Dropping Coverage Amount as you Age, payoff Mortgage, Kids move out

Apologies if this has already been covered. But looking through the interwebs and this sub it seems like a lot of people throw out "get 10x your income" in coverage.

To me, this seems way too simplistic. It seems appropriate for my 30-year old self with a mortgage, kids, and more kids on the way. But it seems unrealistic for my nearly 50-year old self with the house paid for (and now worth double what I paid for it), kids in high school (college mostly funded), and income much higher.

Basically, I'm asking if people have a good rule of thumb for scaling the basic "10x salary" rule for 1) age; 2) housing situation; 3) kids situation.

I'll give my personal example. I never had life insurance until I was 31. At that time I bought my first house ($789k mortgage) and had my first kid. I got a 30-year Term Life with $1.5M of coverage for $100/month that I still have today. Then when I was 35 I had my second kid so I got an additional 20-year Term Life with $1.0M of coverage for $55/month. Then when I was 40 I had my third kid so I got an additional 15-year Term Life with $0.5M of coverage for $22/month.

Today, I have a total of $3.0M of coverage for ~$175/month. I have an expensive house that is fully paid off and no debt. I have kids that are 2, 5, and 10 years away from college (respectively) with 529 plans that will pay for 60% of private school and 100% of state school. I'll be 48 in a few months and plan to retire early when the youngest kid is in college (I'll be around 60).

See also  Fee-Based Advisors Feel More Successful: American College

I question whether I shouldn't drop 1 of the 3 term life policies. Overall, how does one scale the "10x salary" rule as one reduces financial risks (via aging and saving)?

submitted by /u/bmaguire14
[comments]