153,258

0.00%

$222,038

5.32%

 

In this single year, the spread focus strategy produced nothing despite a positive return in the market (+4.48%). The cap focus strategy did well, especially with the performance factor enhancement, but the high participation rate focus strategy, the one with the lowest cap and lowest overall average historically, did exceptionally well, more than doubling the gross return of the market.

Let’s look at 1982:

 

     

LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation

 

S&P 500 Raw Return

Cap Focus Strategy

Participation Rate Focus Strategy

Spread Focus Strategy

 

Year

Rate of Return

$100,000

12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+

$33,333

140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,000

5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,334

Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average

1982

14.77%

$155,949

18.00%

$62,315

15.00%

$56,437

14.66%

$63,493

15.87%

 

 

Here, while all strategies did well, the cap focus strategy would have won, producing an 18% compared to the high par and spread strategies at 15% and 14.66% respectively.

The roaring 90s are quite revealing as far as the potential higher-end returning power of the spread focus strategy:

 

     

LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation

 

S&P 500 Raw Return

Cap Focus Strategy

Participation Rate Focus Strategy

Spread Focus Strategy

 

Year

Rate of Return

$100,000

12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+

$33,333

140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,000

5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+

$33,334

Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average

1995

34.13%

$683,041

18.00%

$246,475

15.00%

$202,414

43.70%

$328,964

25.75%

1996

20.26%

$821,425

18.00%

$290,840

15.00%

$232,776

22.89%

$404,264

18.67%

1997

31.01%

$1,076,149

18.00%

$343,191

15.00%

$267,692

39.02%

$561,987

24.16%

1998

26.67%

$1,363,158

18.00%

$404,966

15.00%

$307,846

32.51%

$744,661

21.94%

1999

19.53%

$1,629,383

18.00%

$477,860

15.00%

$354,023

21.80%

$906,960

18.30%

 

Here, where the first two crediting strategies "cap out," hitting their upward thresholds along with all enhancements, but the spread strategy has no cap. Along with the 1.5X performance factor, this strategy outshines everything else when the stock market is killing it.

This brings us to a very important point. The stock market goes through times of irrationally, inflated, super-high returns, such as the late 90s. These are bubbles, and when they pop, the value of many people’s accounts deflate—suddenly, without mercy. This is one thing those who are invested directly in the market constantly live with: the fear of the "bubble" bursting. While we want the upward swing of such an inflated, irrational market, we often bite our nails down to the nub worrying when (not if) we will see a massive decline. If you want the techno-babble, it’s called "mean reversion" or a "correction." Doesn‘t that sounds much nicer than “crash”? Yeah well the pain is just the same no matter what the talking heads call it.

Here’s the point: with certain strategies inside of a LIRP, you can allow yourself to potentially benefit from those crazy, insane, gravity-defying returns, capturing and locking them in annually, without having to worry about the bubble bursting and your account deflating like a balloon at your four-year-old‘s birthday party. Annual Lock in and the floor. We’ll take ourselves a piece of that birthday cake, thanks very much.

This is not an official insurance illustration. It is a simplified example to demonstrate how the crediting strategies/engines within a LIRP can potentially create respectable returns over time. No, it’s not this good on an actual illustration because there are fees that apply to both the index fund and the LIRP, and the actual illustration is going to be forward looking, not using historical market data like we did here to portray the principle. Therefore, the numbers you will see on an official illustration will be more conservative (which we applaud). You will also have different starting points with your money, typically in multiple monthly or annual contributions, rather than a single, one-time deposit as is illustrated here. That would change things, obviously. Further, you’ve likely read in our other posts about accumulation of retirement asset not being the bottom line of judging financial vehicles, but rather the projected net-spendable income. That is the bottom line in any retirement strategy. Rate of return and nest-egg size are helpful. But you will often find that a LIRP may not have the highest accumulation value or rate of return compared to other more traditional retirement vehicles. Shrug. Look at the projected net-spendable income. LIRPs are designed to maximize your retirement income over your lifetime, whereas pre-tax, tax-deferred vehicles such as 401Ks and lRAs are designed to maximize your taxes over your lifetime.

Hopefully this has helped you get the concept of how the various crediting strategies/engines within a LIRP might operate and potentially provide safe yet productive returns.

Oh what the heck, let’s do a couple more scenarios using different starting points for the engineers out there. If you get it, go ahead and skip to Part 4. If your juices get flowing by more tables and data, here you go.

Let’s start with a side-by-side since the turn of the century:

      LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation  
S&P 500 Raw Return Cap Focus Strategy Participation Rate Focus Strategy Spread Focus Strategy Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average
Year Rate of Return $100,000 12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+ $33,333 140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,000 5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,334
2000 -10.14% $89,860 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2001 -13.04% $78,142 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2002 -23.37% $59,880 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2003 26.38% $75,677 18.00% $39,333 15.00% $37,950 32.07% $44,024 21.79%
2004 8.99% $82,480 13.49% $44,637 15.00% $43,643 5.99% $46,659 11.43%
2005 3% $84,955 4.50% $46,646 6.30% $46,392 0.00% $46,659 3.56%
2006 13.60% $96,508 18.00% $55,042 15.00% $53,351 12.90% $52,678 15.28%
2007 3.52% $99,906 5.28% $57,948 7.39% $57,294 0.00% $52,678 4.18%
2008 -38.49% $61,452 0.00% $57,948 0.00% $57,294 0.00% $52,678 0.00%
2009 23.65% $75,985 18.00% $68,379 15.00% $65,889 27.98% $67,415 20.40%
2010 12.63% $85,582 18.00% $80,687 15.00% $75,772 11.45% $75,130 14.78%
2011 0.10% $85,668 0.15% $80,808 0.21% $75,931 0.00% $75,130 0.12%
2012 13.29% $97,053 18.00% $95,353 15.00% $87,321 12.44% $84,473 15.12%
2013 29.43% $125,616 18.00% $112,517 15.00% $100,419 36.65% $115,428 23.35%
2014 11.54% $140,112 17.31% $131,994 15.00% $115,482 9.81% $126,751 14.00%
2015 -0.73% $139,089 0.00% $131,994 0.00% $115,482 0.00% $126,751 0.00%
2016 9.54% $152,358 14.31% $150,882 15.00% $132,804 6.81% $135,383 11.99%
2017 19.42% $181,946 18.00% $178,041 15.00% $152,724 21.63% $164,667 18.24%
2018 -6.24% $170,593 0.00% $178,041 0.00% $152,724 0.00% $164,667 0.00%
2019 28.26% $218,802 18.00% $210,088 15.00% $175,633 34.89% $222,119 22.75%
Average 5.57%   9.95%   8.95%   10.63%   9.85%
Actual Return 3.99%   9.64%   8.72%   9.95%   9.44%
    LIRP Weighted Average 9.85%          
  LIRP Weighted Actual Return 9.44%          
  LIRP Combined Allocation Value $607,839.91          

Well, compared the the market's 5.57% return (which doesn't take into account taxes), the LIRPs weighted average between all 3 strategies of 9.85% looks pretty darn attractive. Further, the S&P 500's actual return is a paltry 3.99% compared to the LIRP's respectable 9.44% tax-free return. For a discussion on average vs actual returns, please see our blog post, "How Wall Street Lies To You (Legally)". In a 30% combined federal and state tax-bracket, you would have to earn a 14.07% average return to equal the LIRP tax-free average. 

For those who are screaming that this isn’t a fair comparison because we start off with three negative years in the market (only happened twice in our economy’s history) that don’t affect the LIRP negatively because of its floor (sorry, not sorry), let’s go to the other extreme and start with 1995, the best years of the market.

S&P 500 Raw Return Cap Focus Strategy Participation Rate Focus Strategy Spread Focus Strategy Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average
Year Rate of Return $100,000 12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+ $33,333 140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,000 5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,334
1995 34.13% $134,130 12.00% $37,333 10.00% $36,300 29.13% $43,044 17.16%
1996 20.26% $161,305 12.00% $41,813 10.00% $39,930 15.26% $49,613 12.45%
1997 31.01% $211,325 18.00% $49,339 15.00% $45,920 39.02% $68,969 24.16%
1998 26.67% $267,686 18.00% $58,220 15.00% $52,807 32.51% $91,388 21.94%
1999 19.53% $319,965 18.00% $68,700 15.00% $60,729 21.80% $111,305 18.30%
2000 -10.14% $287,520 0.00% $68,700 0.00% $60,729 0.00% $111,305 0.00%
2001 -13.04% $250,028 0.00% $68,700 0.00% $60,729 0.00% $111,305 0.00%
2002 -23.37% $191,596 0.00% $68,700 0.00% $60,729 0.00% $111,305 0.00%
2003 26.38% $242,139 18.00% $81,066 15.00% $69,838 32.07% $147,001 21.79%
2004 8.99% $263,908 13.49% $91,998 15.00% $80,313 5.99% $155,799 11.43%
2005 3% $271,825 4.50% $96,138 6.30% $85,373 0.00% $155,799 3.56%
2006 13.60% $308,793 18.00% $113,442 15.00% $98,179 12.90% $175,897 15.28%
2007 3.52% $319,663 5.28% $119,432 7.39% $105,437 0.00% $175,897 4.18%
2008 -38.49% $196,624 0.00% $119,432 0.00% $105,437 0.00% $175,897 0.00%
2009 23.65% $243,126 18.00% $140,930 15.00% $121,252 27.98% $225,105 20.40%
2010 12.63% $273,833 18.00% $166,297 15.00% $139,440 11.45% $250,868 14.78%
2011 0.10% $274,107 0.15% $166,547 0.21% $139,733 0.00% $250,868 0.12%
2012 13.29% $310,536 18.00% $196,525 15.00% $160,693 12.44% $282,063 15.12%
2013 29.43% $401,926 18.00% $231,900 15.00% $184,797 36.65% $385,425 23.35%
2014 11.54% $448,309 17.31% $272,041 15.00% $212,516 9.81% $423,235 14.00%
2015 -0.73% $445,036 0.00% $272,041 0.00% $212,516 0.00% $423,235 0.00%
2016 9.54% $487,492 14.31% $310,971 15.00% $244,394 6.81% $452,058 11.99%
2017 19.42% $582,163 18.00% $366,945 15.00% $281,053 21.63% $549,838 18.24%
2018 -6.24% $545,836 0.00% $366,945 0.00% $281,053 0.00% $549,838 0.00%
2019 28.26% $700,090 18.00% $432,995 15.00% $323,210 34.89% $741,676 22.75%
Average 9.72%   11.08%   9.76%   14.01%   11.64%
Actual Return 8.10%   10.80%   9.56%   13.21%   11.21%
    LIRP Weighted Average 11.64%          
  LIRP Weighted Actual Return 11.21%          
  LIRP Combined Allocation Value $1,497,882.15          

Notice anything? Well, I’m sure several things, but every single LIRP crediting strategy/engine outperformed, from a gross rate of return average perspective, the index. All with no negative years due to market losses. How‘s that for a Pepcid AC? And now comes the disclosure, once again: past performance is not indicative or a guarantee of future results or future experience. These are results considered hypothetical, as is all back-testing. These examples are to illustrate a concept. Fees are not assumed in either the S&P 500's or the LIRP's return, which would lower them both. Taxes would significantly reduce the values of the S&P 500's hypothetical illustrated values. Get it? Sigh, moving on . . .

In the financial world, 2000-2009 is often referred to as the "lost decade." We had the dot com bubble blow up as well as 2008 all within a 10-year span. Brutal for most people. Here’s how that would have worked out with our hypothetical strategic tax-free allocation inside the LIRP:

      LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation  
S&P 500 Raw Return Cap Focus Strategy Participation Rate Focus Strategy Spread Focus Strategy Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average
Year Rate of Return $100,000 12% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+ $33,333 140% Par,
10% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,000 5% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,334
2000 -10.14% $89,860 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2001 -13.04% $78,142 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2002 -23.37% $59,880 0.00% $33,333 0.00% $33,000 0.00% $33,334 0.00%
2003 26.38% $75,677 18.00% $39,333 15.00% $37,950 32.07% $44,024 21.79%
2004 8.99% $82,480 13.49% $44,637 15.00% $43,643 5.99% $46,659 11.43%
2005 3% $84,955 4.50% $46,646 6.30% $46,392 0.00% $46,659 3.56%
2006 13.60% $96,508 18.00% $55,042 15.00% $53,351 12.90% $52,678 15.28%
2007 3.52% $99,906 5.28% $57,948 7.39% $57,294 0.00% $52,678 4.18%
2008 -38.49% $61,452 0.00% $57,948 0.00% $57,294 0.00% $52,678 0.00%
2009 23.65% $75,985 18.00% $68,379 15.00% $65,889 27.98% $67,415 20.40%
Average -0.59%   7.73%   7.37%   7.89%   7.67%
Actual Return -2.71%   7.45%   7.16%   7.30%   7.30%
    LIRP Weighted Average 7.67%          
  LIRP Weighted Actual Return 7.30%          
  LIRP Combined Allocation Value $201,682.14          

 

To us, this illustrates the absolute power of annual reset, annual lock in, and the 0% floor. The raw return of the S&P 500 over this ten year period was -0.59% per year. Starting with $100,000 on January 1, 2000, following the vaunted buy, hold, and pray philosophy (ya know, being "disciplined" and all) you would have had $75,985 at the end of 2009, not counting any fees, applicable taxes, and dividends.

During this same decade, the LIRP strategies all produced a gross return of over 7% per year, tax-free, basing their return upon the S&P 500 index. How can that be when the index was negative?

  • Locking in gains once achieved
  • Annual reset
  • The guaranteed floor 

Bowling with bumper rails.

Again, these are only a few examples of the crediting strategies and enhancements that different LIRPs may offer.

Indulge me for one more analysis. What if cap rates, participation rates or spreads were worse than the typical examples just shared? Let's lower the caps and the spread/margin a bit and do a stress test of sorts. Instead of a 12% cap for the first strategy, we'll assume 9%; 7.5% for the second instead of 10%; and an 8% spread/margin for the third instead of 5%. And here we go:

      LIRP Strategic Tax-free Allocation  
S&P 500 Raw Return Cap Focus Strategy Participation Rate Focus Strategy Spread Focus Strategy Tax-free Strategic Allocation Annual Average
Year Rate of Return $100,000 9% cap, 100% Par, PF 1.5X Year 3+ $33,333 140% Par,
7.5% Cap, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,000 8% Spread,
100% Par, PF 1.5X
Year 3+
$33,334
1976 19.15% $119,150 9.00% $36,333 7.50% $35,475 11.15% $37,051 9.24%
1977 -11.50% $105,448 0.00% $36,333 0.00% $35,475 0.00% $37,051 0.00%
1978 1.06% $106,565 1.59% $36,911 2.23% $36,265 0.00% $37,051 1.26%
1979 12.31% $119,684 13.50% $41,894 11.25% $40,344 6.47% $39,446 10.37%
1980 25.77% $150,526 13.50% $47,549 11.25% $44,883 26.66% $49,960 17.23%
1981 -9.73% $135,880 0.00% $47,549 0.00% $44,883 0.00% $49,960 0.00%
1982 14.77% $155,949 13.50% $53,968 11.25% $49,933 10.16% $55,034 11.62%
1983 17.26% $182,866 13.50% $61,254 11.25% $55,550 13.89% $62,678 12.89%
1984 1.38% $185,390 2.07% $62,522 2.90% $57,160 0.00% $62,678 1.64%
1985 26.36% $234,259 13.50% $70,963 11.25% $63,590 27.54% $79,940 17.53%
1986 14.62% $268,507 13.50% $80,543 11.25% $70,744 9.93% $87,878 11.54%
1987 2.04% $273,985 3.06% $83,007 4.28% $73,775 0.00% $87,878 2.42%
1988 12.39% $307,932 13.50% $94,213 11.25% $82,075 6.59% $93,664 10.41%
1989 27.25% $391,843 13.50% $106,932 11.25% $91,308 28.88% $120,710 17.99%
1990 -6.56% $366,138 0.00% $106,932 0.00% $91,308 0.00% $120,710 0.00%
1991 26.30% $462,432 13.50% $121,368 11.25% $101,580 27.45% $153,845 17.50%
1992 4.48% $483,149 6.72% $129,524 9.41% $111,137 0.00% $153,845 5.32%
1993 7.07% $517,308 10.61% $143,260 11.25% $123,640 0.00% $153,845 7.21%
1994 -1.56% $509,238 0.00% $143,260 0.00% $123,640 0.00% $153,845 0.00%
1995 34.13% $683,041 13.50% $162,600 11.25% $137,549 39.20% $214,144 21.49%
1996 20.26% $821,425 13.50% $184,550 11.25% $153,023 18.39% $253,526 14.42%
1997 31.01% $1,076,149 13.50% $209,465 11.25% $170,238 34.52% $341,030 19.90%
1998 26.67% $1,363,158 13.50% $237,743 11.25% $189,390 28.01% $436,535 17.69%
1999 19.53% $1,629,382 13.50% $269,838 11.25% $210,697 17.30% $512,034 14.05%
2000 -10.14% $1,464,163 0.00% $269,838 0.00% $210,697 0.00% $512,034 0.00%
2001 -13.04% $1,273,236 0.00% $269,838 0.00% $210,697 0.00% $512,034 0.00%
2002 -23.37% $975,681 0.00% $269,838 0.00% $210,697 0.00% $512,034 0.00%
2003 26.38% $1,233,066 13.50% $306,266 11.25% $234,400 27.57% $653,202 17.54%
2004 8.99% $1,343,918 13.49% $347,566 11.25% $260,770 1.49% $662,902 8.67%
2005 3% $1,384,236 4.50% $363,206 6.30% $277,199 0.00% $662,902 3.56%
2006 13.60% $1,572,492 13.50% $412,239 11.25% $308,383 8.40% $718,586 11.02%
2007 3.52% $1,627,843 5.28% $434,005 7.39% $331,179 0.00% $718,586 4.18%
2008 -38.49% $1,001,287 0.00% $434,005 0.00% $331,179 0.00% $718,586 0.00%
2009 23.65% $1,238,091 13.50% $492,596 11.25% $368,437 23.48% $887,274 16.15%
2010 12.63% $1,394,462 13.50% $559,097 11.25% $409,886 6.95% $948,895 10.53%
2011 0.10% $1,395,856 0.15% $559,935 0.21% $410,747 0.00% $948,895 0.12%
2012 13.29% $1,581,365 13.50% $635,526 11.25% $456,956 7.94% $1,024,190 10.87%
2013 29.43% $2,046,761 13.50% $721,323 11.25% $508,363 32.15% $1,353,416 19.10%
2014 11.54% $2,282,957 13.50% $818,701 11.25% $565,554 5.31% $1,425,282 9.97%
2015 -0.73% $2,266,292 0.00% $818,701 0.00% $565,554 0.00% $1,425,282 0.00%
2016 9.54% $2,482,496 13.50% $929,226 11.25% $629,179 2.31% $1,458,206 8.95%
2017 19.42% $2,964,597 13.50% $1,054,671 11.25% $699,962 17.13% $1,707,997 13.99%
2018 -6.24% $2,779,606 0.00% $1,054,671 0.00% $699,962 0.00% $1,707,997 0.00%
2019 28.26% $3,565,123 13.50% $1,197,052 11.25% $778,707 30.39% $2,227,057 18.50%
Average 9.68%   8.65%   7.56%   10.66%   8.97%
Actual Return 8.46%   8.48%   7.45%   10.02%   8.66%
    LIRP Weighted Average 8.97%          
  LIRP Weighted Actual Return 8.66%          
  LIRP Combined Allocation Value $4,202,816.07          

 

While the market's average return (before taxes) is slightly higher, the LIRP's actual return is higher. This is the more important metric. Further, the volatility in the LIRP is much lower, providing a superior risk-adjusted return compared the S&P 500. By its nature, the LIRP is an absolute return strategy, and a defining characteristic of such an approach is potentially much less volatility while still achieving respectable returns. 

In Part 4, let’s discuss other features, including liquidity, long-term care provisions, access of funds through various strategies, and fees.

Ever notice how you're only good at the things you're really passionate about? We're passionate about tax-free retirement planning. Talk to us. 

Recent Blog Posts

  • When Should You Claim Your Social Security?
  • Tax-free Retirement - Part 4 - Utilizing a Life Insurance Retirement Plan (LIRP) As Part of a Tax-free Retirement
  • Tax-free Retirement - Part 3 - Utilizing a Life Insurance Retirement Plan (LIRP) As Part of a Tax-free Retirement

Archived Blog

  • February 2021 (2)
  • January 2021 (4)
  • December 2020 (7)
  • November 2020 (3)

Categories

  • 401K (5)
  • annuity (3)
  • COVID-19 (1)
  • difference between actual and average returns (1)
  • How to calculate rate of return (1)
  • IRA (4)
  • Life Insurance Retirement Plan (3)
  • LIRP (7)
  • provisional income (6)
  • qualified plans (1)
  • rate of return (1)
  • retirement (9)
  • retirement income (8)
  • retirement planning (8)
  • Roth 401K (7)
  • Roth IRA (5)
  • social security (5)
  • tax deferral (1)
  • tax free income (1)
  • tax free retirement (5)
  • tax-deferred (2)
  • tax-free retirement (4)
  • taxed (1)
  • taxes (2)
  • TSP (2)
  • what is actual return (1)
  • what is average return (1)

Contact Us

Our commitment to your financial goals brings confidence and clarity to your future.

 

Phone: 435.868.3160
Fax: 435.275.4194

Email: kcooper@axioscapital.com

321 N Mall Dr, Building R, St George, UT 84790

Get Directions

10808 S River Front Pkwy, Suite 300, South Jordan, UT 84095

Get Directions

5550 Painted Mirage Rd, Suite 320, Las Vegas, NV 89149

Get Directions

   

 

 

  • Sitemap
  • Legal, privacy, copyright and trademark information

The information contained on this website is for informational purposes only, and does not constitute a solicitation or sale of any financial or insurance instrument or vehicle. Always consult with independent financial, legal, and tax advisors prior to implementing any strategy. The information contained on this website is believed to be accurate, but not warranteed to be so. Axios Capital Strategies (ACS) will not be held liable for your usage of the information on this site. The information on this site is only intended for those who reside in states where ACS and/or its agents are licensed to do business.

Licensed Insurance Professional. Respond and learn how insurance and annuities can positively impact your retirement. This material has been provided by a licensed insurance professional for informational and educational purposes only and is not endorsed or affiliated with the Social Security Administration or any government agency. It is not intended to provide, and should not be relied upon for, accounting, legal, tax, or investment advice.

 

 

© 2021 Axios Capital Strategies. All rights reserved.

Website Design For Financial Services Professionals