Activity
Mon
Wed
Fri
Sun
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
Jun
Jul
Aug
Sep
Oct
What is this?
Less
More
12 contributions to Wealth Warehouse IBC Community
How do I not steal the peas?
Just finished my second go around with BYOB. Having a hard time wrapping my mind around the figures Nash is utilizing in purchasing your own equipment/financing the needs of life. Don’t get me wrong here. I get that my policy grows uninterrupted in the background. That’s not my hang up. In ‘Equipment Financing, Illustrations 1-5’, I’m not getting his math the second time around. Hypothetical, take out a $40,000 car loan. Just for the sake here, we will say I can get 7% at my credit union for 60 months. A policy loan would be roughly the same for arguement here. My basic understanding would be that from the credit union my payment would be $792/mo. To not steal the peas, I take a policy loan, and pay at least $792 back to my policy. Let’s call it $800. My hang up is this: How does Nash get to these tables (p 54, 59-64?) I’m paying back 7% to the life insurance company on the policy loan. Does this only work if I’m putting MORE than I would pay to my credit union into paying back my policy loan? (Say, $1,000/mo?) What did I miss in my two readings to make the numbers work the way he demonstrates?
3 likes • 6d
I will try to add to what @Paul Fugere is saying. Sorry for being long winded. There are two keys to understanding the equipment financing section in the book, and as with all things IBC, it has to do with who the banker is. The banker always wins. Key #1: It’s all about premium and dividends, NOT policy loans. Key #2: The owner’s cash flow is the SAME in each illustration. For key #1, policy loans do not make it more efficient. Rather, Nelson makes the OWNER inefficient in illustration 1 by his actions of not paying premium. The $15,000 base premium, which MUST be paid, is instead being paid by dividends and partial surrenders. That’s $15k worth of stealing peas every year which is inefficient (we want those dividends to buy PUA which starts happening again in year 17 in this case). In illustrations 2 and beyond, the owner is paying an 8% policy loan at a rate of over 15% ($1,500/month). He will finish the policy loan before 4 years, so to be an honest banker, what does he do with his payments for the rest of the 48-month term? He pays base and/or PUA premium. This frees some dividends to buy more PUA. The owner is reducing HIS inefficiency, which is how the policy appears more efficient. It’s not by policy loans. It’s by paying premium and getting that dividend to buy PUA. For key #2, the owner’s overall cash flow is the EXACT same in illustration 1 vs. all the others. In illustration 1, he’s paying $1,500/month for a truck. In illustration 2, he’s STILL paying $1,500/month for a truck. The difference is the banker to whom he pays! In illustration 1, he’s paying to the finance company. In illustration 2, he’s paying directly to the life insurance company through his own policy. The money is ending up back in the same pool, and the cash flow is the same. But in illustrations 2 and beyond he is cutting out the middle man, the finance company. He is becoming his own banker. Nelson is not making the policies more efficient in each illustration, rather he makes the overall financial picture of the owner more efficient. Nelson just created a policy big enough to handle the owner’s cash flow, and then some.
Question for today
I will miss today's IBC because of a scheduled treatment on Base (Andrews Joint Airforce Base- Maryland). See you next week. My contribution for today is a question. At what point in the life cycle of a Specially Designed Whole Life policy does it become most efficient? My question is probably general because it is likely that each policy is impacted by many factors (age, initial contribution, PUA contribution. . . ). I would say looking at one of my illustrations that seven to eight years would be a good marker. Yes, I am assuming the policy owner requested that all dividends be used to purchase PUAs. Just my question for the community here. Next Week and I will be monitoring resonses.
1 like • Aug 22
The policy becomes most efficient the day that you die, technically. Other than that, it is the most efficient when…you pay next year’s premium. And then the next year’s premium after that, and so on.
Pay Off Mortgage or Use Policy Loan?
I’d appreciate the group’s perspective on a financial decision my wife and I are considering. Our remaining mortgage balance is approximately $300,000 at 3.5% APR. Fortunately, our business has performed very well, and based on our current projections, we expect to have enough available capital by the end of this year to pay off the mortgage in full. However, we’re questioning whether simply paying off a 3.5% mortgage is the best use of $300,000, particularly if that capital could potentially be deployed elsewhere to generate a higher return. For additional context, we expect to remain in our current home for approximately 10–12 more years, but this will not be our retirement home. We are currently considering three Courses of Action (COAs): COA 1 – Pay Off the Mortgage - Use the $300,000 to pay off our existing 3.5% mortgage. - Own the home free and clear, but have a significant amount of capital/equity tied up in the property. - Free up approximately $2,000 per month in cash flow that could then be invested or used elsewhere. COA 2 – Policy Loan + Invest the Capital - Borrow approximately $300,000 from our whole-life policy at ~6%. - Use the policy loan to pay off the existing mortgage. - Keep the original $300,000 in cash available for investment. - Target an asset or investment capable of producing approximately a 10% annual return ($30,000). - Pay the approximately $18,000 annual policy-loan interest from our existing cash flow. - Apply the approximately $30,000 of investment income/returns toward reducing the policy-loan balance. Conceptually, we would essentially be replacing our traditional mortgage with a policy loan while keeping our $300,000 working in another asset. COA 3 – Policy Loan + Invest for Cash Flow - Borrow approximately $300,000 from our whole-life policy at ~6%. - Use the policy loan to pay off the existing mortgage. - Invest the original $300,000 elsewhere, again targeting approximately a 10% annual return ($30,000). - Use approximately $18,000 of the annual investment return to cover the policy-loan interest. - Retain the remaining approximately $12,000 per year as additional cash flow. - Allow the $300,000 policy-loan principal to remain outstanding. - When we eventually sell the home in approximately 10–12 years, use the proceeds from the sale to pay off the policy loan.
2 likes • Aug 11
I would like to suggest a possible fourth, long term, option as food for thought. Our goal here is “becoming your own banker.” You have a $300,000 debt, no matter how you slice it. Who would be the ideal owner of the debt, someone else’s bank, or your own banking system? From what I read, you don’t have a specific investment already planned for the $300k. COA 4: Pay off the mortgage with cash, but “play the game” as Nelson Nash said in the book. You’re not actually paying the mortgage off, but merely transferring the debt to your banking system. Then you must be an honest banker. One way you can accomplish this is by starting a new policy(ies) after paying off the mortgage. “Play the game” by paying your banking system the closing costs, fees, etc. upfront in the form of the first premium on this new policy, and then you have a place to put the freed up $2,000/month cash flow: $24,000 annual premiums. After 10-12 years, you could have somewhere near that $300k in cash value available in the new policy. This is a long term strategy (looking past the 12 year mark and beyond), and it is taking over the banking function in this specific area of your life: the mortgage. It might take 12 years to regain the $300k, but you’ll have new banking branch compounding during those 12 years. You will earn what your mortgage company would have earned from your mortgage payments. The goal would be to finish the entire loan schedule, but you have transferred the flow of money from going away from you to going toward you. This is probably the strategy I would do, but the caveat is I’m not a savvy investor or businessman. I just like capitalizing whole life policies.
My Mom and IUL…
My mom is meeting with a State Farm agent this morning to talk about converting her term policy into an IUL and invited me on ( I thought we were meeting to discuss whole life). I’m not all that familiar with IUL or variable mechanics. What questions should we be asking the agent?
1 like • Aug 11
@Travis Fairbairn I’m too late to the party, but if you’re still dealing with this issue, here’s the question I like to ask: The company sells IUL products because they make the company money, right? Otherwise they wouldn’t sell them. Well who earns the profits from the IUL products? The owners of the company. Well that’s me and all of the whole life policy owners who earn dividends. You want high returns in the IUL, but I can go get those using my whole life policy. Secondly, IULs are merely, and literally, “buying term and investing the difference,” but with the added fees and complications of universal life instead of the simplicity of term.
Be on The Wealth Warehouse Podcast
Producer David here. After the live webinar I noticed there was a TON of comments from people that are using The Infinite Banking Concept in really cool ways. I thought I would ask on here if anyone has ever wanted to be on the show and share their story. If so, comment on here or send a DM with the specifics of, if you were on the show, what you would like to share that could add value to listeners. Chow.
2 likes • Jul 2
@Rebekah Waller I’m up for it.
1-10 of 12
Caleb Munnell
3
22 points to level up
@caleb-munnell-4230
Nebraska native, pretending to be a Texan now. Husband and father, Christian, and lover of music, general relativity, and the infinite banking concept

Active 2d ago
Joined May 26, 2026