Salary: Insurance Agents and Brokers in Hong Kong

Over the past few decades, Hong Kong’s insurance industry has experienced rapid growth. According to Insurance Authority data , as of February 29, 2024, Hong Kong has over 110,000 insurance agents and brokers, making up about 3% of the total workforce. Beyond that impressive number, the industry contributed HK$113.7 billion to Hong Kong’s GDP in 2021, accounting for 4.1% , positioning it as one of the top ten sectors.

Based on the Census and Statistics Department’s latest income data , the median income in the financial and insurance sector is $35,000, the highest among major industries in Hong Kong. That’s a whopping 67% higher than the citywide median of $21,000, showing that this field isn’t just crowded—it’s seriously lucrative.

If you know someone in the insurance game, you’ve probably heard of this term— MDRT (Million Dollar Round Table) . While it doesn’t mean a million-dollar salary, it does indicate that these intermediaries are raking in an average of at least $40,000 in first-year commissions from new policies—impressive, right?

In Hong Kong, front-line insurance intermediaries fall into two main categories: agents (who typically represent just one insurer) and brokers (who can sell products from various companies). Since agents make up the larger group and their pay structures differ a bit, let’s dive into how much they can earn from commissions on a single policy.

1. First-year commission on new business

2. Ongoing benefits like renewal commissions and

3. Management income from leading a team

Setting aside management income, both first-year commissions and renewal commissions are directly tied to policy sales —so, to understand why insurance intermediaries often earn top dollar, we need to look at how commissions are structured.

From chats with current and former agents, it’s clear that commissions for first-year and renewal premiums vary widely depending on the product—anywhere from 1% to 60%. This mainly depends on factors like the premium payment period and the savings component. Based on my own experience and estimates, here’s a quick breakdown of common hot-selling products and their approximate commission rates:

As you can see from this commission structure, commissions are generally linked to the savings component and the premium payment period, with first-year commissions potentially reaching up to 60% ! In other words, more than half of your first-year premium might go toward the agent’s cut, leaving only a fraction for actual coverage or investment.

And that’s not the whole story. On top of first-year commissions, agents often snag extra bonuses and incentives, typically 15% to 40% of that initial commission. Plus, their managers get a slice too, usually 30% to 50% of the first-year commission—making the whole setup even more rewarding.

If you think agents’ commissions are unreasonably high, brokers’ commissions might shock you even more!

In the two Facebook posts by the CEO on the 89th floor of IFC ( Post 1 , Post 2 ), it reveals that insurance brokers can receive commissions even higher than agents—by a whopping 30% to 50%! From the commission table in the posts, it’s shown that for some products with long premium payment periods, the first-year commission alone can reach as high as 96%, meaning almost all of the first-year premium goes straight to the broker’s commission. Additionally, the CEO mentioned the Insurance Authority’s concerns about this commission structure.

In the December 2023 issue of the Insurance Authority’s Regulatory Communication , it states: “The temptation to focus on selling new policies may conflict with the duty to service existing ones. Due to the ‘all-or-nothing’ nature of commissions (you get them only if you sell, and nothing if you don’t), the higher the commission level, the greater the internal pressure to sell. Economic realities mean that if the commission structure is poorly adjusted, it could overly incentivize intermediaries—or even subconsciously lead them to prioritize their own interests over clients’, potentially resulting in poor outcomes for clients.”

1. Focusing Only on New Policies

Whether for agents or brokers, there’s commission on the first year plus renewal commissions. However, under the current system, first-year commissions are typically sky-high, so renewal commissions end up being much lower (usually between 1% and 25%), creating a top-heavy reward structure.

This setup makes it all too easy for intermediaries to prioritize selling new policies over managing existing ones; in extreme cases, some unscrupulous ones might even encourage clients to “cancel the old policy and start a new one” to pocket those hefty first-year commissions ( Example 1 ). Recognizing this, the insurance regulatory body requires the industry to submit a Key Facts Statement—Policy Replacement to ensure clients fully understand the potential losses from “canceling the old and starting new.”

2. Avoiding Medical Insurance and Specializing in Savings

Looking at the commission structures above, besides encouraging “cancel the old and start new,” another common issue arises: pushing high-commission products while dodging those with low commissions that require more effort.

Among various insurance products, medical insurance often demands the most follow-up services, yet it offers one of the lowest first-year commissions—which is why many insurance teams steer clear of selling it altogether.

On the flip side, savings insurance comes with higher commissions and less need for ongoing service, making it a “prime target” for many intermediaries. As one Malaysian insurance training expert candidly shared in an interview : “An insurance agent’s time is limited; if they sell medical policies, they’d be running ragged at hospitals and barely making any money.”

Think about it—just selling a bundled savings policy can net commissions in the thousands or even tens of thousands. In contrast, even for a pricey high-end medical plan, the commission might only be a couple of thousand or less. With such a stark difference, is it any wonder intermediaries have their preferences?

In the most extreme scenarios, some intermediaries bundle savings plans with standalone medical insurance, using catchy phrases like ” payments that can be stopped ” to boost sales and their commissions on medical plans. This approach is downright unhealthy for the entire insurance ecosystem, especially since many working folks can only afford plans without savings components—but this commission culture often clashes with what consumers actually need.

Let’s dive into the heart of the matter: Insurance intermediaries receive exceptionally high commissions, but is their performance really worth it?

Of course, under effective market supply and demand principles, intermediaries’ performance must justify the price, which is why insurance companies shell out such hefty commissions to directly reward policy sales. The more profitable or harder-to-sell the policy, the higher the commission rate— so from the insurers’ perspective, at least, intermediaries’ efforts are worth every penny of that premium payout.

But here’s the catch: Those sky-high commissions ultimately come from policyholders’ premiums, whether it’s the first-year payment or renewals. Most policyholders have no idea just how much intermediaries pocket, and even if they did, there’s no way to change the commission rates (it’s illegal to offer insurance rebates in Hong Kong).

Do you know anyone working on the front lines of the insurance industry? After 5 years, how many are still in the game? Even as an outsider, it’s easy to see that turnover is sky-high. There aren’t official stats from places like the Insurance Authority or the Census and Statistics Department on industry attrition rates, but from what I’ve observed, fewer than 20% of agents make it through 10 years in this cutthroat field.

Knowing that attrition could hit as high as 80% over a decade, would you still count on your intermediary to stick around and serve you for the long haul when buying a long-term policy? Are you confident your policy won’t turn into an orphan policy ?

Even for those agents who survive the fierce competition, many end up switching companies for various reasons. One big factor? That extra perk known as the “signing bonus” or “handshake fee.” This is a hefty bonus—potentially in the six or seven figures—paid when an agent moves to a new firm and brings in substantial new business.

To snag that bonus, some agents switching firms might review your existing policies and nudge you to buy new ones with them to keep their services going. However, the Insurance Authority has stepped in with measures to protect policyholders, like the Long-Term Insurance Policy Transfer Guidelines , which regulate insurers and intermediaries.

Even if you luck out and land an agent who sticks with the same company, that doesn’t guarantee you’re getting your money’s worth— in fact, there are scenarios where having an agent might just make things worse.

Take investment-linked policies, for instance. Many have a contribution period, like the infamous “101 fund policy” (or later versions like “105 fund policy”). These often tie into commission structures similar to savings plans, with first-year commissions linked to the contribution duration. The twist? These policies usually allow some flexibility to pause contributions after the initial period. In the past, some agents have exploited this structure to confuse clients (as seen in example 2 ), pushing them into longer-term policies for bigger commissions.

But these shady sales tactics always end up hurting the clients most, with higher management fees deducted from investment accounts and potential massive losses if stopping contributions triggers a surrender clause. Investment-linked insurance is notoriously complex, and even everyday folks—or heck, even economists —have suffered tens of thousands in losses from such practices.

Beyond the classic “buy long, pay short” scams with 101 fund policies, there have been complaints about agents inflating clients’ income and assets (as in example 3 ) to land them with unaffordable large policies. Some even use premium financing to leverage policies for maximum commissions.

A standout case was two years ago when celebrity Chen Yanhang was misled by a bank wealth manager who overstated her income and assets, leading her to buy a HK$30 million policy . Thankfully, she went public on a TVB show, which forced the bank to correct the agent’s mistakes—talk about a silver lining in a messy situation!

The traditional commission structure can’t fully guarantee that you’ll get long-term service. Even worse, if you run into self-interested bad intermediaries, they might push you to “cancel old policies and start new ones,” or even engage in misleading sales and other unethical or illegal practices—ultimately, it’s the clients who end up losing out.

With technological advancements, services that once relied on intermediaries can now be handled easily on your own. For example, virtual insurance companies like Bowtie don’t use agents, so you can deal directly with customer service and claims specialists without any middlemen. On top of that, these innovative insurers can pass on savings from cutting commission costs through lower premiums, helping protect your wallet.