Frankly speaking, you don't need a medical insurance beyond 80's.
The insurance premium is too extra ordinary high until not worthwhile to have one.
With 5 figure premium beyond 80's yo, not many people can afford it.
The one can afford 5 figure premium, then one is already rich enough, can self insured already.

No such thing you buy medical insurance at young time, then the premium will stay cheap when you are old time.

Medical insurance premium goes up together with ages.

Let the kids buy their own when they are financially independent.

Your family may not be burden with treatment cost.
But your family may be burden with ten of thousand premium needs to be paid every year.
Medical premium at old ages is not 1k or a few K pa.

Please be reminded that medical insurance is not covering everything, Outpatient cost, post treatment, nursing, medicine cost etc may not be covered by insurance. So there is still needs personal saving to pay for that.

Wait until when you old time, and every year pay such a medical fee up to 5 figure each year, then you will know or start realise the issues of paying medical at old ages, that I am talking about.

After such an age, even one has critical illness like cancer etc, doctor may also advise not to under knife, as your body may not able to coup with surgery and chemo treatment as well.

That's why medical insurance cover until 70-80s is sufficient.
If cover until 100, means potential make medical premium become even more expensive and unaffordable to many middle class.

Remember insurance mechanism is like a pool of fund, when the pool of fund needs to be used those beyond 80s, means potential higher premium

This post has been edited by cherroy: Mar 10 2020, 09:37 AM

Don't think there is investment linked that being structured to be self sustained until 99, I could be wrong.
Also, the longer the ILP is designed to self-sustained, the higher the premium could be.

Also, investment linked is just investing in unit trust, and those unit trust may not perform as good to be self-sustained until an ages as projected.
That's why you hear some investment linked send letter to policy owner to increase their annual premium, especially with recent financial market lackluster performance and turmoil.

Some investment linked unit trust may as well result in a loss instead of gain, even putting FD can beat those unit trust.

Basically, there is no guarantee the investment linked will make enough to cover or self-sustained, it may or may not.

Basically, there is no free lunch in insurance coverage, you can't "beat" insurance, and never think of trying to "beat" them.

Buy it if you needs it and when can afford it, should be the mindset.

Insurance is cheaper when you are young. - Correct.
But it never said, you buy at young age, and premium will stay cheaper or the same when you are old. - Insurance never tells you this statement neither.

In fact, insurance company already list out table big and clear regarding the premium needs to be paid at each age group and never tell you premium will stay forever the same, especially for medical.

Why someone can interpret as "buy insurance early or young so that it can stay cheaper or at the same" is beyond my understanding.

The advantage of getting insurance earlier is you may minimise the pre-existing illness risk, and get coverage during early age, instead of non.

Not related to cheaper premium or not.

If you are really in tight budget, then no choice, rely on company insurance to save as much as possible.
As having your own insurance, it makes your own insurance redundant.

But with company insurance, you have 2 risk ie
1. Company may decide to remove the insurance benefit in the future.
2. You may not work in the company anymore.

Just need to make justification on your own based on budget and personal planning.

1K plus already can get quite higher and decent amount of coverage and room rate.

The widest coverage only can come from your own saving. Insurance always has its specific scope of coverage, it cannot cover everything.

Medical card mostly more and less the same across in term of coverage.

Eg. Dental problem, generally no covers, despite you have 10 medical card across. If there is, please share it, I would like to have it.

As we know, dental treatment is one of many expensive medical bill that we may face.
One tooth of implant already can cost a few K, even an ordinary teeth root canal treatment, removing root and crowning easily cost hundred up to thousand plus.

So you need your own saving to pay those bills.

Normally, one medical card is sufficient.
If the previous one is insufficient, you can add on in the future, or get another new one.

Just like car, you can have 2 cars, but in most situation, you just drive one car.
If you have a lot of money to burn, then no problem, you can have 5 cars as well, it is your choice. Just you need to pay 5x insurance premium only.

Normally, secondary medical card only needed if the first one out of limit, but with few hundred K limit set by most medical card nowadays, normally it won't hit the limit.

You need to understand each insurance function.

Life insurance - is to cover your loss of income once you dead, or CI, it is mainly a income replacement that may important to support your family after you died.
But if you have no income currently, or family doesn't rely your income to support their daily life, then life insurance priority become less.

Medical insurance - is to prevent a sudden shock of medical bill needs for illness, but subjected to with medical card coverage. Not all medical bill will be covered across, just like my above dental bill example.

CI insurance - an income replacement to support your life after CI.

Each insurance has its own specific function and scope of coverage. No such thing of total comprehensive coverage on everything. It is not like I have insurance, I need not to worry anything already, or don't need to pay any bills further.

Medical insurance premium at old age is quite expensive to start with even if they accepted it.

For a couple of hundred thousand coverage, the premium easily goes to 5 digit pa and keep on rising together with ages.
Pay for 5 to 10 years insurance premium, easily more than 6 digit paid to the premium.

With annual income 350k it is sufficient for self insured already. Save for 3 years then you have 1 mil of spared fund to cover all aspect of medical expenses.
While insurance never cover every aspect.

Don't get me wrong, it is not to discourage to have medical insurance, it is up to individual preference, no right or wrong.
Just pointed up with such a high income, the importance of insurance become lesser.

Life insurance is needed when family members is depended on insured person income for financial support.

If the insured is not the financial pillar of the family, life insurance is not a priority to have.

Insurance is not a place to look for payout or return, or having a mindset to "gain" or "profit" from it.

Sustainability is based on projection only, not guaranteed.

Sustainability depends on 2 issues.
1. COI incremental, which may be more than what had projected.
2. Return of ILP if poorer than projected.

Then the sustainability is affected.

Yes, ILP has its good side.
But at the same times, there is nothing wrong to look on negative side of story, nobody want to find out something bad after contributed more than 10 or 20 years then later found out something is not as good as previous sweet talk.

ILP can make a loss instead of projected gain to sustain the policy.

Nobody can deny potential of negativity of ILP which may happen, and it does happen especially recently, some funds are making poor return, some even losses, due to unfavourable market condition.
With interest rate worldwide are mostly near zero, it may even tougher job for funds to generate good return as previous 10 years ago.

Look at both good and potential bad side of ILP, then only make a decision on it, as insurance is long term commitment.

If standalone premium triple, so does COI for ILP.

Please do not pain the picture the standalone will increase the premium tremendously, while ILP will not. Although the above statement may not say so, but the statement can be mis-interpret easily by those not familiar with ILP structure or newbie in insurance.
ILP never guarantee premium won't be increasing.

ILP premium will also need to adjust if the COI increase tremendous or investment portion is not as good as projected to sustain the policy.
ILP just store excess money in investment to sustain the policy, it never mean ILP won't suffer from COI increase.

We don't want people to have wrong mindset towards ILP.

Thank you.

It is irresponsible to post any figure, as insurance company never promise any figure to start with.

Any increment in premium (standalone) or cost of insurance (for ILP) is depended on insurance pooling situation.
High percentage of claims, inflation in medical cost are factors that determine the incremental.

Please do not be brain-washed by certain % must buy insurance.
Certain % wages must buy insurance only good for insurance company and agent, it means your x% wages will be his/her income.

It should be personal tailored based on affordability, needs, preference and situation. Not everyone needs the same insurance nor everyone can afford all insurances.

Just to add,

The unit trust in the ILP is not guaranteed to be profitable, and may result in losses instead of gain.

There are poor performance unit trust out there as well. One can read those unit trust performance via the fund fact sheet, to see their annualised return, some even perform poorer than FD.

Even the projection given, aka lower or upper range, it doesn't mean it won't perform below the lower range and vice versa, it may perform way above the upper range as well, which all depended on investment performance of the unit trust.
In layman term, the performance is never guaranteed to be profitable nor how much as well, while it may result in losses if investment condition is not favourable.

ILP = Insurance + Unit trust (a combo product).

The unit trust investment portion is the one compensate the rise on COI, in order for the premium to stay as original, until it is exhausted.

Insurance charges or COI never fix.

Please do not post misleading statement, this can misled people thinking whatever annual cash back is their interest on capital, which actually is not.

Saving plan never guarantee to return all your premium paid when maturity.

Saving plan only guarantee payout annual cash back + guaranteed maturity benefit/amount + non-guaranteed return (if).

The guaranteed maturity benefit /= total premium paid.

If the saving plan has high annual cash back rate one, the guaranteed maturity benefit highly be much less than total premium paid.

The higher annual cash back you are getting, the potential lower the maturity benefit.

Please always look at the table illustrated in the proposal.

Medical insurance

A bought at age 20, premium Rm1000
When A reached 40 time, premium become Rm2000

B only starts to buy at 40, premium RM2000.

Medical insurance premium table or increment is always based on age. Whether you bought since age 0, 20 or 40, all follow the table.

Medical insurance premium always goes up together with your age. There is no lock up in the medical insurance be it standalone or ILP for COI.

Another eg. A&B same company medical coverage.

A has company medical coverage, and also buy own medical insurance, it becomes redundancy (except if exceed the annual limit issue, if they are same coverage)
For 20 years, A already paid 30+K to insurance, while still with company medical insurance coverage.

B did not buy own medical insurance, saved up 30+K in the process.
Only buy when 40, B has extra 30+k cash in hand, and if invest prudently with conservative return of 5%, B has more than 70K in hand compared with A.

While both also have medical coverage in the process.

The only difference is A eliminated pre-existing illness risk compared to B when 40.

Medical insurance never has lock up premium. So you cannot lock up premium amount even you bought as early as 0 age.

We are talking about A & B employee have company medical insurance coverage benefit, and A decided to buy own medical insurance as well, while B is not.

B has no coverage issue. And B can always sign up own medical insurance later when if being non-employed anymore, and the risk along is pre-existing illness, not about cheaper when buy early.
There is no lock in premium in medical insurance so that people can enjoy cheaper premium later on by buying early. Premium or COI for ILP always revised based on aging and inflation of medical cost.

No medical premium will stay the same at Rm2xx per month, if your premium is "fixed", it is likely an ILP, whereby you are paying extra compared to standalone (or more than the COI), and the extra portion is channeled into investment in unit trust which will be drawndown in future to compensate the rise of COI as age goes, so that the premium is fixed until run out of sustainability issue, that insurance company will send notification of revision of premium due to sustainability issue.

The simple fact is no medical premium is fixed be it standalone or ILP (COI), this is the hard fact truth.

This post has been edited by cherroy: Aug 10 2020, 09:23 AM

Your understanding on ILP needed to be beefed up.
You paid more ILP compared to standalone, because you are paying extra premium in the early year, that being saved and invested in unit trust, which used to compensate or pay the increase COI of medical coverage later on, it never deter the increase of COI.
Please be minded the investment part also can lose money instead gaining, so you also took the risk of investment in ILP.

All still comes from your own money, it never lock in the medical COI due to aging and inflation in medical cost.

In a correct insurance pov, you don't or can't or look for premium saving. Insurance is drafted based on actuaries maths, it is computed based on pool of risk.
Please don't have a mindset try to save on insurance premium by buying early, late or whatever strategy, it doesn't work that way. Insurance is a consumable financial product, you need it, you buy it.

When old, everyone will need to pay more in medical coverage, this is how insurance works, and how insurance company can be profitable.

Life insurance only needed if your have financial dependents, if you are not married and no financial dependents, then life insurance is not urgently important, except CI/TPD.

Insurance is all about financial management and personal needs, there is no single or universal rules how and which insurance needed.
Fix rules or fixed % amount must be insurance, it just means insurance company and agent can securely make fixed % profit from your wages. It is about marketing only, which doesn't address the personal needs for insurance which is different for everyone based on different individual financial position.