A life insurance policy contains a war exclusion clause. If the insured dies while serving in a declared war, the insurer will typically:
Select an option to reveal the answer and the full 3-part explanation — free, no signup.
Answer & full 3-part explanation (select an option above, or peek)
Why A is correct
War exclusion clauses state that the insurer is not liable, or is liable only for a reduced amount, often a refund of premiums paid, for death caused by war or acts of war. The exact result depends on the policy language; some policies limit only deaths in declared wars, while others handle combat-related losses differently. War represents a catastrophic, concentrated risk that is difficult to predict under standard mortality assumptions, so insurers exclude or limit it rather than charge a normal premium for it. Producers should read the specific clause before promising coverage in military scenarios.
Why the other options are wrong
- B) War deaths are commonly excluded or limited rather than automatically covered in full, so the full death benefit is not guaranteed. The exclusion exists precisely to remove war risk from coverage.
- C) No standard policy pays double for war; that would defeat the purpose of the exclusion rather than compensate for it. The exclusion limits liability, it does not create an extra benefit.
- D) There is no automatic return-of-policy mechanism; the contract governs any benefits payable under its terms. The outcome is determined by the policy language, not by a return of the contract.
Memory hook
War exclusion: battle deaths are written out of the policy or capped at a premium refund.