|
|
Welcome: Site Map: Adviser Updates: Publications and Documents:
Business Succession Planning: Need for Asset or Buy/Sell Strategy Need for Liability or Key Person Strategy
Simple Succession Plan:
Complete Succession Plan:
One Page Strategy: Simplifying the Valuation Issue
Multiple Policy Approach:
One Page, Two Policy Strategy:
Other Issues:
Sole Proprietors and Families: Third Party Buy/Sell Strategies |
Cost Disadvantages of Super Fund Ownership
This page focuses on some of the cost implications and disadvantages with respect to Super Fund Ownership of Insurance Cover. Overview of Super Fund Ownership Click here for an overview with respect to Super Fund Ownership. Tax Issues Click here for an analysis of some of the Tax Issues with respect to Insurance Cover held in the Superannuation environment. Other Issues Click here for an analysis of some of the commercial, personal, family and other implications and disadvantages with respect to Super Fund Ownership of Insurance Cover.
Income Tax Liability of Super Fund Cover Click here for an analsyis of some of the tax issues with respect to Insurance Cover held in the Superannuation environment. If the Member is aware of the possible tax liability with respect to the Insurance Proceeds, they can "gross-up" the Sum Insured in order to fund the appropriate net amount after tax.
Grossing-Up the Sum Insured and the Premium It is normal for a Life Insured to determine the amount of the Insurance Cover they want by the desire to fund a particular target capital amount required to fund living expenses or other needs (e.g., the repayment of a home loan or personal investment loan). If the Cover is held outside Super, there is no tax liability and the amount of Cover can be the same amount as the target capital amount. For example, if the Life Insured wanted to repay a home loan of $1 million (so that the family could retain ownership of the home debt-free), it would only be necessary to have $1 million Cover. If the Cover is held inside Super, the amount of the Cover needs to take into account the anticipated tax liability. If the Life Insured wanted to achieve the same target capital amount, they could "gross-up" the Sum Insured to allow for the anticipated tax liability. This strategy would also gross-up the Premium or cost of the Cover. Thus, the desire to obtain a tax deduction for the Premium makes it necessary to pay a higher Premium in order to achieve the same target. The amount of the gross-up must take into account the fact that the amount of the gross-up itself will be subject to income tax. Ultimately, there could be a point where the benefit of the tax deduction for the Premium would be either wholly or largely illusory. When to Gross Up? Members must also consider when to "gross up" the amount of Cover. If they make the decision when they are young, they might have more Cover than they actually need in the short term. However, the excess will give them a buffer or comfort zone. If they wait until the risk has manifested itself, they might not be able to obtain additional Cover because of health reasons.
Grossing-Up the TPD Benefit If the tax rate was 16.5%, the Premium with respect to the relevant amount would have to be grossed up by 20%. If the tax rate was 21.5%, the Premium with respect to the relevant amount would have to be grossed up by 28%. If the tax rate was 31.5%, the Premium with respect to the relevant amount would have to be grossed up by 46%. If the tax rate was 46.5%, the Premium with respect to the relevant amount would have to be grossed up by 87%.
Grossing-Up the Death Benefit If it is intended or possible that some or all of the Death Benefit will be paid to a Non-Dependant, it would be necessary to gross-up the Premium with respect to the relevant amount by at least 20%. This rate would be even higher in the case of untaxed components (e.g., if the Super Fund has claimed a deduction for the Premium). In this case, the Premium with respect to the relevant amount would have to be grossed up by 46%. It is often difficult to determine the risk of this tax liability. When the Life Insured is relatively young, the risk is minimal...for the time being. However, it increases over time. The risk is also minimal if they have a spouse. However, if their spouse pre-deceases them, then the risk increases substantially. In this case, the risk is dictated by the age and financial dependency of the Member's children. If the children have ceased to be dependent (or are close to being independent), then the Member should consider placing the Cover outside the Super environment.
Bundled Death and TPD Benefits It is normal for Death and TPD Benefits to be bundled together in the one Policy. Therefore, if it was necessary to gross up the TPD Benefit, it would normally be necessary to gross-up the Death Benefit as well. As a result, even though it might have been unlikely that the Death Benefit would be assessable, it might be necessary to gross up the Premium with respect to the Death Benefit as well as the TPD Benefit.
|
Adviser Tip A Volume Discount on 100% of the total Sum Insured held by the Insurance Trust might be worth more than a tax deduction for 50% of the Sum Insured, even though none of the Cover held by the Insurance Trust might be held in the superannuation environment. .
Please contact us to arrange a meeting or teleconference. |
