There are still "Participant" insurance policy around whereby those bonuses/Cash calue are given based on insurance company investment performance as a whole annually, instead for the like ILP which you invested a particular fund (that may result in negative return if the particular fund is not doing well).

Just because agent promotes more on ILP (that may due to better commission rate or better profitability to insurance company or else reason, which is another story), it doesn't mean other insurance products are not available.

In fact, traditional/conventional participant policy may pose lesser risk than ILP. As worst to worst, annual bonus/cash payout out become less or zero, while in ILP, investment in unit trust can yield you a loss.

But at the same time, ILP annual premium is much higher than traditional/term/etc policy as it bundled the investment portion.
So end effect of commission may be the same (even though % wise is lower) or may be higher as well.

While unit trust portion, sales charges range from 1-5% may incur, as well as annual management fee that range from 0.5~1.5%.
So in return, when insurance company can make more money, they can give better benefit.

Insurance is not a charity organisation, when they give good protection, it just means there are area of profit they can make from it.

Pre-existing means those illness already exist before the insurance was bought.
Not about what age.

That's why we need to be careful when switching new policy/insurance companies particularly medial policy, as if any sickness found later that actually incurred before you bought the new policy, it may not covered by the new policy due to pre-existing clause.
As some illness/sickness may only appear in the later stage, while when diagnosed, medical examination can trace back when the illness actually occurred.

As I have seen some switching medical policy just simply due to a little bit better coverage, or sweet talk by agent, especially for elderly one, as switching may result in the insured faced addition pre-existing risk that do not covered by the new policy.

Cogenital means those problem exist since the child is born.

Edited : technically, since cogenital illness exist before the insurance was bought, so it is still fulfilled the "pre-existing" terminology, strictly speaking.

So there are totally 2 different issues.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Jan 14 2019, 10:44 AM

Medical insurance be it standalone or ILP, their medical premium soar together with ages one, little different.

In ILP, you don't see the total ILP premium soar as much, because it may utilise the portion of investment to pay for the medical premium portion.

ILP (100%) = Investment in Unit trust (x%) + medical premium (y%)

So each year the % is tweak between so the the total ILP premium become stable throughout as long as possible, until it reaches unsustainable figure, by then insurance company may send notification of need to top up aka premium being adjusted upward to sustain the medical insurance coverage.

ILP, insurance company can earn extra from the investment portion through unit trust, range from sales charges of 3~5%, annual management fee range from 0.5~1.5% for unit trust company (when if unit trust is also run by them)
Also, in ILP, more money in tied up early on, as compared to standalone that you pay as needed.


So, in ILP, they can give you some premium that is more competitive compared to standalone.
Just like you go to buy fast food, a value set meal vs ala-carte.
Set one generally got extra a little bit or little bit cheaper, as you buy more stuff.

So ILP vs standalone, both insurance cost also rise together with age. As more age, more risk in term of medical insurance perspective.

Please do not use the word "everything bao", <--- this is never a right word in insurance and insurance company never stated in their T&C nor use such kind of word.
It only gives wrong impression as well as potential misleading as well. Often dispute arise from here.

Also, those figure (premium at age 60) is projected not absolute, be it ILP and standalone.

Generally and mostly, fixed income unit trust is not available for selection for ILP, as fixed income return generally is lot less (based on projection) than equity based.
The lower fixed income projection return won't able to meet the ILP projection (for so called fixed/same premium amount for a period of time).

Generally, you can't tweet too much in the ILP, as ILP portion of investment is drafted fixed so that the ILP can sustain based on period of projection so that the premium can potential remain the same for the period to cover the cost of medical insurance.

Also, please bare in mind, equity investment can result in loss as well, even if invested for 10 years or 20 years, if financial world turns sour.
By then, the ILP may not sustainable and need to top up in later year.

Just fyi,
I have family member that has standalone medical insurance, and already 60 and 60+, their premium last year I knew was about 3~5K, but definitely is not as high as 1 mil limit, as last time (decades back), the limit was not so high across. ILP generally can give higher limit as compared to standalone.

ILP - you commit higher premium early on, invested in unit trust that insurance company can make some money - in return give you high limit as compared to standalone.
In the same time, exposed to investment risk.

Standalone - you commit less (in return less personal annual liability), and easily can discontinue or switch company any time, while insurance make no money from unit trust - in return may give a less limit.
Want the same limit with ILP plan? pay lot more premium as compared.

It is always a trade off. No free lunch. Fair and square.
You want high limit, then for sure high premium. Insurance is not a charity organisation, you need to pay what you want.
This is a more correct way to treat insurance or a healthy mind set of having an insurance.

Insurance industry is regulated by BNM, insurance premium cannot be simply fixed by insurance company they like, any insurance premium is always a reflection of coverage given, or "package" of coverage given (like ILP), we can't say which is cheaper or more expensive or which is better or more value. Whether standalone or ILP, they have its own pro and cons and specific intention.
We can't treat insurance premium as same as price tag in supermarket, getting an insurance is not as same as buying goods in supermarket.

Whether it is ILP or whatever comprehensive insurance package, insurance always has its own scope of coverage, there is no such thing of insurance "bao" everything one.
If any agent dare to say ABC insurance or xyz package insurance (even tons of riders), can "bao" everything, then the agent is not sincere explaining the insurance already.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Feb 16 2019, 05:34 PM

Paid 12K and can get back 18K next year?
Where insurance company find 6K to pay you?

If there is, it will be the hottest product in the market, don't need to be promoted by the agent already.
This is one big frog jumping around...

Medical annual and lifetime limit level is always debatable. There is no right or wrong.
Just get one within your affordable level in term of premium.

Personally, I won't too concern on this, as if I really need until 1 mil+ medical bill, that's means I may be too serious to survive and may have too much complication, and even after cured, may not have enough money to survive the rest of life (there may be a lot of money need to be spent afterwards that may not covered by the insurance as well) and likelyhood won't be live too long with so much medical complication.

Unless one has ton of millions one, then different story.

If I don't have money today due to overpay too much on insurance, I may died starving next week, even having 10 mil medical coverage or 100 mil of insurance coverage.
So, just plan according within personal affordability. Life is never perfect.

Cover for what purpose?

Director illness, then company cannot run?
Keyman insurance is the way.

In normal circumstance, company should able to run even if director passed away.
Just reappoint another director.

Generally director is appointed through AGM/EGM yearly.

The company has the right not to pay the director whether in the form of director emoluments/wages or director fee, if the director is deemed not fit to perform the job.

Director is also one of employee of the company, company can opt for "no show no pay", just like any ordinary employee.

I do not see there is a need for keyman insurance, if the company can run without the director.

Might as well straight away go to standalone.

Please be reminded those investment portion that goes to unit trust, a 3-5% sales charges and 0.5~1.5% annual management may incur in the first place. And various tnc to protect insurance company interest.

Don't be penny wise and pound foolish, and try to "win" against the insurance company.

Insurance company hire top actuarial science people and powerful computer algorithms to compute those possibilities and various scenario already before deciding their premium.
So I don't think it is worth the effort to find loopholes against computer algorithms.

Standalone cost more because they do not make profit from your extra premium(compared to standalone) for investment portion.

Just like you buy fast food, combo set vs ala-carte.
Combo definitely is cheaper, no doubt, but you need to spend more.

Standalone, you free up commitment, as premium is lower than ILP, but at the expense more expensive COI for medical.
But at the same time, it free up your cashflow.

The deal is always fair, (as said, insurance is already highly "computed" business), you don't try to "win' against it.

You get something better deal, you need to pay more. There is no free lunch in insurance.

And insurance is highly regulated industry, insurance company won't able simply put high premium in insurance to "chop" consumer.

If really financial constraint until need count until Rm5 or RM10 decimal point, then one should review the financial planning properly.
Getting a medical insurance won't magically solve all the medical cost problem, medical insurance is not covering everything, there are areas that medical insurance won't cover, as well as other post medication expenses that may need one's cash saving to pay for it.

Don't get me wrong, not to say which is better, as in insurance there is no such thing which is better.

As posted before, treat it just like buying combo mean vs ala-carte.
Combo - you see it "cheaper" but you need to buy more stuff and pay more.
Eg. buy a combo meal, you get burger + drink + fries = Rm15

Ala-carte - you see it more expensive, but you pay less.
Eg. Buy only burger = Rm10.

In the end of the day, for ala-carte, you have extra Rm5 in your pocket vs the "cheaper" for combo at Rm15.

So you can't say which is cheaper or worthwhile, it depends on the situation.
If you want to invest in UT + buy insurance, then ILP may be a good option.

But if not intended to invest in UT and has more flexibility in cashflow, then standalone may serve a good option.

Please be reminded, the UT portion in ILP, there may be around 5% sales charges incurred as well. And the UT may suffer losses instead gain, those projected return in the ILP proposal is based on previous years market track record, they do not guarantee future will be the same, it can yield a loss instead of gain, or a better gain than in projection in market condition is favourable.

ILP a more simple term = Unit trust (mostly equities) + insurance combo.

This is the same for both traditional/standalone and ILP medical.

Both cost of insurance definitely will rise together with ages one.
Just in ILP, they utilise (or in other word withdraw/redeem) the unit trust to pay for it.

Just a brief
The purpose of a life insurance
- to compensate loss of income of the person who is breadwinner of the family, so that family members can still have income (through the life insurance compensation) to survive financially.

Why a 80 years old need life insurance then?
Unless, the person is still working at 80 yo and still the important family breadwinner and family members can't survive without the person income, which is unlikely.

Insurance companies do send out (now mostly print our own via online) insurance statement every beginning of the year for tax reporting purpose.
Inside, they do classify every your policy whether it is considered life or medical or education.

So just refer the statement.

2018 assessment year
Medical + education - Max coombined Rm3k
Life insurance + EPF = Max combined Rm7K.

2019, slight change.
No longer Life + EPF
Separate as

Life - Max Rm3K
EPF - Max RM4K.

It may be the same for investment link, as COI for medical coverage in investment linked policy likelyhood also rise as same as degree with standalone one.

Just to post, so that forumers won't misunderstand that investment linked policy premium will stay the same forever.

Whether it is investment linked or standalone, it is the same as generally medical insurance premium become "non-economical" to have once getting old especially after 70~75 range.
As statistically this is the average lifespan of population.



This post has been edited by cherroy: Apr 22 2019, 09:24 AM

We never know due to both variables.
1. Variable in term of COI - medical COI tends to rise over the years, due to inflation, population aging, newer medical equipment/treatment etc.

2. Variable in unit trust return. Investment link is actually investing in unit trust only, not something sophisticated to understand that unit trust return vary due to market condition. Bare in mind, the unit trust may actually yield a loss instead of gain, which may result a shorten duration of ILP or else insurance company needs to raise the ILP premium.
ILP premium is never guaranteed to be fix throughout.

Insurance company generally has a projection based on previous record of COI increment and unit trust return, that give a projection to ILP client that one can refer to, but it is never guaranteed.

Generally, insurance is a consumable product hence it should be burned off one.

No, one may not need to pay insurance until one died.
As there are some insurance that may not need once reaching certain age or condition.

eg. Life insurance
Generally you do not need it once no longer generate income or breadwinner of the family.

Medical
After average lifespan of 70/75+, medical insurance or COI for medical will be extraordinary high, it may not make sense for having one, especially for low and middle class people that no longer generate income and not having large amount of retirement fund.
As the extra-ordinary high premium may not affordable to those people and affecting their financially greatly.
Even the huge medical cost is covered, he/she may not have extra money to cover the rest expenses and continue their further life.
Life is cruel and insurance is not charity organisation.

That's why medical insurance premium is cheap when you are 18, and become expensive when 60.

Insurance companies have done statistics extensively and employ sophisticated computer algorithm to calculate those probability in the first place.
Insurance companies exist as same as bank, or private companies, they exist because of profit.

But policy owners are not at a loss as well, as joining in the pool of fund of insurance, means if unfortunate strike, then they get the compensation from insurance.

As mentioned, insurance is consumable, please do not have a mindset that try to "win" against insurance, nor try to calculate whether it is "worth" or not.