Stay away from single-premium unit plans

The loud gross sales pitch notwithstanding, single-premium unit linked coverage programs (ULIPs) are not the best instruments to have got in your portfolio. Traditionalist ULIP investors and those vulnerable to mis-selling should observe that it is possible to acquire a larger coverage cover, better tax-saving and also comparable tax returns through a combination of other available instruments. To cognize how, read on.

Investors may retrieve that the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA) have reduced the lower limit sum of money assured on single-premium Ulips with a term of 10 old age or more.

The lower limit sum of money assured on a single insurance insurance premium ULIP can now be 1.10 modern times of the single premium. Earlier, it had to be at least 1.25 modern times the single premium. This have come up into consequence from April 1, 2008.

In lawsuit of a single-premium ULIP, as the name suggests, the individual pickings the policy necessitates to pay just one premium. The bulk of the insurance insurance premium is invested after deducting the premium allotment charge, which is typically around 2-5% of the amount. The part invested is referred to as the investing fund.

The ULIP also sees the life of the individual pickings the policy for a certain amount of sum of money assured. Given that the lower limit sum of money assured for single-premium ULIPs with a term of office of 10 old age or more than have been reduced to 1.1 modern modern times the single premium, compared with 1.25 times earlier, the lower limit life coverage offered to an individual paying a single insurance insurance premium of Rs 1 hundred thousand is Rs 1.1 hundred thousand (110% of Rs 1 lakh) instead of the earlier Rs 1.25 hundred thousand (125% of Rs 1 lakh).

The life coverage obviously makes not come up free of cost and a certain mortality complaint have to be paid for it. This is deductible every calendar month by cancelling the units of measurement that have got accumulated in the investing fund, depending on the age of the individual.

The logic in favor of single-premium ULIPs is that a less sum of money assured guarantees a less mortality complaint and hence more than money acquires invested. But, if the thought is to guarantee that more than money acquires invested, why not make away with the coverage constituent altogether? At any rate, Ulips aren't quite common funds, as they are sometimes made out to be.

Take an individual who have the capacity of paying a insurance premium of Rs 1 lakh. He opts for the lower limit sum of money assured of Rs 1.1 lakh, which would be collectible to his campaigner upon his death. Now, for person who have the capacity to pay a insurance premium of Rs 1 lakh, a sum of money assured of Rs 1.1 hundred thousand is manner too less. He could always choose for a far larger cover, through term insurance.

The typical statement cited in favor of single-premium ULIPs is that one demands to pay the insurance premium just once.

But, tax-saving investings necessitate to be made every year. So, an individual who do a tax-saving investing for three old age at a stretch by purchasing different single-premium policies every twelvemonth will stop up with three different policies.

Now, if something were to go on to him, his campaigner will have got to register three separate claims to acquire the sum of money assured. That would be annoying indeed. And what if these are from three different companies and each of them take a firm stands on original written documents to unclutter the claim?

On the other hand, if the thought is to invest, why not put the full amount? Why wage a mortality complaint for a sum of money assured that is not adequate in the first place?

This tin be easily done through investment in tax-saving common funds. At the same time, the individual is can have got a sizeable term coverage cover.

You may not acquire the full taxation tax tax deduction on the insurance insurance premium paid, though, for sub-section Three of Section 80 Degree Centigrade of the Income Tax Act 1961 clearly points out that a deduction is available lone to so much of the premium, which is not in extra of the 20% of the sum of money assured on the policy.

If the insurance insurance premium paid is Rs 1 hundred thousand and the individual opts for a lower limit sum of money of money assured of 110% of that, i.e. Rs 1.1 lakh, the single premium of Rs 1 hundred thousand plant out to around 91% of the sum assured. However, the tax-saving allowed here will be Rs 22,000 (20% of Rs 1.1 lakh), which intends the individual cannot claim a tax deduction for the remaining Rs 88,000. Now, if the individual waterfall in the 30% taxation bracket, this would intend an other taxation liability of Rs 26,400 (30% of Rs 88,000).

So, for people looking at single insurance insurance premium policies as a tax-saving investment, it is very of import that they choose for a sum of money assured which is at least 5 modern times the single premium paid. In other words, only person opting for a sum of money assured of Rs 5 hundred thousand can help a taxation freedom of Rs 1 hundred thousand (20% of Rs 5 lakh).

Thus, a typical line in the booklet of single-premium policies — "Contributions made towards the insurance premiums will be eligible for taxation tax deduction under Section 80 Degree Centigrade of the Income Tax Act" - is right in letter, but not in spirit.

Also, those opting for the lower limit sum of money assured of 1.1 modern times will be surprised to cognize that the adulthood amount is not tax-free. This is because, under Section 10 (10D(c)) of the Income Tax Act, the full amount would be tax-free lone if the insurance premium paid is not more than than 20% of the sum of money assured in any twelvemonth of the policy.

If that is not the case, the full amount at adulthood acquires lumped with the income for that peculiar twelvemonth and acquires taxed accordingly. Even this, the coverage companies neglect to uncover in their gross sales brochures, and the coverage advisers will never state you.

Under licence from