the capitalization and amortization of DAC and the establishment and amortization of VOBA;
The accounting for derivatives is complex and interpretations of the primary accounting standards continue to evolve in practice. Judgment is applied in determining the availability and application of hedge accounting designations and the appropriate accounting treatment under these accounting standards. If it was determined that hedge accounting designations were not appropriately applied, reported net income could be materially affected. Differences in judgment as to the availability and application of hedge accounting designations and the appropriate accounting treatment may result in a differing impact on the consolidated financial statements of the Company from that previously reported. Measurements of ineffectiveness of hedging relationships are also subject to interpretations and estimations and different interpretations or estimates may have a material effect on the amount reported in net income.
As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, DAC and VOBA for the total Company was $4.9 billion and $5.1 billion, respectively, of which $4.9 million was in the Individual segment for both years.
The Company offers certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefit riders. These include guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefit (“GMWB”) riders and guaranteed minimum accumulation benefit (“GMAB”) riders. GMWB and GMAB riders are embedded derivatives, which are measured at fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in fair value reported in net investment gains (losses). The fair values of GMWB and GMAB riders are calculated based on actuarial and capital market assumptions related to the projected cash flows, including benefits and related contract charges, over the lives of the contracts, incorporating expectations concerning policyholder behavior. These riders may be more costly than expected in volatile or declining markets, causing an increase in liabilities for future policy benefits, negatively affecting net income.
The Company enters into reinsurance transactions as both a provider and a purchaser of reinsurance for its insurance products. Accounting for reinsurance requires extensive use of assumptions and estimates, particularly related to the future performance of the underlying business and the potential impact of counterparty credit risks. The Company periodically reviews actual and anticipated experience compared to the aforementioned assumptions used to establish assets and liabilities relating to ceded and assumed reinsurance and evaluates the financial strength of counterparties to its reinsurance agreements using criteria similar to that evaluated in the security impairment process discussed previously. Additionally, for each of its reinsurance contracts, the Company determines if the contract provides indemnification against loss or liability relating to insurance risk, in accordance with applicable accounting standards. The Company reviews all contractual features, particularly those that may limit the amount of insurance risk to which the reinsurer is subject or features that delay the timely reimbursement of claims. If the Company determines that a reinsurance contract does not expose the reinsurer to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk, the Company records the contract using the deposit method of accounting.
An increase in interest credited to policyholder account balances of $12 million, net of income tax, due primarily to lower amortization of the excess interest reserves on acquired annuity and universal life blocks of business.
In June 2005, the FASB completed its review of EITF Issue No. 03-1, The Meaning of Other-Than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments (“EITF 03-1”). EITF 03-1 provides accounting guidance regarding the determination of when an impairment of debt and marketable equity securities and investments accounted for under the cost method should be considered other-than-temporary and recognized in income. EITF 03-1 also requires certain quantitative and qualitative disclosures for debt and marketable equity securities classified as available-for-sale or held-to-maturity under SFAS No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and subsidiaries (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2007. Our audits also included the financial statement schedules listed in the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements and Schedules. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.
On July 1, 2005 (the “Acquisition Date”), MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut became a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife. MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, together with substantially all of Citigroup Inc.’s (“Citigroup”) international insurance businesses, excluding Primerica Life Insurance Company and its subsidiaries (“Primerica”) (collectively, “Travelers”), were acquired by MetLife from Citigroup (the “Acquisition”) for $12.1 billion. See Note 2 for further information on the Acquisition.
During the second quarter of 2007, the nature of the Company’s partnership interest in Greenwich Street Investments, LP (“Greenwich”) changed such that Greenwich is no longer consolidated and is now accounted for under the equity method of accounting. During the second quarter of 2006, the Company’s ownership interest in Tribeca Citigroup Investments, Ltd. (“Tribeca”) declined to a position whereby Tribeca is no longer consolidated and is now accounted for under the equity method of accounting. As such, there was no minority interest liability at December 31, 2007. Minority interest related to Greenwich included in other liabilities was $43 million at December 31, 2006.
and that a separate instrument with the same terms would qualify as a derivative instrument, the embedded derivative is bifurcated from the host contract and accounted for as a freestanding derivative. Such embedded derivatives are carried on the consolidated balance sheet at fair value with the host contract and changes in their fair value are reported currently in net investment gains (losses). If the Company is unable to properly identify and measure an embedded derivative for separation from its host contract, the entire contract is carried on the balance sheet at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses). Additionally, the Company may elect to carry an entire contract on the balance sheet at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) if that contract contains an embedded derivative that requires bifurcation. There is a risk that embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation may not be identified and reported at fair value in the consolidated financial statements and that their related changes in fair value could materially affect reported net income.
The Company is a party to legal actions and is involved in regulatory investigations. Given the inherent unpredictability of these matters, it is difficult to estimate the impact on the Company’s financial position. Liabilities are established when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. On a quarterly and annual basis, the Company reviews relevant information with respect to liabilities for litigation, regulatory investigations and litigation-related contingencies to be reflected in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. It is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters, or the use of different assumptions in the determination of amounts recorded, could have a material adverse effect upon the Company’s consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.
During the second quarter of 2006, the Company’s ownership interests in Tribeca declined to a position whereby Tribeca is no longer consolidated and, as of June 30, 2006, was accounted for under the equity method of accounting. The equity method investment at December 31, 2006 of $82 million was included in other limited partnership interests. Net investment income related to the Company’s equity method investment in Tribeca was $9 million for the six months ended December 31, 2006.
The Company may be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to derivative financial instruments. Generally, the current credit exposure of the Company’s derivative contracts is limited to the fair value at the reporting date. The credit exposure of the Company’s derivative transactions is represented by the fair value of contracts with a net positive fair value at the reporting date.
The use of discount rates was necessary to establish the fair value of the other identifiable intangible assets. In selecting the appropriate discount rates, management considered its weighted average cost of capital as well as the weighted average cost of capital required by market participants. A discount rate of 11.5% was used to value these intangible assets.
The Company’s life insurance operations participate in reinsurance activities in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to large risks, and provide additional capacity for future growth. The Company has historically reinsured the mortality risk on new individual life insurance policies primarily on an excess of retention basis or a quota share basis. The Company has reinsured up to 90% of the mortality risk for all new individual life insurance policies. This practice was initiated by the Company for different products starting at various points in time between 1997 and 2004. On a case by case basis, the Company may retain up to $5 million per life on single life individual policies and reinsure 100% of amounts in excess of the Company’s retention limits. The Company evaluates its reinsurance
The NAIC adopted the Codification of Statutory Accounting Principles (“Codification”) in 2001. Codification was intended to standardize regulatory accounting and reporting to state insurance departments. However, statutory accounting principles continue to be established by individual state laws and permitted practices. The Connecticut Insurance Department and the Delaware Department of Insurance have adopted Codification with certain modifications for the preparation of statutory financial statements of insurance companies domiciled in Connecticut and Delaware, respectively. Modifications by the various state insurance departments may impact the effect of Codification on the statutory capital and surplus of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut and MLI-USA.
Statutory net income of MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, a Connecticut domiciled insurer, was $1.1 billion, $856 million and $1.0 billion for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively. Statutory capital and surplus, as filed with the Connecticut Insurance Department, was $4.2 billion and $4.1 billion at December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively. Due to the merger of MLAC with and into MetLife Insurance Company of Connecticut, the 2006 statutory net income balance was adjusted.
Revenues derived from any customer did not exceed 10% of consolidated revenues for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005. Substantially all of the Company’s revenues originated in the United States.