United Kingdom.
Bermuda Re’s UK branch conducts business in the UK and is subject to taxation in the UK.
Bermuda Re believes that it has operated and will continue to operate its Bermuda operation in a manner which will not cause them to be subject to UK taxation.
If Bermuda Re’s Bermuda operations were to become subject to UK income tax, there could be a material adverse impact on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flow.
Ireland.
Holdings Ireland and Ireland Re conduct business in Ireland and are subject to taxation in Ireland.
Available Information.
The Company’s Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8- K, proxy statements and amendments to those reports are available free of charge through the Company’s internet website at http://www.
everestre.
com as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).
ITEM 1A.
RISK FACTORS In addition to the other information provided in this report, the following risk factors should be considered when evaluating an investment in our securities.
If the circumstances contemplated by the individual risk factors materialize, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected and the trading price of our common shares could decline significantly.
RISKS RELATING TO OUR BUSINESS Fluctuations in the financial markets could result in investment losses.
Prolonged and severe disruptions in the public debt and equity markets, such as occurred during 2008, could result in significant realized and unrealized losses in our investment portfolio.
For the year ended December 31, 2008, we incurred $695.8 million of realized investment gains and $310.4 million of unrealized investment losses.
Although financial markets significantly improved during 2009 and 2010, they could deteriorate in the future and again result in substantial realized and unrealized losses, which could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations, equity, business and insurer financial strength and debt ratings.
Our results could be adversely affected by catastrophic events.
We are exposed to unpredictable catastrophic events, including weather-related and other natural catastrophes, as well as acts of terrorism.
Any material reduction in our operating results caused by the occurrence of one or more catastrophes could inhibit our ability to pay dividends or to meet our interest and principal payment obligations.
Subsequent to April 1, 2010, we define a catastrophe as an event that causes a loss on property exposures before reinsurance of at least $10.0 million, before corporate level reinsurance and taxes.
Prior to April 1, 2010, we used a threshold of $5.0 million.
By way of illustration, during the past five calendar years, pre-tax catastrophe losses, net of contract specific reinsurance but before cessions under corporate reinsurance programs, were as follows:
## Table 0 ##
7.7%, was receivable from Mt.
Logan Re segregated accounts and $51,124 thousand, or 5.0%, was receivable from Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (“FCIC”).
The receivables from Resolution Group and C. V.  Starr are fully collateralized by individual trust agreements.
No other retrocessionaire accounted for more than 5% of our receivables.
Future Policy Benefit Reserve.
Activity in the reserve for future policy benefits is summarized for the periods indicated:
## Table 1 ##
4.
FAIR VALUE GAAP guidance regarding fair value measurements address how companies should measure fair value when they are required to use fair value measures for recognition or disclosure purposes under GAAP and provides a common definition of fair value to be used throughout GAAP.
It defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly fashion between market participants at the measurement date.
In addition, it establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy for the disclosure of fair value measurements.
The valuation hierarchy is based on the transparency of inputs to the valuation of an asset or liability.
The level in the hierarchy within which a given fair value measurement falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the measurement, with Level 1 being the highest priority and Level 3 being the lowest priority.
The levels in the hierarchy are defined as follows: Level 1: Inputs to the valuation methodology are observable inputs that reflect unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in an active market; Level 2: Inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument; Level 3: Inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.
The Company’s fixed maturity and equity securities are primarily managed by third party investment asset managers.
The investment asset managers obtain prices from nationally recognized pricing services.
These services seek to utilize market data and observations in their evaluation process.
They use pricing applications that vary by asset class and incorporate available market information and when fixed maturity securities do not trade on a daily basis the services will apply available information through processes such as benchmark curves, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings and matrix pricing.
In addition, they use model processes, such as the Option Adjusted Spread model to develop prepayment and interest rate scenarios for securities that have prepayment features.
In limited instances where prices are not provided by pricing services or in rare instances when a manager may not agree with the pricing service, price quotes on a non-binding basis are obtained from investment brokers.
The investment asset managers do not make any changes to prices received from either the pricing services or the investment brokers.
In addition, the investment asset managers have procedures in place to review the reasonableness of the prices from the service providers and may request verification of the prices.
In addition, the Company continually performs analytical reviews of price changes and tests the prices on a random basis to an independent pricing source.
No material variances were noted during these price validation procedures.
In limited situations, where financial markets are inactive or illiquid, the Company may use its own assumptions about future cash flows and risk-adjusted discount rates to
Commission and brokerage decreased by 2.6% to $298.2 million in 2015 compared to $306.2 million in 2014.
The decrease was mainly due to the impact of the decrease in premiums earned and changes in the mix of business.
Segment other underwriting expenses decreased slightly to $34.3 million in 2015 compared to $34.6 million in 2014.
Bermuda.
The following table presents the underwriting results and ratios for the Bermuda segment for the periods indicated.
## Table 2 ##
Premiums.
Gross written premiums increased by 1.5% to $890.4 million in 2016 compared to $877.3 million in 2015, primarily due to an increased casualty writings through the Bermuda office, partially offset by lower casualty writings through the Ireland office and the negative impact of $31.1 million from the movement of foreign exchange rates.
Net written premiums increased by 5.1% to $831.9 million in 2016 compared to $791.6 million in 2015.
The difference between the change in gross written premiums compared to the change in net written premiums was due to varying utilization of reinsurance.
Premiums earned increased 1.9% to $838.0 million in 2016 compared to $822.4 million in 2015.
The change in premiums earned relative to net written premiums is the result of timing; premiums are earned ratably over the coverage period whereas written premiums are recorded at the initiation of the coverage period.
Gross written premiums increased by 11.6% to $877.3 million in 2015 compared to $786.4 million in 2014, primarily due to increased property and casualty writings through the Bermuda, Ireland and UK offices, partially offset by the negative impact of $44.1 million from the movement of foreign exchange rates.
Net written premiums increased by 6.3% to $791.6 million in 2015 compared to $744.7 million in 2014.
The difference between the change in gross written premiums compared to the change in net written premiums was due to a higher utilization of reinsurance.
Premiums earned increased 14.9% to $822.4 million in 2015 compared to $715.7 million in 2014.
The change in premiums earned relative to net written premiums is the result of timing; premiums are earned ratably over the coverage period whereas written premiums are recorded at the initiation of the coverage period.

Tables referenced above, in order (Table 0 first):
<table><tr><td>Calendar year:</td><td>Pre-tax catastrophe losses</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2010</td><td>$571.1</td></tr><tr><td>2009</td><td>67.4</td></tr><tr><td>2008</td><td>364.3</td></tr><tr><td>2007</td><td>160.0</td></tr><tr><td>2006</td><td>287.9</td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">At December 31,</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in thousands)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at beginning of year</td><td>$58,910</td><td>$59,820</td><td>$59,512</td></tr><tr><td>Liabilities assumed</td><td>175</td><td>315</td><td>250</td></tr><tr><td>Adjustments to reserves</td><td>303</td><td>2,310</td><td>4,724</td></tr><tr><td>Benefits paid in the current year</td><td>-4,315</td><td>-3,535</td><td>-4,667</td></tr><tr><td>Balance at end of year</td><td>$55,074</td><td>$58,910</td><td>$59,820</td></tr><tr><td>(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>
<table><tr><td></td><td colspan="3">Years Ended December 31,</td><td colspan="2">2016/2015</td><td colspan="2">2015/2014</td></tr><tr><td>(Dollars in millions)</td><td>2016</td><td>2015</td><td>2014</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td><td>Variance</td><td>% Change</td></tr><tr><td>Gross written premiums</td><td>$890.4</td><td>$877.3</td><td>$786.4</td><td>$13.0</td><td>1.5%</td><td>$90.9</td><td>11.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Net written premiums</td><td>831.9</td><td>791.6</td><td>744.7</td><td>40.3</td><td>5.1%</td><td>46.9</td><td>6.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Premiums earned</td><td>$838.0</td><td>$822.4</td><td>$715.7</td><td>$15.6</td><td>1.9%</td><td>$106.7</td><td>14.9%</td></tr><tr><td>Incurred losses and LAE</td><td>461.9</td><td>456.4</td><td>361.8</td><td>5.5</td><td>1.2%</td><td>94.7</td><td>26.2%</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage</td><td>234.0</td><td>216.0</td><td>198.8</td><td>18.0</td><td>8.3%</td><td>17.1</td><td>8.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expenses</td><td>36.3</td><td>36.0</td><td>34.9</td><td>0.3</td><td>0.8%</td><td>1.1</td><td>3.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Underwriting gain (loss)</td><td>$105.7</td><td>$113.9</td><td>$120.2</td><td>$-8.2</td><td>-7.2%</td><td>$-6.2</td><td>-5.2%</td></tr><tr><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td><td></td><td>Point Chg</td></tr><tr><td>Loss ratio</td><td>55.1%</td><td>55.4%</td><td>50.5%</td><td></td><td>-0.3</td><td></td><td>4.9</td></tr><tr><td>Commission and brokerage ratio</td><td>27.9%</td><td>26.3%</td><td>27.8%</td><td></td><td>1.6</td><td></td><td>-1.5</td></tr><tr><td>Other underwriting expense ratio</td><td>4.4%</td><td>4.4%</td><td>4.9%</td><td></td><td>-</td><td></td><td>-0.5</td></tr><tr><td>Combined ratio</td><td>87.4%</td><td>86.1%</td><td>83.2%</td><td></td><td>1.3</td><td></td><td>2.9</td></tr><tr><td>(Some amounts may not reconcile due to rounding.)</td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td><td></td></tr></table>

Question: Which year is Incurred losses and LAE the highest?
Answer: 2016