This is essentially building the whole life plan with the mutiplier as a term plan add-on. Pros - limited pay, able to "lock-in" ECI/CI rates, lower premium rates compared to a pure whole life Cons - higher premiums compared to term life. lower cash value (Since more is paid to term insurance).

The only reason that i see that you buy a whole life for babies (which i did for my baby), which is to cover insurability, and to protect parents income should CI falls on the baby (but whelp..) This is because whole life has this feature built in, OPAI (option to purchase addtional insurance without medical underwriting). This will become the cornerstone of CI protection should you be diagnosed with pre-existing that is not critical enough, yet will affect future CI protection coverage). Its a very good to have, but not a MUST.

https://blog.seedly.sg/working-adults-key-insurance-policies-singapore Seedly covered it but, Depending on your budget, (1) Hospitaliazation - To cover the hospital bills that matters. Wouldnt want a bill shock of 5 digits or even 6 digits. (2) Critical Illness - Mindef Aviva Living Care, cheapest if you are below 30, and anything above 30 and require top up, do buy private in this case (due to escalating premium from Living Care) and premiums are not guaranteed. (3) A small WL for CI base coverage (do you really need CI insurance at age 65 and above? you will need to decide for yourself) because premiums are cheap and you are offered OPAI (option to purchase additional insurance) without medical underwriting. Perfect for Case (2) should you require top up. (4) A big term for TPD ($1 million is good) till age 65 (not to be confused with term till 99). or... Disability income (current pay) , cheap and if you really felt that you do not need it, can reduce it after 5 years. A lot of people do not overpay for insurance, but the locked-in premiums savings can be good. Of course, if you are the mathematical model kind, you can do a Dy/Dx curve to find the most efficient one. You can top up more later through Mindef Aviva (5) Accident - depending on your job nature, it can be very important or totally not worth in risk management aspects. (1) and (2) is definitely important, the rest are dependent.

If that wrong/questionable advice or fact is documented and materialised through FHR (financial health review) and recommendation, and the client executed through the advisor for it, MAS will step in to fine and penalty the financial advisor. Most malpractise and churning are also recorded and referred to FIDREC (but they are only for financial disputes and not the court or the law). But for high profile case, https://www.straitstimes.com/singapore/courts-crime/court-orders-us620900-to-be-returned-to-ex-jockey you may take a look at this. https://www.straitstimes.com/business/invest/when-financial-advisers-misbehave for RNF people getting barred for scams and mis-selling. For advice that was not paid and not specific enough to be constituted as a financial advice, then its just "general knowledge" and no one can be faulted for the wrong advice.

Good question over here. I have been cracking my brain on the why for some time. And it boils down to 1 fact again which I have mentioned. its just meant to reduce/remove the challenges of investing overseas where there is estate duty tax. e.g as a foreign alien investing in US stocks, only the first $60k is tax exempted. Anything above, if it goes to your estate, will be subjected to a hefty 40% tax. there are 3 ways to hedge this risk (1) joint account with a loved 1 who can liquidate and transfer it to their account (2) buy a term life insurance that covers it. The fees should be about 0.2-0.5% p.a of the intended coverage (3) buy an ILP (hopefully with the lowest fees) to remove the tax. however, with most fee structure, you will likely need to pay a range of 30k to 60k in fees for a 300k investment (after 20 years). for Ireland domiciled,tax of 33% applies to foreign aliens after 310k. So take note not to invest above that. We can only hope to learn more from each other. Credits to Chee Xiu Bin (great discussion) and Jonathon Chia GuangRong for the inspirations.

I would try not to mix too much ILPs (unless your funds are in US/other states which open up to estate duty tax but...) I would ask the advisor to do an apple to apple comparison. Like how you do comparions for 3 quotes in a company. Run your finance like a business. Then you will see how to make better decisions. Without comparison and information, what can we base our decisions on? There are fees to be paid. Is it fair and value to you? What is the nett return after fees if i can choose another way (alternative) to do it?

I always ask for alternative from other advisors. Why is this product better than if you invest with other provider etc etc. What are the nett returns after premium payment is done, and nett future value as compared to other products with the same funds and etc. Must always have apple to apple (or at least complementary/alternative). If can't how to make better decision?

The question to ask yourself would be... (1) what does the endowment serve its purpose in the grand scheme of things? (2) What is the payout that you are looking at? (3) How far away are you from your Full Retirement Sum? (4) Can this be complemented with other types of investment? (5) what is the tax relif that you get should you take some of it to contribute to SRS or CPF RSTU? Do what it makes sense to you (overall networth/assets increase).

It has to do a lot with the following: (1) Par funds are created as a safe and diversified portfolio which removes all the required thinking, managing and decision making process to the insurer/fund manager that does it. (2) Its also designed to give gauranteed and non-gauranteed (portion in Benefit Illustration), which in about 95% case, safe enough. (3) You pay fees for the peace of mind, and having others to manage it for you while you focus on other jobs and aspect of your life. For returns, anything above 2.5% (fixed deposit etc) has risk which comes in many forms (investment non-gauranteed and base off your exit of investment) and types (CPF SA - long term lock-up, political risk etc). Even inflation is a risk for not doing anything to your money. So the benefits of a par plan is lower returns in return for smoothed and gauranteed 1% with potential of up non-gauranteed (but gauranteed yearly once bonus is declared) to 4% (perpetual endowment).

There are definitely other platforms. But the crux of it is... (1) They do have higher risk (or alpha / volatility index) as compared to CPF Special Account, which is gauranteed by the current government. However, the liquidaty comes with some price. (2) Retirement plans can offer 4%, with a split of Gauranteed about 1 to 2% and Non-Gauranteed of 2% to 3%. But certain companies do cut bonus, and terminal bonus may fall to 0 (outlier like AIG/AIA Saga). So its just a potential, for other platforms. Of course, they do offer flexibility. (3) I also deal with Traded Policies, but they do have their fair share of risk to consider. So its about understanding the risk and return involved.