which are reported at the par amount at the time of issuance of the insurance policy.
A reduction in premiums receivable denominated in British Pounds and Euros of $32.5 million. As of December 31, 2016 premium receivables in British Pounds totaled £144.4 million and Euros totaled €33.1 million.
As of the Effective Date, the Company was generally discharged and released from all pre-Effective Date debts, liabilities, claims, causes of action and interests in accordance with the provisions of the Reorganization Plan. Holders of claims and equity interests are also generally barred from commencing or continuing any action or proceeding relating to such claims, causes of action or interests. The Reorganization Plan also provides for broad exculpation and releases of the Company, Ambac Assurance, the Segregated Account (as defined below), OCI, the Rehabilitator, the board of directors and board committees of the Company and Ambac Assurance, all individual directors, officers and employees of the
Pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement, Ambac Assurance and the Segregated Account have agreed to certain matters related to decision-making, information sharing, tax compliance and allocation of expenses, including an agreement by Ambac Assurance to reimburse the Segregated Account for specified expenses, subject to the Minimum Surplus Amount. Ambac Assurance has made certain covenants to the Segregated Account pursuant to the Cooperation Agreement, including an agreement to not enter into any transaction involving consideration or other proceeds of more than $5,000 (or such higher amount as determined by the Rehabilitator) without the Segregated Account’s prior written consent (other than policy claim payments made in the ordinary course of business and investments in accordance with Ambac Assurance’s investment policy), and providing the Segregated Account with an annual operating expense budget for Ambac Assurance and its subsidiaries, as well as quarterly analyses of variances. The Cooperation Agreement also addresses Ambac Assurance’s rights in the event Ambac Assurance is no longer the management and administrative services provider to the Segregated Account as described above. The Cooperation Agreement Amendment made each of the Company and the Rehabilitator a party to the Cooperation Agreement and provides the Rehabilitator with certain additional approval rights with respect to (a) the tax positions taken by the Company in its consolidated tax return; (b) the acceptance by Ambac Assurance of the repayment of intercompany loans or the modification of the terms thereof; (c) changes by Ambac Assurance in the assumptions or vendors utilized in determining loss reserves determined in accordance with Statutory Accounting Principles; and (d) changes to Ambac Assurance’s investment policy and transfer of the investment management function for Ambac Assurance’s investment portfolio.
Ambac has a formal impairment review process for available for sale securities in its investment portfolio. Ambac conducts a review each quarter to identify and evaluate investments that have indications of impairment that may be other than temporary in accordance with the Investments - Debt and Equity Securities Topic of the ASC. Factors considered to identify and assess securities for other than temporary impairment include: (i) fair values that have declined by 20% or more below amortized cost; (ii) market values that have declined by 5% or more but less than 20% below amortized cost for a continuous period of at least six months; (iii) recent downgrades by rating agencies; (iv) the financial condition of the issuer and financial guarantor, as applicable, and an analysis of projected defaults on the underlying collateral; (v) scheduled interest payments are past due; (vi) whether Ambac has the intent to sell the security; and (vii) whether it is more likely than not that Ambac will be required to sell a security before the anticipated recovery of its amortized cost basis. If we believe a decline in the fair value of a particular investment is temporary, we record the decline as an unrealized loss net of tax in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income in Stockholders’ Equity on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. If management either: (i) has the intent to sell its investment in a debt security or (ii) determines that the Company more likely than not will be required to sell the debt security before its anticipated recovery of the amortized cost basis less any current period credit impairment, then an other-than-temporary impairment charge is recognized in earnings, with the amortized cost of the security being written-down to fair value. If these conditions are not met, but it is determined that a credit loss exists, the credit impairment loss is recognized in earnings, and the other-than-temporary amount related to all other factors is recognized in other comprehensive income. For fixed income securities that have other-than-temporary impairments in a period, the previous amortized cost of the security less the amount of the other-than-temporary impairment recorded through earnings becomes the investment’s new cost basis. Ambac accretes the new cost basis to par or to the estimated future cash flows to be recovered over the expected remaining life of the security.
The approaches used to estimate expected future losses and recoveries considers the likelihood of all possible outcomes. The evaluation process for determining expected losses is subject to certain judgments based on our assumptions regarding the probability of default by the issuer of the insured security, probability of settlement outcomes (which may include commutation settlements, refinancing and/or other settlement outcomes) and expected severity of credits for each insurance contract. Ambac’s loss reserves are based on management’s on-going review of the financial guarantee credit portfolio. Active surveillance of the insured portfolio enables Ambac’s Portfolio Risk Management ("PRM") group to track credit migration of insured obligations from period to period and update internal classifications and credit ratings for each transaction. Non-adversely classified credits are assigned a Class I or Survey List (“SL”) rating while adversely classified credits are assigned a rating of Class IA through Class V. The criteria for an exposure to be assigned an adversely classified credit rating includes the deterioration of an issuer’s financial condition, underperformance of the underlying collateral (for collateral dependent transactions such as mortgage-backed or student loan securitizations), poor performance by the servicer of the underlying collateral and other adverse economic events or trends. The servicer of the underlying collateral of an insured securitization transaction is a consideration in assessing credit quality because the servicer’s performance can directly impact the performance of the related issue. For example, a servicer of a mortgage-backed securitization that does not remain current in its collection loss mitigation efforts could cause an increase in the delinquency and potential default of the underlying obligation. Similarly, loss severities increase when a servicer does not effectively handle loss mitigation activities such as (i) the advancing of delinquent principal and interest and of default related expenses which are deemed to be recoverable by the servicer, (ii) pursuit of loan charge-offs which maximize cash flows from the mortgage loan pool, and (iii) foreclosure and real estate owned disposition strategies and timelines. All credits are assigned risk classifications by PRM group using the following guidelines:
We determined that Ambac’s subsidiaries generally have the obligation to absorb a FG VIE's expected losses given that they have issued financial guarantees supporting the liabilities (and in certain cases assets). As further described below, we consolidated certain FG VIEs because: (i) we determined for certain transactions that experienced the aforementioned performance deterioration, that Ambac’s subsidiaries had the power, through voting rights or similar rights, to direct the activities that most significantly impact the VIE’s economic performance because certain triggers had been breached in these transactions resulting in Ambac's subsidiaries' ability to exercise certain loss remediation activities, or (ii) due to the passive nature of the VIEs’ activities, Ambac’s subsidiaries’ contingent loss remediation rights upon a breach of certain triggers in the future is considered to be the power to direct the activities that most significantly impact the VIEs’ economic performance. With respect to existing VIEs involving Ambac financial guarantees, Ambac is generally required to consolidate a VIE in the period that applicable triggers result in Ambac having control over the VIE’s most significant economic activities. A VIE is deconsolidated in the period that Ambac no longer has such control, which could occur in connection with insurance policies that are allocated to the Segregated Account, execution of remediation activities on the transaction or amortization of insured exposure, any of which may reduce the degree of Ambac’s control over a VIE. Assets and liabilities of FG VIEs that are consolidated are reported within Variable interest entity assets or Variable interest entity liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. The net results from such FG VIEs are reported within Income (loss) on variable interest entities in the Consolidated Statements of Total Comprehensive Income.
A subsidiary of Ambac transferred financial assets to two special purpose entities. The business purpose of these entities was to provide certain financial guarantee clients with funding for their debt obligations. These special purpose entities were established as separate legal entities, demonstrably distinct from Ambac and that Ambac, its affiliates or its agents could not unilaterally dissolve. The permitted activities of these entities were contractually limited to purchasing assets from Ambac, issuing MTNs to fund such purchases, executing derivative hedges and obtaining financial guarantee policies with respect to indebtedness incurred. Effective February 17, 2015, one of the special purpose entities
The amount of recorded subrogation recoveries related to each securitization is limited to ever-to-date paid and unpaid losses plus the present value of expected cash flows for each policy. To the extent losses have been paid but not yet fully recovered, the recorded amount of RMBS subrogation recoveries may exceed the sum of the unpaid claims and the present value of expected cash flows for a given policy. The net cash inflow for these policies is recorded as a “Subrogation recoverable” asset. For those transactions where the subrogation recovery is less than the sum of unpaid claims and the present value of expected cash flows, the net cash outflow for these policies is recorded as a “Loss and loss expense reserves” liability.
Sponsor actions include loan repurchases, direct payments to Ambac and other contributions from sponsors. In January 2016, Ambac Assurance settled its RMBS-related disputes and litigation against JP Morgan Chase & Co. and certain of its affiliates (collectively "JP Morgan"). Pursuant to the settlement, JP Morgan paid Ambac Assurance $995,000 in cash in return for releases of all of Ambac Assurance's claims against JP Morgan arising from certain RMBS transactions insured by Ambac Assurance. Ambac Assurance also agreed to withdraw its objections to JP Morgan's global RMBS settlement with RMBS trustees.
Ambac Assurance (exclusive of the Segregated Account which is under the control of OCI via the Segregated Account Rehabilitation Plan and Segregated Account Rehabilitation Proceedings) and Everspan are subject to the insurance laws and regulations of each jurisdiction in which it is licensed, some of which are described below. Failure to comply with applicable insurance laws and regulations (including, without limitation, minimum surplus requirements, aggregate risk limits and single risk limits) could expose Ambac Assurance or Everspan to fines, the loss or suspension of insurance licenses in certain jurisdictions, the imposition of orders by regulators with respect to the conduct of business by Ambac Assurance or Everspan and/or the inability to pay dividends, all of which could have an adverse impact on our business results.
OCI has prescribed an additional accounting practice that differs from NAIC SAP. Paragraph 4 of Statement of Statutory Accounting Principles No. 41 “Surplus Notes” (“SSAP 41”) states that proceeds received by the issuer of surplus notes must be in the form of cash or other admitted assets having readily determinable values and liquidity satisfactory to the commissioner of the state of domicile. Under the statutory accounting principles as generally applied, surplus notes issued in conjunction with commutations or the settlement of claims would be valued at zero upon issuance pursuant to paragraph 4, SSAP 41. OCI has directed Ambac Assurance to record surplus notes issued in connection with commutations or the settlement of claims at full par value upon issuance as in these instances the surplus notes did not represent a contribution of capital, but rather a distribution of value from the common and preferred shareholders of Ambac Assurance. The surplus notes issued in connection with commutations or settlement of claims has a claim against surplus senior to the preferred and common shareholders.
We do not adjust the relative change ratio until an actual internal rating downgrade has occurred unless we observe new pricing on financial guarantee CDS contracts. Since we have active surveillance procedures in place for our entire CDS portfolio, particularly for transactions at or near a below investment grade threshold, we believe it is unlikely that an internal downgrade would lag the actual credit deterioration of a transaction for any meaningful time period. The factors used to increase the relative change ratio are based on rating agency probability of default percentages determined by management to be appropriate for the relevant bond type. That is, the probability of default associated with the respective tenor and internal rating of each CDS transaction is utilized in the computation of the relative change ratio in our CDS valuation model. The new relative change ratio in the event of an internal downgrade of the reference obligation is calculated as the weighted average of: (i) a given transaction’s inception relative change ratio and (ii) a ratio of 100%. The weight given to the inception relative change ratio is 100% minus the current probability of default (the probability of non-default) and the weight given to using a 100% relative change ratio is the probability of default. For example, assume a transaction having an inception relative change ratio of 33% is downgraded to B-during the period, at which time it has an estimated remaining life of 8 years. If the estimated probability of default for an 8 year, B-rated credit of this type is 60% then the revised relative change ratio will be 73.2%. The revised relative change ratio can be calculated as 33% x (100%-60%) +100% x 60% = 73.2%.
VIE derivative asset and liability fair values are determined using valuation models. When specific derivative contractual terms are available and may be valued primarily by reference to interest rates, foreign exchange rates and yield curves that are observable and regularly quoted, the derivatives are valued using vendor-developed models. Other derivatives within the VIEs that include significant unobservable valuation inputs are valued using internally developed models. VIE derivative fair value balances at December 31, 2016 and 2015 were developed using vendor-developed models and do not use significant unobservable inputs.
Management has determined that the unrealized losses reflected in the tables above are temporary in nature as of December 31, 2016 and 2015 based upon (i) no unexpected principal and interest payment defaults on these securities; (ii) analysis of the creditworthiness of the issuer and financial guarantor, as applicable, and analysis of projected defaults on the underlying collateral; (iii) management has no intent to sell these investments in debt securities; and (iv) it is not more likely than not that Ambac will be required to sell these debt securities before the anticipated recovery of its amortized cost basis. The assessment under (iv) is based on a comparison of future available liquidity from the investment portfolio against the projected net cash flow from operating activities and debt service. For purposes of this assessment, available liquidity from the investment portfolio is comprised of the fair value of securities for which management has asserted its intent to sell, trading securities plus the projected principal and interest payments from the remaining securities in the portfolio. To the extent that securities that management intends to sell are in an unrealized loss position, they would have already been considered other-than-temporarily impaired with the amortized cost written down to fair value. For purposes of this analysis, residual cash flows are projected to be invested at current reinvestment rates consistent with existing fixed income portfolio holdings. Because the above-described assessment indicates that future available liquidity exceeds projected net cash outflow, it is not more likely than not that we would be required to sell securities in an unrealized loss position before the recovery of their amortized cost basis. In the liquidity assessment described above, principal payments on securities pledged as collateral are not considered to be available for other liquidity needs until the collateralized positions are projected to be settled. Projected interest receipts on securities pledged as collateral generally belong to Ambac and are considered to be sources of available liquidity from the investment portfolio.
The total effect of income taxes on net income and stockholders’ equity for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
On June 9, 2014, the Rehabilitator filed in the Rehabilitation Court a motion to confirm and declare the reimbursement amounts due with respect to cash claim payments made by Ambac Assurance and the Segregated Account on two policies. Certain investors filed objections to the motion on July 2, 2014. On July 7, 2014, after a hearing on the motion, the Rehabilitation Court granted the Rehabilitator’s motion. On August 20, 2014, a group of investors filed a notice of appeal. On March 4, 2016, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed the Rehabilitation Court’s ruling. On March 24, 2016, a group of investors filed a motion for reconsideration asking the Wisconsin Court of Appeals to reverse its decision. The motion for reconsideration was denied on March 30, 2016.
Meade Communities LLC v. Ambac Assurance Corporation (Circuit Court, Anne Arundel County, Maryland, Case No. C-02-CV-15-003745). Plaintiff filed this action on December 2, 2015. Ambac Assurance’s answer was served on February 16, 2016.
Ambac Assurance Corporation and the Segregated Account of Ambac Assurance Corporation v. Countrywide Home Loans, Inc., Countrywide Securities Corp., Countrywide Financial Corp., and Bank of America Corp. (Supreme Court of the State of New York, County of New York, Case No. 653979/2014, filed on December 30, 2014). Ambac Assurance alleges a claim for fraudulent inducement in connection with Ambac Assurance’s issuance of insurance policies relating to eight residential mortgage-backed securitizations that are not the subject of Ambac Assurance’s previously filed lawsuits against the same defendants. On February 20, 2015, the Countrywide defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, which Bank of America joined on February 23, 2015. Ambac Assurance opposed the motion. On December 20, 2016, the court issued a decision denying the defendants’ motion to dismiss.. Discovery is ongoing.