Management believes that based on its historical pattern of taxable income, the Company will produce sufficient income in the future to realize its deferred tax assets after valuation allowance. A valuation allowance has been recorded primarily related to tax benefits associated with foreign operations and state and local deferred tax assets. The valuation allowance as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, respectively, includes $150 million and $168 million recorded in connection with Prudential Securities Group Inc. state deferred tax assets and $215 million and $249 million recorded in connection with the acquisition of Hyundai Investment and Securities Co., Ltd. and its subsidiary. Adjustments to the valuation allowance will be made if there is a change in management’s assessment of the amount of the deferred tax asset that is realizable.
from certain of its United Kingdom investment management subsidiaries would be repatriated to the U.S. Accordingly, earnings from those United Kingdom investment management subsidiaries were no longer considered permanently reinvested. A U.S. income tax benefit of $23 million associated with the assumed repatriation of those earnings was recognized in discontinued operations in 2007. The Company had undistributed earnings of foreign subsidiaries, where it assumes permanent reinvestment, of $1,516 million at December 2007, $1,252 million at December 31, 2006 and $1,018 at December 31, 2005, for which deferred taxes have not been provided. Determining the tax liability that would arise if these earnings were remitted is not practicable.
On October 22, 2004, the American Jobs Creation Act ("the AJCA") was signed into law. The AJCA includes a deduction of 85% of certain foreign earnings that are repatriated, as defined in the AJCA. During 2005, the Company evaluated the effects of the repatriation provision and repatriated earnings of approximately $160 million from foreign operations under the AJCA, for which the Company recorded income tax expense of $9 million.
The Company's liability for income taxes includes the liability for unrecognized tax benefits, interest and penalties which relate to tax years still subject to review by the Internal Revenue Service (“Service”) or other taxing jurisdictions. Audit periods remain open for review until the statute of limitations has passed. Generally, for tax years which produce net operating losses, capital losses or tax credit carryforwards (“tax attributes”), the statute of limitations does not close, to the extent of these tax attributes, until the tax year in which they are fully utilized. The completion of review or the expiration of the statute of limitations for a given audit period could result in an adjustment to the liability for income taxes. Any such adjustment could be material to the Company’s results of operations for any given quarterly or annual period based, in part, upon the results of operations for the given period. The Company does not anticipate any significant changes to its total unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months.
On January 26, 2006, the Service officially closed the audit of the Company’s consolidated federal income tax returns for the 1997 to 2001 periods. As a result of certain favorable resolutions, the Company’s consolidated statement of operations for the year ended December 31, 2005 included an income tax benefit of $720 million, reflecting a reduction in the Company’s liability for income taxes. The statute of limitations has closed for these tax years; however, there were tax attributes which were utilized in subsequent tax years for which the statute of limitations remains open.
assumptions and/or estimation methodologies could have a material effect on the fair values. The methods and assumptions discussed below were used in calculating the fair values of the instruments. See Note 19 for a discussion of derivative instruments.
The carrying amount approximates or equals fair value for the following instruments: fixed maturities classified as available for sale, trading account assets supporting insurance liabilities, other trading account assets, equity securities, securities purchased under agreements to resell, short-term investments, cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income, restricted cash and securities, separate account assets and liabilities, broker-dealer related receivables and payables, securities sold under agreements to repurchase, and cash collateral for loaned securities. The following table discloses the Company’s financial instruments where the carrying amounts and fair values differ at December 31,
Currency derivatives, including exchange-traded currency futures and options, currency forwards and currency swaps, are used by the Company to reduce risks from changes in currency exchange rates with respect
Credit derivatives are used by the Company to enhance the return on the Company’s investment portfolio by creating credit exposure similar to an investment in public fixed maturity cash instruments. With credit derivatives the Company can sell credit protection on an identified name, or a basket of names in a first to default structure, and in return receive a quarterly premium. With single name credit default derivatives, this premium or credit spread generally corresponds to the difference between the yield on the referenced name’s public fixed maturity cash instruments and swap rates, at the time the agreement is executed. With first to default baskets, the premium generally corresponds to a high proportion of the sum of the credit spreads of the names in the basket. If there is an event of default by the referenced name or one of the referenced names in a basket, as defined by the agreement, then the Company is obligated to pay the counterparty the referenced amount of the contract and receive in return the referenced defaulted security or similar security. See Note 21 for a discussion of guarantees related to these credit derivatives. In addition to selling credit protection, in limited instances the Company has purchased credit protection using credit derivatives in order to hedge specific credit exposures in the Company’s investment portfolio.
In its mortgage operations, the Company enters into commitments to fund commercial mortgage loans at specified interest rates and other applicable terms within specified periods of time. These commitments are legally binding agreements to extend credit to a counterparty. Loan commitments for loans that will be held for sale are recognized as derivatives and recorded at fair value. The determination of the fair value of loan commitments accounted for as derivatives considers various factors including, among others, terms of the related loan, the intended exit strategy for the loans based upon either a securitization valuation models or investor purchase commitments, prevailing interest rates, and origination income or expense. Loan commitments that relate to the origination of mortgage loans that will be held for investment are not accounted for as derivatives and accordingly are not recognized in the Company’s financial statements. See Note 21 for a further discussion of these loan commitments.
As further described in Note 9, the Company sells variable annuity products, which contain embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives are marked to market through “Realized investment gains (losses), net” based on the change in value of the underlying contractual guarantees, which are determined using valuation models. The Company maintains a portfolio of derivative instruments that is intended to economically hedge the risks related to the above products’ features. The derivatives may include, but are not limited to equity options, total return swaps, interest rate swap options, caps, floors, and other instruments. In addition, some variable annuity products feature an automatic rebalancing element to minimize risks inherent in our guarantees.
The table below provides a summary of the notional amount and fair value of derivatives contracts, excluding embedded derivatives, by the primary underlying. Many derivative instruments contain multiple underlyings.
For the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, there were no derivative reclassifications to earnings due to hedged firm commitments no longer deemed probable or due to hedged forecasted transactions that had not occurred by the end of the originally specified time period.
The Company is exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties that is related to the financial derivative transactions. The Company manages credit risk by entering into derivative transactions with major commercial and investment banks and other creditworthy counterparties, and by obtaining collateral where appropriate and by limiting its single party credit exposures.
The Company has organized its principal operations into the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business. Within the Financial Services Businesses, the Company operates through three divisions, which together encompass eight reportable segments. The Company’s real estate and relocation services business as well as businesses that are not sufficiently material to warrant separate disclosure and businesses to be divested are included in Corporate and Other operations within the Financial Services Businesses. Collectively, the businesses that comprise the three operating divisions and Corporate and Other are referred to as the Financial Services Businesses.
Closed Block Business. The Closed Block Business, which is managed separately from the Financial Services Businesses, was established on the date of demutualization. It includes the Closed Block (as discussed in Note 10); assets held outside the Closed Block necessary to meet insurance regulatory capital requirements related to products included within the Closed Block; deferred policy acquisition costs related to the Closed Block policies; the principal amount of the IHC debt (as discussed in Note 12) and certain related assets and liabilities.
In managing the Financial Services Businesses, the Company analyzes the operating performance of each segment using “adjusted operating income.” Adjusted operating income does not equate to “income from continuing operations before income taxes and equity in earnings of operating joint ventures” or “net income” as determined in accordance with U.S. GAAP but is the measure of segment profit or loss used by the Company to evaluate segment performance and allocate resources, and, consistent with SFAS No. 131, “Disclosures about Segments of an Enterprise and Related Information,” is the measure of segment performance presented below.
reserves for certain policies are adjusted when cash flows related to these policies are affected by net realized investment gains and losses, and the related charge for reserves for future policy benefits represents that adjustment. Certain of the Company’s annuity products contain a market value adjustment feature that requires us to pay to the contractholder or entitles us to receive from the contractholder, upon surrender, a market value adjustment based on the crediting rates on the contract surrendered compared to crediting rates on newly issued contracts or based on an index rate at the time of purchase compared to an index rate at time of surrender, as applicable. These payments mitigate the net realized investment gains or losses incurred upon the disposition of the underlying invested assets. The related charge represents the payments or receipts associated with these market value adjustment features. Minority interest expense is recorded for the earnings of consolidated subsidiaries owed to minority investors. The related charge for minority interest in consolidated operating subsidiaries represents the portion of these earnings associated with net realized investment gains and losses.
Adjusted operating income of the International Insurance segment and International Investments segment, excluding the global commodities group, reflect the impact of an intercompany arrangement with Corporate and Other operations pursuant to which the segments’ non-U.S. dollar denominated earnings in all countries for a particular year, including its interim reporting periods, are translated at fixed currency exchange rates. The fixed rates are determined in connection with a currency hedging program designed to mitigate the risk that unfavorable rate changes will reduce the segments’ U.S. dollar equivalent earnings. Pursuant to this program, the Company’s Corporate and Other operations execute forward currency contracts with third parties to sell the hedged currency in exchange for U.S. dollars at a specified exchange rate. The maturities of these contracts correspond with the future periods in which the identified non-U.S. dollar denominated earnings are expected to be generated. These contracts do not qualify for hedge accounting under U.S. GAAP and, as noted above, all resulting profits or losses from such contracts are included in “Realized investment gains (losses), net.” When the contracts are terminated in the same period that the expected earnings emerge, the resulting positive or negative cash flow effect is included in adjusted operating income (gains of $78 million, gains of $42 million and losses of $55 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively). As of December 31, 2007 and 2006, the fair value of open contracts used for this purpose was a net asset of $12 million and $105 million, respectively.
Adjustments are also made for the purposes of calculating adjusted operating income for the following items:
The Company’s Japanese insurance operations invest in “dual currency” fixed maturities and loans, which pay interest in U.S. dollars, while the principal is payable in Japanese yen. For fixed maturities that are categorized as held to maturity, and loans where the Company’s intent is to hold them to maturity, the change in value related to foreign currency fluctuations associated with the U.S. dollar interest payments is recorded in “Asset management fees and other income.” Since these investments will be held until maturity, the foreign exchange impact will ultimately be realized as net investment income as earned. Therefore the change in value related to foreign currency fluctuations recorded within “Asset management fees and other income” is excluded from adjusted operating income and is reflected as an adjustment to “Realized investment gains (losses), net.” These adjustments were a net loss of $22 million, a net loss of $7 million, and a net gain of $19 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
In addition, the Company has certain other assets and liabilities for which, under GAAP, the change in value due to changes in foreign currency exchange rates during the period is recorded in “Asset management fees and other income.” To the extent the foreign currency exposure on these assets and liabilities is economically hedged, the change in value included in “Asset management fees and other income” is excluded from adjusted operating
income and is reflected as an adjustment to “Realized investment gains (losses), net.” These adjustments were a net gain of $134 million, a net gain of $2 million, and a net loss of $3 million for the year ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Adjusted operating income excludes net investment gains and losses on trading account assets supporting insurance liabilities. This is consistent with the exclusion of realized investment gains and losses with respect to other investments supporting insurance liabilities managed on a consistent basis, as discussed above. In addition, to be consistent with the historical treatment of charges related to realized investment gains and losses on available for sale securities, adjusted operating income also excludes the change in contractholder liabilities due to asset value changes in the pool of investments (including commercial loans) supporting these experience-rated contracts, which are reflected in “Interest credited to policyholders’ account balances.” The result of this approach is that adjusted operating income for these products includes only net fee revenue and interest spread the Company earns on these experience-rated contracts, and excludes changes in fair value of the pool of investments, both realized and unrealized, that accrue to the contractholders.
Equity in earnings of operating joint ventures. Equity in earnings of operating joint ventures, on a pre-tax basis, are included in adjusted operating income as these results are a principal source of earnings. These earnings are reflected on a GAAP basis on an after-tax basis as a separate line on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Operations.
The Asset Management segment revenues include intersegment revenues of $306 million, $342 million and $358 million for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005, respectively, primarily consisting of asset-based management and administration fees and investment expenses. Management has determined the intersegment revenues with reference to market rates. Intersegment revenues are eliminated in consolidation in Corporate and Other.
The Company occupies leased office space in many locations under various long-term leases and has entered into numerous leases covering the long-term use of computers and other equipment. Rental expense, net of sub-lease income, incurred for the years ended December 31, 2007, 2006 and 2005 was $179 million, $175 million and $192 million, respectively.
In connection with the Company’s commercial mortgage operations, it originates commercial mortgage loans. At December 31, 2007, the Company had outstanding commercial mortgage loan commitments with borrowers of $2,937 million. In certain of these transactions, the Company prearranges that it will sell the loan to an investor after the Company funds the loan. As of December 31, 2007, $574 million of the Company’s commitments to originate commercial mortgage loans are subject to such arrangements.
The Company also has other commitments, some of which are contingent upon events or circumstances not under the Company’s control, including those at the discretion of the Company’s counterparties. These other commitments amounted to $10,782 million at December 31, 2007. Reflected in these other commitments are $10,638 million of commitments to purchase or fund investments, including $7,435 million that the Company anticipates will be funded from the assets of its separate accounts.
A number of guarantees provided by the Company relate to real estate investments, in which the investor has borrowed funds, and the Company has guaranteed their obligation to their lender. In some cases, the investor is an affiliate, and in other cases the unaffiliated investor purchases the real estate investment from the Company. The Company provides these guarantees to assist the investors in obtaining financing for the transaction on more beneficial terms. The vast majority of these guarantees relate to real estate investments held by the Company’s separate accounts and the Company’s maximum potential exposure under these guarantees was $2,538 million at December 31, 2007. Any payments that may become required of the Company under these guarantees would either first be reduced by proceeds received by the creditor on a sale of the underlying collateral, or would provide the Company with rights to obtain the underlying collateral. These guarantees generally expire at various times over the next ten years. At December 31, 2007, no amounts were accrued as a result of the Company’s assessment that it is unlikely payments will be required.
Certain contracts underwritten by the Retirement segment include guarantees related to financial assets owned by the guaranteed party. These contracts are accounted for as derivatives, at fair value, in accordance with SFAS No. 133. At December 31, 2007, such contracts in force carried a total guaranteed value of $4,428 million.
In connection with its commercial mortgage operation, the Company provides commercial mortgage origination, underwriting and servicing for certain government sponsored entities, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. The Company has agreed to indemnify certain of these government sponsored entities for a portion of the credit risk associated with the mortgages it services through these relationships. The Company’s percentage share of losses incurred generally varies from 2% to 20% of the unpaid principal balance, based on the program and the severity of the loss. The unpaid principal balance of mortgages subject to these arrangements as of December 31, 2007 were $5,576 million, all of which are collateralized by first liens on the underlying commercial properties. As of December 31, 2007, the Company has established a liability of $11 million related to these indemnifications.
The Company is also subject to other financial guarantees and indemnity arrangements. The Company has provided indemnities and guarantees related to acquisitions, dispositions, investments and other transactions that are triggered by, among other things, breaches of representations, warranties or covenants provided by the Company. These obligations are typically subject to various time limitations, defined by the contract or by operation of law, such as statutes of limitation. In some cases, the maximum potential obligation is subject to contractual limitations, while in other cases such limitations are not specified or applicable. Since certain of these obligations are not subject to limitations, it is not possible to determine the maximum potential amount due under these guarantees. At December 31, 2007, the Company has accrued liabilities of $7 million associated with all other financial guarantees and indemnity arrangements, which does not include retained liabilities associated with sold businesses.
Company reinsured Liberty Mutual for certain losses including any adverse loss development on losses occurring prior to the sale that arise from insurance contracts generated through certain “discontinued” distribution channels or due to certain loss events and stop-loss protection on losses occurring after the sale and arising from those same distribution channels of up to $95 million, in excess of related premiums and other adjustments. The reinsurance covering the losses associated with the discontinued distribution channels will be settled based upon loss experience through December 31, 2008, with a provision that profits on the insurance business from these channels will be shared, with Liberty Mutual receiving up to $20 million of the first $50 million.
From November 2002 to March 2005, eleven separate complaints were filed against the Company and the law firm of Leeds Morelli & Brown in New Jersey state court. The cases were consolidated for pre-trial proceedings in New Jersey Superior Court, Essex County and captioned Lederman v. Prudential Financial, Inc., et al. The complaints allege that an alternative dispute resolution agreement entered into among Prudential Insurance, over 350 claimants who are current and former Prudential Insurance employees, and Leeds Morelli & Brown (the law firm representing the claimants) was illegal and that Prudential Insurance conspired with Leeds Morelli & Brown to commit fraud, malpractice, breach of contract, and violate racketeering laws by advancing legal fees to the law firm with the purpose of limiting Prudential’s liability to the claimants. In 2004, the Superior Court sealed these lawsuits and compelled them to arbitration. In May 2006, the Appellate Division reversed the trial court’s decisions, held that the cases were improperly sealed, and should be heard in court rather than arbitrated. In November 2006, plaintiffs filed a motion seeking to permit over 200 individuals to join the cases as additional plaintiffs, to authorize a joint trial on liability issues for all plaintiffs, and to add a claim under the New Jersey discrimination law. In March 2007, the court granted plaintiffs’ motion to amend the complaint to add over 200 additional plaintiffs and a claim under the New Jersey discrimination law but denied
The Company, along with a number of other insurance companies, received formal requests for information from the State of New York Attorney General’s Office (“NYAG”), the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), the Connecticut Attorney General’s Office, the Massachusetts Office of the Attorney General, the Department of Labor, the United States Attorney for the Southern District of California, the District Attorney of the County of San Diego, and various state insurance departments relating to payments to insurance intermediaries and certain other practices that may be viewed as anti-competitive. The Company may receive additional requests from these and other regulators and governmental authorities concerning these and related subjects. The Company is cooperating with these inquiries and has had discussions with certain authorities in an effort to resolve the inquiries into this matter. In December 2006, Prudential Insurance reached a resolution of the NYAG investigation. Under the terms of the settlement, Prudential Insurance paid a $2.5 million penalty and established a $16.5 million fund for policyholders, adopted business reforms and agreed, among other things, to continue to cooperate with the NYAG in any litigation, ongoing investigations or other proceedings. Prudential Insurance also settled the litigation brought by the California Department of Insurance and agreed to business reforms and disclosures as to group insurance contracts insuring customers or residents in California and to pay certain costs of investigation. These matters are also the subject of litigation brought by private plaintiffs, including purported class actions that have been consolidated in the multidistrict litigation in the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, In re Employee Benefit Insurance Brokerage Antitrust Litigation. In August and September 2007, the court dismissed the anti-trust and RICO claims. In January 2008, the court dismissed the ERISA claims with prejudice but has not yet resolved the state law claims. The regulatory settlement may adversely affect the existing litigation or cause additional litigation and result in adverse publicity and other potentially adverse impacts to the Company’s business.
The Company’s subsidiary, American Skandia Life Assurance Corporation, has commenced a remediation program to correct errors in the administration of approximately 11,000 annuity contracts issued by that company. The owners of these contracts did not receive notification that the contracts were approaching or past their designated annuitization date or default annuitization date (both dates referred to as the “contractual annuity date”) and the contracts were not annuitized at their contractual annuity dates. Some of these contracts also were affected by data integrity errors resulting in incorrect contractual annuity dates. The lack of notice and data integrity errors, as reflected on the annuities administrative system, all occurred before the acquisition of the American Skandia entities by the Company. The remediation and administrative costs of the remediation program are subject to the indemnification provisions of the acquisition agreement pursuant to which the Company purchased the American Skandia entities in May 2003 from Skandia.
Prudential Securities has been named as a defendant in a number of industry-wide purported class actions in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York relating to its former securities underwriting business. Plaintiffs in one consolidated proceeding, captioned In re: Initial Public Offering Securities Litigation, allege, among other things, that the underwriters engaged in a scheme involving tying agreements, undisclosed compensation arrangements and research analyst conflicts to manipulate and inflate the prices of shares sold in initial public offerings in violation of the federal securities laws. Certain issuers of these securities and their current and former officers and directors have also been named as defendants. In October 2004, the district court granted plaintiffs’ motion for class certification in six “focus cases.” In December 2006, the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit vacated that decision and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. In August 2000, Prudential Securities was named as a defendant, along with other underwriters, in a purported class action, captioned CHS Electronics Inc. v. Credit Suisse First Boston Corp. et al., which alleges on behalf of issuers of securities in initial public offerings that the defendants conspired to fix at 7% the discount that underwriting syndicates receive from issuers in violation of federal antitrust laws. Plaintiffs moved for class certification in September 2004 and for partial summary judgment in November 2005. The summary judgment motion has been deferred pending disposition of the class certification motion. In April 2006, the district court denied class certification. In September 2007, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the district court’s decision denying class certification and remanded the case to the district court for further proceedings. In a related action, captioned Gillet v. Goldman Sachs et al., plaintiffs allege substantially the same antitrust claims on behalf of investors, though only injunctive relief is currently being sought.
In addition to the regulatory proceedings described above that were settled in 2006, in October 2004, the Company and Prudential Securities were named as defendants in several class actions brought on behalf of purchasers and holders of shares in a number of mutual fund complexes. The actions are consolidated as part of a multi-district proceeding, In re: Mutual Fund Investment Litigation, pending in the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. The complaints allege that the purchasers and holders were harmed by dilution of the funds’ values and excessive fees, caused by market timing and late trading, and seek unspecified damages. In August 2005, the Company was dismissed from several of the actions, without prejudice to repleading the state claims, but remains a defendant in other actions in the consolidated proceeding. In July 2006, in one of the consolidated mutual fund actions, Saunders v. Putnam American Government Income Fund, et al., the United States District Court for the District of Maryland granted plaintiffs leave to refile their federal securities law claims against Prudential Securities. In August 2006, the second amended complaint was filed alleging federal securities law claims on behalf of a purported nationwide class of mutual fund investors seeking compensatory and punitive damages in unspecified amounts. Discovery is ongoing. Motions to dismiss the other actions are pending.
In August 1999, a Prudential Insurance employee and several Prudential Insurance retirees filed an action in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, Dupree, et al., v. Prudential Insurance, et al., against Prudential Insurance and its Board of Directors in connection with a group annuity contract entered into in 1989 between the Prudential Retirement Plan and Prudential Insurance. The suit alleged that the annuitization of certain retirement benefits violated ERISA and that, in the event of demutualization, Prudential Insurance would retain shares distributed under the annuity contract in violation of ERISA’s fiduciary duty requirements. In July 2001, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint dropping three counts, and the Company filed an answer denying the essential allegations of the complaint. The amended complaint seeks injunctive and monetary relief, including the return of what are claimed to be excess investment and advisory fees paid by the Retirement Plan to Prudential. In March 2002, the court dismissed certain of the claims against the individual defendants. A non-jury trial was concluded in January 2005. In August 2007, the court issued its decision and order dismissing the case. In September 2007, plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal with the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals. In December 2007, the appeal was withdrawn.
The Company’s litigation and regulatory matters are subject to many uncertainties, and given its complexity and scope, their outcome cannot be predicted. It is possible that results of operations or cash flow of the Company in a particular quarterly or annual period could be materially affected by an ultimate unfavorable resolution of pending litigation and regulatory matters depending, in part, upon the results of operations or cash flow for such period. In light of the unpredictability of the Company’s litigation and regulatory matters, it is also possible that in certain cases an ultimate unfavorable resolution of one or more pending litigation or regulatory matters could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position. Management believes, however, that, based on information currently known to it, the ultimate outcome of all pending litigation and regulatory matters, after consideration of applicable reserves and rights to indemnification, is not likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial position.
Results for the first quarter of 2006 include pre-tax expenses of $176 million related to obligations and costs retained in connection with businesses contributed to the retail securities brokerage joint venture with Wachovia, including an increase in the reserve for estimated settlement costs related to market timing issues involving Prudential Equity Group, LLC’s former Prudential Securities operations, with respect to which the Company announced that Prudential Equity Group, LLC had reached a settlement in August 2006.
The supplemental combining financial information presents the consolidated financial position and results of operations for Prudential Financial, Inc. and its subsidiaries (together, the “Company”), separately reporting the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business. The Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business are both fully integrated operations of the Company and are not separate legal entities. The supplemental combining financial information presents the results of the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business as if they were separate reporting entities and should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Financial Services Businesses and Closed Block Business participate in the Company’s commingled internal short-term cash management facility, pursuant to which they invest cash from securities lending and repurchase activities as well as certain trading and operating activities. The net funds invested in the facility are generally held in investments that are short term, including mortgage- and asset-backed securities. As of December 31, 2007, the balance held in this facility was approximately $16.9 billion. A proportionate interest in each security held in the portfolio is allocated to the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business based upon their proportional cash contributions to the facility as of the balance sheet date. Participation in the facility by the Financial Services Businesses and the Closed Block Business is dependent on cash flows arising from the activities noted above, which in turn can change the allocation of the facility's assets between the two Businesses. A proportionate share of any realized investment gain or loss is recorded by each Business based upon their respective ownership percentages in the facility as of the date of the realized gain or loss. Beginning in the quarter ended September 30, 2007, management determined to seek to implement changes in the facility in order to permit each Business to hold discrete ownership of its investments in the facility without affecting or being affected by the level of participation in the facility by the other Business. Pending the implementation of these changes, the facility is being managed so that the proportionate interests of the Financial