The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis (“MD&A”) is intended to help the reader understand the financial condition as of December 31, 2014, compared with December 31, 2013, and the results of operations in 2014 and 2013, compared with the immediately preceding year of Lincoln National Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries. Unless otherwise stated or the context otherwise requires, “LNC,” “Company,” “we,” “our” or “us” refers to Lincoln National Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries. The MD&A is provided as a supplement to, and should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements (“Notes”) presented in “Part II - Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” as well as “Part I - Item 1A. Risk Factors” above.
In this report, in addition to providing consolidated revenues and net income (loss), we also provide segment operating revenues and income (loss) from operations because we believe they are meaningful measures of revenues and the profitability of our operating segments. Financial information that follows is presented in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), unless otherwise indicated. See Note 1 for a discussion of GAAP.
Legislative, regulatory or tax changes, both domestic and foreign, that affect: the cost of, or demand for, our subsidiaries’ products, the required amount of reserves and/or surplus, our ability to conduct business and our captive reinsurance arrangements as well as restrictions on revenue sharing and 12b-1 payments; and the potential for U.S. federal tax reform;
Uncertainty about the effect of rules and regulations to be promulgated under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) on us and the economy and financial services sector in particular;
costs (“DAC”), value of business acquired (“VOBA”), deferred sales inducements (“DSI”) and deferred front-end loads (“DFEL”) and an increase in liabilities related to guaranteed benefit features of our subsidiaries’ variable annuity products;
The effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2014, has been audited by Ernst & Young LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, as stated in their report which is included on the following page.
Fixed maturity securities (amortized cost: 2014 - $78,609; 2013 - $76,353)
Variable interest entities’ fixed maturity securities (amortized cost: 2014 - $587; 2013 - $682)
Common stock dividends declared (2014 - $0.68; 2013 - $0.52; 2012 - $0.36)
Our measurement of fair value is based on assumptions used by market participants in pricing the asset or liability, which may include inherent risk, restrictions on the sale or use of an asset or non-performance risk, which would include our own credit risk. Our estimate of an exchange price is the price in an orderly transaction between market participants to sell the asset or transfer the liability (“exit price”) in the principal market, or the most advantageous market in the absence of a principal market, for that asset or liability, as opposed to the price that would be paid to acquire the asset or receive a liability (“entry price”). Pursuant to the Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures Topic of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards CodificationTM (“ASC”),
Otherwise, if the amortized cost of the security is greater than the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected, and the security was not purchased at a discount greater than the expected principal loss, then impairment is recognized.
Acquisition costs for UL and VUL insurance and investment-type products, which include fixed and variable deferred annuities, are generally amortized over the lives of the policies in relation to the incidence of estimated gross profits (“EGPs”) from surrender charges, investment, mortality net of reinsurance ceded and expense margins and actual realized gain (loss) on investments. Contract lives for UL and VUL policies are estimated to be 30 to 40 years based on the expected lives of the contracts. Contract lives for fixed and variable deferred annuities are generally between 13 and 30 years, while some of our fixed multi-year guarantee products have amortization periods equal to the guarantee period. The front-end load annuity product has an assumed life of 25 years. Longer lives are assigned to those blocks that have demonstrated favorable lapse experience.
Other assets consist primarily of DSI, specifically identifiable intangible assets, property and equipment owned by the Company, balances associated with corporate-owned and bank-owned life insurance, certain reinsurance assets, receivables resulting from sales of securities that had not yet settled as of the balance sheet date, debt issue costs, assets under capital leases and other prepaid expenses. Other liabilities consist primarily of current and deferred taxes, pension and other employee benefit liabilities, derivative instrument liabilities, certain reinsurance payables, payables resulting from purchases of securities that had not yet settled as of the balance sheet date, interest on borrowed funds, obligations under capital leases and other accrued expenses.
The carrying values of specifically identifiable intangible assets are reviewed at least annually for indicators of impairment in value that are other-than-temporary, including unexpected or adverse changes in the following: the economic or competitive environments in which the company operates; profitability analyses; cash flow analyses; and the fair value of the relevant business operation. If there was an indication of impairment, then the discounted cash flow method would be used to measure the impairment, and the carrying value would be adjusted as necessary and reported in impairment of intangibles on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss). Sales force intangibles are attributable to the value of the new business distribution system acquired through business combinations. These assets are amortized on a straight-line basis over their useful life of 25 years. Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) licenses acquired through business combinations are not amortized.
Interest credited includes interest credited to contract holder account balances. Interest crediting rates associated with funds invested in the general account of LNC’s insurance subsidiaries during 2012 through 2014 ranged from 1% to 10%.
ASU 2011-06, Fees Paid to the Federal Government by Health Insurer
This standard addresses the recognition and classification of fees mandated by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. The annual fee is imposed on health insurers for each calendar year beginning on or after January 1, 2014, and is payable no later than September 30 of the applicable year. If a fee payment is required, the insurer is required to record the liability in full with a corresponding deferred cost that is amortized to expense using a straight-line method of allocation over the applicable year. The ASU indicates that the annual fee does not meet the definition of an acquisition cost.
The amendments in this ASU did not have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
ASU 2013-11, Presentation of an Unrecognized Tax Benefit When a Net Operating Loss Carryforward, a Similar Tax Loss, or a Tax Credit Carryforward Exists
This standard requires an entity to present unrecognized tax benefits as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward. The standard defines specific exceptions when the unrecognized tax benefit should be presented in the financial statements as a liability and not combined with deferred tax assets.
This standard changes the requirements for reporting discontinued operations. The disposal of a component of an entity must be reported as a discontinued operation if the disposal represents a strategic shift that has a major effect on an entity’s operations and financial results. The amendments also require entities to provide new disclosures about a disposal of an individually significant component of an entity that does not qualify for discontinued operations presentation. Early adoption is permitted, but only for disposals that have not been reported in financial statements previously issued or available for issuance.
Under current GAAP, the use of the effective yield method for investments in qualified affordable housing projects is limited, and may result in certain investments being accounted for under a method of accounting that may not fairly represent the economics of the investment. This standard permits an entity to make an accounting policy election to use the proportional amortization method of accounting if certain conditions are met. The amendments are to be applied retrospectively for interim and annual reporting periods.
We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this standard, and do not expect the adoption to have a material effect on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations.
This standard establishes the core principle of recognizing revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods and services. The amendments define a five-step process that systematically identifies the various components of the revenue recognition process, culminating with the recognition of revenue upon satisfaction of an entity’s performance obligation. Retrospective application is required, and early adoption is not permitted.
We are currently evaluating the impact of adopting this standard on our consolidated financial condition and results of operations and will provide the required disclosures, as necessary, in our first quarter 2015 consolidated financial statements.
ASU 2014-16, Determining Whether the Host Contract in a Hybrid Financial Instrument Issued in the Form of a Share Is More Akin to Debt or to Equity
This standard is intended to improve consolidation accounting guidance related to limited partnerships, limited liability corporations and securitization structures. The new standard includes changes to existing consolidation models that will eliminate the presumption that a general partner should consolidate a limited partnership, clarify when fees paid to a decision maker should be a factor in the VIE consolidation evaluation and reduce the VIE consolidation models from two to one by eliminating the indefinite deferral for certain investment funds. Early adoption is permitted including adoption in an interim period.
On December 7, 2014, we entered into a stock purchase agreement with Entercom Communications Corp. (“Entercom Parent”) and Entercom Radio, LLC (“Entercom”), pursuant to which we agreed to sell LFM to Entercom for $105 million consisting of cash and perpetual cumulative convertible preferred stock of Entercom Parent. The transaction is subject to FCC, Hart-Scott-Rodino (“H-S-R”) and other customary regulatory approvals and closing conditions. As a result of a request for additional information under the H-S-R Act, closing may be delayed beyond the second quarter of 2015.
As of December 31, 2014, we adjusted the carrying amount of the assets and liabilities of LFM that will be sold to fair value less cost to sell and have reclassified such amounts as held-for-sale within other assets and other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. Accordingly, we recognized a loss of $28 million, after-tax, during the fourth quarter of 2014 reflected within income (loss) from continuing operations on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss).
We reclassified the results of operations of Delaware into income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of federal income taxes, for all periods presented on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss), and selected amounts (in millions) were as follows:
The income from discontinued operations for the year ended December 31, 2012, related to the release of reserves associated with prior tax years that were closed out during the year and a purchase price adjustment associated with the termination of a portion of the investment advisory agreement with Delaware.
As described more fully in Note 1, we regularly review our investment holdings for OTTI. Based upon this review, we believe that the AFS fixed maturity securities were not other-than-temporarily impaired as of December 31, 2014.
Based upon this evaluation as of December 31, 2014, management believes we have the ability to generate adequate amounts of cash from our normal operations (e.g., insurance premiums and fees and investment income) to meet cash requirements with a prudent margin of safety without requiring the sale of our temporarily-impaired securities.
As of December 31, 2014, the unrealized losses associated with our corporate bond securities were attributable primarily to widening credit spreads and rising interest rates since purchase. We performed a detailed analysis of the financial performance of the underlying issuers and determined that we expected to recover the entire amortized cost for each security.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, alternative investments included investments in 156 and 121 different partnerships, respectively, and the portfolio represented approximately 1% of our overall invested assets.
Credit ratings express opinions about the credit quality of a security. Securities rated investment grade, that is those rated BBB- or higher by Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”) Rating Services or Baa3 or higher by Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”), are generally considered by the rating agencies and market participants to be low credit risk. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, 96% of the fair value of our corporate bond portfolio was rated investment grade. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the portion of our corporate bond portfolio rated below investment grade had an amortized cost of $3.3 billion and $2.7 billion, respectively, and a fair value of $3.2 billion and $2.7 billion, respectively. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, 88% and 84%, respectively, of the fair value of our ABS portfolio was rated investment grade. As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, the portion of our ABS portfolio rated below investment grade had an amortized cost of $193 million and $273 million, respectively, and a fair value of $176 million and $226 million, respectively. Based upon the analysis discussed above, we believed as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, that we would recover the amortized cost of each investment grade corporate bond and ABS security.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, default rates were projected by considering underlying MBS loan performance and collateral type. Projected default rates on existing delinquencies vary between 10% to 100% depending on loan type and severity of delinquency status. In addition, we estimate the potential contributions of currently performing loans that may become delinquent in the future based on the change in delinquencies and loan liquidations experienced in the recent history. Finally, we develop a default rate timing curve by aggregating the defaults for all loans in the pool (delinquent loans, foreclosure and real estate owned and new delinquencies from currently performing loans) and the associated loan-level loss severities.
(1) We obtain collateral based upon contractual provisions with our counterparties. These agreements take into consideration the counterparties’ credit rating as compared to ours, the fair value of the derivative investments and specified thresholds that if exceeded result in the receipt of cash that is typically invested in cash and invested cash. See Note 6 for additional information.
Increase (decrease) in payables for collateral on investments (in millions) consisted of the following:
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, our most significant investments in one issuer were our investments in securities issued by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation with a fair value of $2.2 billion and $2.6 billion, respectively, or 2% and 3% of our invested assets portfolio, respectively, and our investments in securities issued by Fannie Mae with a fair value of $1.4 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively, or 1% and 2%, respectively, of our invested assets portfolio. These investments are included in corporate bonds in the tables above.
We use forward-starting interest rate swaps designated and qualifying as cash flow hedges to hedge our exposure to interest rate fluctuations related to the forecasted purchases of certain assets and liabilities and anticipated issuances of fixed-rate securities.
We use indexed annuity contracts to permit the holder to elect an interest rate return or an equity market component, where interest credited to the contracts is linked to the performance of the S&P 500 Index® (“S&P 500”). Contract holders may elect to rebalance index options at renewal dates, either annually or biannually. As of each renewal date, we have the opportunity to re-price the indexed component by establishing participation rates, caps, spreads and specified rates, subject to contractual guarantees. We purchase call options that are highly correlated to the portfolio allocation decisions of our contract holders, such that we are economically hedged with respect to equity returns for the current reset period.
We use variance swaps to hedge the liability exposure on certain options in variable annuity products. Variance swaps are contracts entered into at no cost and whose payoff is the difference between the realized variance rate of an underlying index and the fixed variance rate determined as of inception.
The maturity of the notional amounts of derivative instruments (in millions) was as follows:
Reported in interest and debt expense on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss).
Reported in commissions and other expenses on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss).
As of December 31, 2014, $21 million of the deferred net losses on derivative instruments in AOCI were expected to be reclassified to earnings during the next 12 months. This reclassification would be due primarily to interest rate variances related to our interest rate swap agreements.
Certain of our credit default swap agreements contain contractual provisions that allow for the netting of collateral with our counterparties related to all of our collateralized financing transactions that we have outstanding. If these netting agreements were not in place, we would have been required to post $3 million as of December 31, 2014, after considering the fair values of the associated investments counterparties’ credit ratings as compared to ours and specified thresholds that once exceeded result in the payment of cash.
We are exposed to credit loss in the event of non-performance by our counterparties on various derivative contracts and reflect assumptions regarding the credit or NPR. The NPR is based upon assumptions for each counterparty’s credit spread over the estimated weighted average life of the counterparty exposure less collateral held. As of December 31, 2014, the NPR adjustment was less than $1 million. The credit risk associated with such agreements is minimized by purchasing such agreements from financial institutions with long-standing, superior performance records. Additionally, we maintain a policy of requiring derivative contracts to be governed by an International Swaps and Derivatives Association (“ISDA”) Master Agreement. We are required to maintain minimum ratings as a matter of routine practice in negotiating ISDA agreements. Under some ISDA agreements, our insurance subsidiaries have agreed to maintain certain financial strength or claims-paying ratings. A downgrade below these levels could result in termination of derivative contracts, at which time any amounts payable by us would be dependent on the market value of the underlying derivative contracts. In certain transactions, we and the counterparty have entered into a credit support annex requiring either party to post collateral when net exposures exceed pre-determined thresholds. These thresholds vary by counterparty and credit rating. The amount of such exposure is essentially the net replacement cost or market value less collateral held for such agreements with each counterparty if the net market value is in our favor. As of December 31, 2014, our exposure was $41 million.
As of December 31, 2014 and 2013, $15 million and $74 million, respectively, of our unrecognized tax benefits presented below, if recognized, would have affected our income tax expense and our effective tax rate. The Company is not aware of any events for which it is likely that unrecognized tax benefits will significantly increase or decrease within the next year. A reconciliation of the unrecognized tax benefits (in millions) was as follows:
The Company is subject to examination by U.S. federal, state, local and non-U.S. income authorities. The Company is currently under examination by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for tax years 2009 through 2011. The Company anticipates closing the current exam cycle in 2015. Furthermore, LNC has filed a protest with the IRS Appeals division for tax years 2005 through 2008. These years remain open as the Company works with Appeals to finalize the tax computations in these years. All protested items have been resolved and we anticipate reaching a final settlement in 2015. The Company does not expect any adjustments that would be material to its consolidated results of operations or its financial condition.
Our amounts recoverable from reinsurers represent receivables from and reserves ceded to reinsurers. The amounts recoverable from reinsurers were $5.7 billion and $6.0 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. We focus on obtaining reinsurance from a diverse group of reinsurers, and we monitor concentration as well as financial strength ratings of our reinsurers. Our reinsurance operations were acquired by Swiss Re in December 2001 through a series of indemnity reinsurance transactions. As such, Swiss Re reinsured certain of our liabilities and obligations under the indemnity reinsurance agreements and thereby represents our largest reinsurance exposure. As we are not relieved of our liability to the ceding companies for this business, the liabilities and obligations associated with the reinsured policies remain on our Consolidated Balance Sheets with a corresponding reinsurance receivable from Swiss Re, which totaled $2.5 billion and $2.6 billion as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Swiss Re has funded a trust, with a balance of $2.6 billion as of December 31, 2014, to support this business. In addition to various remedies that we would have in the event of a default by Swiss Re, we continue to hold assets in support of certain of the transferred reserves. These assets consist of those reported as trading securities and certain mortgage loans. Our liabilities for funds withheld and embedded derivatives as of December 31, 2014, included $764 million and $128 million, respectively, related to the business sold to Swiss Re.
We recorded the gain related to the indemnity reinsurance transactions with Swiss Re as a deferred gain on business sold through reinsurance on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. The deferred gain is being amortized into income at the rate that earnings on the reinsured business are expected to emerge, over a period of 15 years from the date of sale. We amortized $48 million, after-tax, of deferred gain on business sold through reinsurance during each of 2014, 2013 and 2012.
As of December 31, 2014, LFM’s intangible assets were reclassified as other assets held-for-sale. For more information, see Note 3.
Future estimated amortization of specifically identifiable intangible assets (in millions) as of December 31, 2014, was as follows:
(1) Our variable contracts with guarantees may offer more than one type of guarantee in each contract; therefore, the amounts listed are not mutually exclusive.
Future contract benefits and other contract holder funds include reserves for our secondary guarantee products sold through our Life Insurance segment. These UL and VUL products with secondary guarantees represented 34% of total life insurance in-force reserves as of December 31, 2014, and 39% of total sales for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Future principal payments due on long-term debt (in millions) as of December 31, 2014, were as follows:
Upon an event of default, the credit facility provides that, among other things, the commitments may be terminated and the loans then outstanding may be declared due and payable. As of December 31, 2014, we were in compliance with all such covenants.
On December 23, 2014, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries entered into a credit facility agreement with a third-party lender. Under the agreement, the lender issued an irrevocable LOC effective December 30, 2014, with a maximum scheduled LOC amount of up to approximately $350 million. The LOC supports an inter-company reinsurance agreement and expires December 6, 2019. On December 29, 2014, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries amended and restated the credit facility agreement entered into on August 26, 2011, with a third-party lender. Under the amended and restated agreement, the lender issued an irrevocable LOC effective December 29, 2014, with a maximum scheduled LOC amount of up to approximately $990 million. The LOC supports an inter-company reinsurance agreement and expires August 26, 2031. On December 23, 2013, we entered into a credit facility agreement with a third-party lender. Under the agreement, the lender issued an irrevocable LOC effective December 23, 2013, with a maximum scheduled LOC amount of up to approximately $156 million. The LOC supports certain fees owed to another third-party lender and automatically renews on an annual basis, unless not extended by the third-party lender upon 30 days’ notice. On October 30, 2012, one of our wholly-owned subsidiaries amended and restated the credit facility agreement entered into on November 1, 2011, with a third-party lender. Under the amended and restated agreement, the lender issued an irrevocable LOC effective October 30, 2012, with a maximum scheduled LOC amount of up to approximately $1.0 billion. The LOC supports an inter-company reinsurance agreement and expires October 1, 2031. On April 28, 2011, certain of our wholly-owned subsidiaries amended and restated the reimbursement agreement entered into on December 31, 2009, with a
third-party lender. Under the amended agreement, the lender issued an irrevocable LOC effective April 1, 2011, with a maximum scheduled LOC amount of up to approximately $925 million. The LOC supports an inter-company reinsurance agreement and expires March 31, 2023.
These agreements each contain customary terms and conditions, including early termination fees, covenants restricting the ability of the subsidiaries to incur liens, merge or consolidate with another entity and dispose of all or substantially all of their assets. Upon an event of early termination, the agreements require the immediate payment of all or a portion of the present value of the future LOC fees that would have otherwise been paid. Further, the agreements contain customary events of default, subject to certain materiality thresholds and grace periods for certain of those events of default. The events of default include payment defaults, covenant defaults, material inaccuracies in representations and warranties, bankruptcy and liquidation proceedings and other customary defaults. Upon an event of default, the agreements provide that, among other things, obligations to issue, amend or increase the amount of any LOC shall be terminated and any obligations shall become immediately due and payable. As of December 31, 2014, we were in compliance with all such covenants.
The ACSM would generally require us to use commercially reasonable efforts to satisfy our obligation to pay interest in full on the capital securities with the net proceeds from sales of our common stock and warrants to purchase our common stock with an exercise price greater than the market price. We would have to utilize the ACSM until the trigger events no longer existed. Our failure to pay interest pursuant to the ACSM will not result in an event of default with respect to the capital securities nor will a nonpayment of interest unless it lasts for 10 consecutive years, although such breaches may result in monetary damages to the holders of the capital securities. As of December 31, 2014, we were in compliance with all such covenants.
Regulatory bodies, such as state insurance departments, the Securities and Exchange Commission, Financial Industry Regulatory Authority and other regulatory bodies regularly make inquiries and conduct examinations or investigations concerning our compliance with, among other things, insurance laws, securities laws, laws governing the activities of broker-dealers, registered investment advisors and unclaimed property laws.
LNC and its subsidiaries are involved in various pending or threatened legal or regulatory proceedings, including purported class actions, arising from the conduct of business both in the ordinary course and otherwise. In some of the matters, very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Modern pleading practice in the U.S. permits considerable variation in the assertion of monetary damages or other relief. Jurisdictions may permit claimants not to specify the monetary damages sought or may permit claimants to state only that the amount sought is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the trial court. In addition, jurisdictions may permit plaintiffs to allege monetary damages in amounts well exceeding reasonably possible verdicts in the jurisdiction for similar matters. This variability in pleadings, together with the actual experiences of LNC in litigating or resolving through settlement numerous claims over an extended period of time, demonstrates to management that the monetary relief which may be specified in a lawsuit or claim bears little relevance to its merits or disposition value.
We establish liabilities for litigation and regulatory loss contingencies when information related to the loss contingencies shows both that it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. It is possible that some matters could require us to pay damages or make other expenditures or establish accruals in amounts that could not be estimated as of December 31, 2014. While the potential future charges could be material in the particular quarterly or annual periods in which they are recorded, based on information currently known by management, management does not believe any such charges are likely to have a material adverse effect on LNC’s financial condition.
On June 13, 2009, a single named plaintiff filed a putative national class action in the Circuit Court of Allen County (“Court”), Indiana, captioned Peter S. Bezich v. LNL, No. 02C01-0906-PL73, asserting he was charged a cost of insurance fee that exceeded the applicable mortality charge, and that this fee breached the terms of the insurance contract. We dispute the allegations and are vigorously defending this matter. Plaintiff petitioned the Court to certify a class action, on behalf of all persons who purchased or owned the relevant insurance product between 1999 and 2009, alleging that: (i) LNL breached the contract by including non-mortality factors in cost of insurance rates; (ii) LNL breached the contract when it charged administrative expenses in excess of set amount; and (iii) LNL breached the contract by failing to adjust cost of insurance rates to reflect improving mortality expectations. On June 12, 2014, the Court issued an Order denying certification on all of the Plaintiff’s counts and claims except with respect to a single legal issue: whether the contract was breached as alleged in Count III. However, any damages arising from this alleged breach would have to be tried on an individual case-by-case basis. The appellate court granted permission for our interlocutory appeal of the Court’s certification of the single issue class. The plaintiff has cross-appealed and both appeals are pending.
Total rental expense on operating leases for the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, was $44 million, $44 million and $43 million, respectively. Future minimum rental commitments (in millions) as of December 31, 2014, were as follows:
In December 2014, we entered into a five-year, sale-leaseback transaction on $83 million (net of amortization) of assets, which we have classified as a capital lease on our Consolidated Balance Sheets. These assets will continue to be amortized on a straight-line basis over the assets’ remaining lives. Total accumulated amortization related to these leased assets was $55 million as of December 31, 2014. As of December 31, 2013, we did not have any leased assets that met the criteria of a capital lease. Future minimum lease payments under capital leases (in millions) as of December 31, 2014, were as follows:
As of December 31, 2014, we did not have a concentration of: business transactions with a particular customer or lender; sources of supply of labor or services used in the business; or a market or geographic area in which business is conducted that makes us vulnerable to an event that is at least reasonably possible to occur in the near term and which could cause a severe impact to our financial condition.
Although we do not have any significant concentration of customers, our American Legacy Variable Annuity (“ALVA”) product offered in our Annuities segment is significant to this segment. The ALVA product accounted for 20%, 17% and 19% of Annuities’ variable annuity product deposits in 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and represented approximately 44%, 47% and 50% of the segment’s total variable annuity product account values as of December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively. In addition, fund choices for certain of our other variable annuity products offered in our Annuities segment include American Fund Insurance SeriesSM (“AFIS”) funds. For the Annuities segment, AFIS funds accounted for 22%, 19% and 21% of variable annuity product deposits in 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively, and represented 50%, 54% and 58% of the segment’s total variable annuity product account values as of December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
State guaranty funds assess insurance companies to cover losses to contract holders of insolvent or rehabilitated companies. Mandatory assessments may be partially recovered through a reduction in future premium taxes in some states. We have accrued for expected assessments and the related reductions in future state premium taxes, which net to assessments (recoveries) of $(15) million and $(6) million as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
For 2013 and 2012, the income used in the calculation of our diluted EPS was our net income (loss) reduced by preferred stock dividends.
Represents changes in the fair values of certain derivative investments (not including those associated with our variable annuity net derivatives results), reinsurance related embedded derivatives and trading securities.
Includes the net difference in the change in embedded derivative reserves of our GLB riders and the change in the fair value of the derivative instruments we own to hedge the change in embedded derivative reserves on our GLB riders and the benefit ratio unlocking on our GDB riders, including the cost of purchasing the hedging instruments.
Details underlying commissions and other expenses (in millions) were as follows:
We maintain U.S. qualified funded defined benefit pension plans in which many of our U.S. employees and agents are participants, and we retained the Lincoln UK pension plan after the sale of that business. We also maintain non-qualified, unfunded defined benefit pension plans for certain employees and agents. In addition, for certain former employees we have supplemental retirement plans that provide defined benefit pension benefits in excess of limits imposed by federal tax law. All of our defined benefit pension plans are frozen, including the Lincoln UK pension plan, and there are no new participants and no future accruals of benefits from the date of the freeze.
The discount rate was determined based on a corporate yield curve as of December 31, 2014, and projected benefit obligation cash flows for the U.S. pension plans. We reevaluate this assumption each plan year. For 2015, our discount rate will be 4.00% for the U.S. pension plans, and 3.50% for the non-U.S. plan.
We expect the health care cost trend rate for 2015 to be 8.00% for the pre-65 population and 6.25% for the post-65 population. A one percent increase in assumed health care cost trend rates would have increased the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by $7 million and total service and interest cost components by less than $1 million. A one percent decrease in assumed health care cost trend rates would have decreased the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation by $6 million and total service and interest cost components by less than $1 million.
The components of net periodic benefit cost (in millions) for our pension and other postretirement plans were as follows:
We expect our 2015 U.S. pension plans’ net periodic benefit cost to be approximately $5 million. In addition, we expect our non-U.S. pension plan net periodic benefit recovery for 2015 to be approximately $10 million when assuming an average exchange rate of 1.56 pounds sterling to U.S. dollars.
The observable and unobservable inputs to the valuation methodologies are based on general standard inputs. The standard inputs used in order of priority are benchmark yields, reported trades, broker quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers and reference data. Depending on the type of security or the daily market activity, standard inputs may be prioritized differently or may not be available for all securities on any given day.
It is our practice to make contributions to our qualified U.S. pension plans to comply with minimum funding requirements of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974, as amended and with guidance issued there under. We do not expect to be required to make any contributions to these plans in 2015.
For our nonqualified U.S. pension plans and U.S. other postretirement benefit plans, we fund benefits as they become due to retirees. The amount expected to be contributed to the plans during 2015 is approximately $12 million and $9 million, respectively.
We sponsor defined contribution plans, which include 401(k) and money purchase plans, for eligible employees and agents. We make contributions and matching contributions to each of the active plans in accordance with the plan documents and various limitations under Section 401(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. For the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, expenses for these plans were $78 million, $72 million and $70 million, respectively.
The results for certain investment options within the plans are hedged by total return swaps. Participants’ account values change due primarily to investment earnings driven by market fluctuations. Our expenses increase or decrease in direct proportion to the change in market value of the participants’ investment options. Participants are able to select our stock as an investment option; however, it is not hedged by the total return swaps and is a primary source of expense volatility related to these plans. For further discussion of total return swaps related to our deferred compensation plans, see Note 6.
Participants may elect to defer a portion of their compensation as defined by the plan. Participants may select from prescribed “phantom” investment options that are used as measures for calculating the returns that are notionally credited to their accounts. Under the terms of the plan, we agree to pay out amounts based upon the aggregate performance of the investment measures selected by the participants. We make matching contributions based upon amounts placed into the plan by individuals after participants have exceeded applicable limits of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to 401(k) plans. The amount of our contribution is calculated in accordance with the plan document. Expenses (in millions) for this plan were as follows:
We sponsor three deferred compensation plans for certain eligible agents. Participants may elect to defer a portion of their compensation as defined by the respective plan. Participants may select from prescribed “phantom” investment options that are used as measures for calculating the returns that are notionally credited to their accounts. Under the terms of these plans, we agree to pay out amounts based upon the aggregate performance of the investment measures selected by the participants. We make matching contributions based upon amounts placed into the plans by individuals after participants have exceeded applicable limits of the Internal Revenue Code applicable to 401(k) plans. The amounts of our contributions are calculated in accordance with the plans’ documents. Expenses (in millions) for these plans were as follows:
We sponsor three stock-based incentive plans for our employees and directors and for the employees and agents of our subsidiaries that provide for the issuance of stock options, performance shares (performance-vested shares as opposed to service-vested shares), stock appreciation rights (“SARs”) and restricted stock units (“RSUs”). We issue new shares to satisfy option exercises.
Information with respect to our incentive plans involving stock options with performance conditions (aggregate intrinsic value shown in millions) was as follows:
Information with respect to our incentive plans involving stock options with service conditions (aggregate intrinsic value shown in millions) was as follows:
The total fair value of options with service conditions vested during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, was $7 million, $6 million and $4 million, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, was $18 million, $6 million and zero, respectively.
We recognize compensation expense for SARs based on the fair value method using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Compensation expense and the related liability are recognized on a straight-line basis over the vesting period of the SARs. The SARs liability is marked-to-market through net income, which causes volatility in net income (loss) as a result of changes in the market value of our stock and reported within commissions and other expenses on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss). The SARs liability as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, was $5 million and reported within other liabilities on our Consolidated Balance Sheets.
The payment for SARs exercised during the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012, was $2 million, $1 million and zero, respectively.
Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to the applicable laws and regulations of their respective states. Changes in these laws and regulations could change capital levels or capital requirements for our insurance subsidiaries.
The increase in statutory net income (loss) when comparing 2014 to 2013 was due primarily to the recapture of certain traditional and interest sensitive business under several yearly renewable term reinsurance treaties that were originally ceded to a reinsurer, a change in estimate on reserves for certain products and a lower effective tax rate due to the use of tax credit carryforwards.
The states of domicile of the Company’s insurance subsidiaries have adopted certain prescribed accounting practices that differ from those found in NAIC SAP. These prescribed practices are the use of continuous Commissioners Annuity Reserve Valuation Method (“CARVM”) in the calculation of reserves as prescribed by the state of New York, the calculation of reserves on universal life policies based on the Indiana universal life method as prescribed by the state of Indiana for policies issued before January 1, 2006, and the use of a more conservative valuation interest rate on certain annuities prescribed by the states of Indiana and New York. The Vermont insurance subsidiaries also have an accounting practice permitted by the state of Vermont that differs from that found in NAIC SAP. Specifically, the permitted practice involves accounting for the lesser of the face amount of all amounts outstanding under an LOC and the value of the Valuation of Life Insurance Policies Model Regulation (“XXX”) additional statutory reserves as an admitted asset and a form of surplus as of December 31, 2014 and 2013.
The favorable (unfavorable) effects on statutory surplus compared to NAIC statutory surplus from the use of these prescribed and permitted practices (in millions) were as follows:
The NAIC has adopted RBC requirements for life insurance companies to evaluate the adequacy of statutory capital and surplus in relation to investment and insurance risks. The requirements provide a means of measuring the minimum amount of statutory surplus appropriate for an insurance company to support its overall business operations based on its size and risk profile. Under RBC requirements, regulatory compliance is determined by the ratio of a company’s total adjusted capital, as defined by the NAIC, to its company action level of RBC (known as the “RBC ratio”), also as defined by the NAIC. The company action level may be triggered if the RBC ratio is between 75% and 100%, which would require the insurer to submit a plan to the regulator detailing corrective action it proposes to undertake. As of December 31, 2014, the combined RBC ratio of LNL, LLANY and FPP reported to their respective states of domicile and the NAIC was in excess of five times the aforementioned company action level.
The difference between the carrying value and fair value of short-term debt as of December 31, 2014 and 2013, related to current maturities of long-term debt.
The fair value of long-term debt is based on quoted market prices. For short-term debt, excluding current maturities of long-term debt, the carrying value approximates fair value. The inputs used to measure the fair value of our short-term and long-term debt are classified as Level 2 within the fair value hierarchy.
We did not have any assets or liabilities measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis as of December 31, 2014 or 2013, and we noted no changes in our valuation methodologies between these periods.
The following summarizes changes to our financial instruments carried at fair value (in millions) and classified within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. This summary excludes any effect of amortization of DAC, VOBA, DSI and DFEL. The gains and losses below may include changes in fair value due in part to observable inputs that are a component of the valuation methodology.
Included in net investment income on our Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss).
primarily to the securities’ observable market information no longer being available or becoming available. Transfers in and out for GLB reserves embedded derivatives represent reclassifications between future contract benefits and other assets or other liabilities. Transfers into and out of Levels 1 and 2 are generally the result of a change in the type of input used to measure the fair value of an asset or liability at the end of the reporting period. When quoted prices in active markets become available, transfers from Level 2 to Level 1 will result. When quoted prices in active markets become unavailable, but we are able to employ a valuation methodology using significant observable inputs, transfers from Level 1 to Level 2 will result. For the years ended December 31, 2014, 2013 and 2012 the transfers between Levels 1 and 2 of the fair value hierarchy were less than $1 million for our financial instruments carried at fair value.
The following summarizes the fair value (in millions), valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs of the Level 3 fair value measurements as of December 31, 2014:
From the table above, we have excluded Level 3 fair value measurements obtained from independent, third-party pricing sources. We do not develop the significant inputs used to measure the fair value of these assets and liabilities, and the information regarding the significant inputs is not readily available to us. Independent broker-quoted fair values are non-binding quotes developed by market