What's New

If you’re one of the many Americans who get life insurance through work, you might assume you’re covered — but is that group policy really enough? Financial professionals are cautioning that workplace life insurance might not provide the full protection your loved ones need.

Most employers offer a group life insurance policy that pays out one to two times your annual salary as a death benefit. That sounds helpful, but if you have a mortgage, children, or any long-term financial obligations, it may fall short.

Here are some key reasons why relying solely on workplace group life insurance might not be enough in 2025. First of all, coverage often isn’t portable. If you leave your job, you usually lose your policy. It also may not cover your actual needs. Experts often recommend having 5 to 10 times your income in life insurance coverage, depending on your age, debts, dependents, and lifestyle goals. Finally, it’s not tailored to you.

You might want to explore individual life insurance if you’re the primary breadwinner for your family, if you have young children or significant debts, and/or you want coverage that stays with you no matter where you work. With an individual policy, you get more control over the benefit amount, term length, and even whether your coverage builds cash value (in the case of whole or universal life).

The bottom line is that employer life insurance is a great starting point, but for many people it’s not the full solution. In 2025, with higher living costs and growing financial responsibilities, it’s smart to evaluate your life insurance needs beyond the basics. We are here to help! Give us a call and we will review your needs and options.

A recent legal challenge has brought national attention to a new federal rule aimed at strengthening mental health parity in private health insurance plans. The rule, introduced in 2023 and supported by the prior administration, requires that mental health and substance use disorder benefits be offered on par with physical health benefits in employer-sponsored insurance plans. The lawsuit, filed by the ERISA Industry Committee (ERIC), which represents large employers, argues that the rule exceeds the government's authority and imposes significant burdens on companies trying to comply.

The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for millions of Americans who rely on employer-sponsored health insurance. Supporters of the rule emphasize the importance of equal access to mental health services, while critics are concerned about regulatory overreach and increased compliance costs for businesses. As the case moves forward, insurers, employers, and policyholders alike will be closely watching to see how it may impact the future of mental health coverage in the private insurance market.