The Company has operations located throughout the U.S. and Europe, with its principal executive offices located in Simsbury, Connecticut. The executive offices are owned by our parent company, Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company (“HLA”). The Company owns the facilities located in Windsor, Connecticut and Woodbury, Minnesota. The Company believes its properties and facilities are suitable and adequate for current operations.
[1] Net investment income includes investment income and mark-to-market effects of equity securities, trading, supporting international unit - linked bonds and pension products business, which are classified in net investment income with corresponding amounts credited to policyholders.
Net realized gains (losses), excluding the impacts of the modco reinsurance agreement improved by $989 for the year ended December 31, 2011 compared to 2010 for a net realized loss of $501. For further discussion on the Net realized gains, see Net Realized Capital Gains (Losses) within the MD&A.
In addition to the income tax benefit recognized from the dividends received deduction, income tax expense (benefit) includes a $50 income tax benefit for the release of the income tax valuation allowance associated with investment realized capital losses for the year ended December 31, 2011. This valuation allowance was recorded during the third quarter of 2010. Also included in the income tax expense (benefit) for the year ended December 31, 2011 is a $52 income tax benefit related to a resolution of a tax matter with the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) for the computation of dividends received deduction for years 1998, 2000 and 2001. See Note 11 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements for a reconciliation of the tax provision at the U.S. Federal statutory rate to the provision for income taxes.
The preparation of financial statements, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ, and in the past has differed, from those estimates.
The Company determines EGPs from a single deterministic reversion to mean (“RTM”) separate account return projection which is an estimation technique commonly used by insurance entities to project future separate account returns. Through this estimation technique, the Company’s DAC model is adjusted to reflect actual account values at the end of each quarter. Through a consideration of recent market returns, the Company will unlock, or adjust, projected returns over a future period so that the account value returns to the long-term expected rate of return, providing that those projected returns do not exceed certain caps or floors. This DAC Unlock, for future separate account returns, is determined each quarter. Under RTM, the expected long term rate of return is 8.3%.
Index to Financial Statements All assumption changes that affect the estimate of future EGPs including: the update of current account values; the use of the RTM estimation technique; and policyholder behavior assumptions, are considered an Unlock in the period of revision. An Unlock adjusts DAC, SIA, URR and death and other insurance benefit reserve balances in the Consolidated Balance Sheets with an offsetting benefit or charge in the Consolidated Statements of Operations in the period of the revision. An Unlock that results in an after-tax benefit generally occurs as a result of actual experience or future expectations of product profitability being favorable compared to previous estimates. An Unlock that results in an after-tax charge generally occurs as a result of actual experience or future expectations of product profitability being unfavorable compared to previous estimates.
EGPs are also used to determine the expected excess benefits and assessments included in the measurement of death and other insurance benefit reserves. These excess benefits and assessments are derived from a range of stochastic scenarios that have been calibrated to the Company’s RTM separate account returns. The determination of death and other insurance benefit reserves is also impacted by discount rates, lapses, volatilities and mortality assumptions and benefit utilization, including assumptions around annuitization rates.
An Unlock revises EGPs, on a quarterly basis, to reflect market updates of policyholder account value and the Company’s current best estimate assumptions. Modifications to the Company’s hedging programs may impact EGPs, and correspondingly impact DAC recoverability. After each quarterly Unlock, the Company also tests the aggregate recoverability of DAC by comparing the DAC balance to the present value of future EGPs. As of December 31, 2011, the margin between the DAC balance and the present value of future EGPs for U.S. individual variable annuities was 3.0%, reflective of the reinsurance of a block of individual variable annuities with an affiliated captive reinsurer. If the margin between the DAC asset and the present value of future EGPs is exhausted, then further reductions in EGPs would cause portions of DAC to be unrecoverable and the DAC asset would be written down to equal future EGPs.
Index to Financial Statements For the year ended December 31, 2009
The Unlock charge for the year ended December 31, 2009 was driven primarily by $(1.3) billion related to reinsurance of a block of in-force and prospective U.S. variable annuities and the associated GMDB and GMWB riders with an affiliated captive reinsurer, as well as actual separate account returns significantly below our aggregated estimated return for the first quarter of 2009, partially offset by actual returns greater than our aggregated estimated return for the period from April 1, 2009 to December 31, 2009. Also included in the unlock was $(49) related to DAC recoverability impairment associated with the decision to suspend sales in the U.K. variable annuity business.
Fair values for direct, assumed and ceded GMWB, GMIB and GMAB contracts are calculated based upon internally developed models because active, observable markets do not exist for those items. The fair value of those guaranteed benefit liabilities classified as embedded derivatives, and the related reinsurance and customized freestanding derivatives is calculated as an aggregation of the following components: Best Estimate Claims Costs; Credit Standing Adjustment; and Margins. The resulting aggregation is reconciled or calibrated, if necessary, to market information that is, or may be, available to the Company, but may not be observable by other market participants, including reinsurance discussions and transactions. The Company believes the aggregation of each of these components, as necessary and as reconciled or calibrated to the market information available to the Company, results in an amount that the Company would be required to transfer, or receive, to or from market participants in an active liquid market, if one existed, for those market participants to assume the risks associated with the guaranteed minimum benefits and the related reinsurance and customized derivatives. The fair value is likely to materially diverge from the ultimate settlement of the liability as the Company believes settlement will be based on our best estimate assumptions rather than those best estimate assumptions plus risk margins. In the absence of any transfer of the guaranteed benefit liability to a third party, the release of risk margins is likely to be reflected as realized gains in future periods’ net income. For further discussion on the impact of fair value changes from living benefits see Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements and for a discussion on the sensitivities of certain living benefits due to capital market factors see Variable Product Guarantee Risks and Risk Management.
The Company has analyzed the third-party pricing services valuation methodologies and related inputs, and has also evaluated the various types of securities in its investment portfolio to determine an appropriate fair value hierarchy level based upon trading activity and the observability of market inputs. For further discussion of fair value measurement, see Note 3 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Company has a monitoring process overseen by a committee of investment and accounting professionals that identifies investments that are subject to an enhanced evaluation on a quarterly basis to determine if an other-than-temporary impairment (“impairment”) is present for AFS securities or a valuation allowance is required for mortgage loans. This evaluation is a quantitative and qualitative process, which is subject to risks and uncertainties. For further discussion of the accounting policies, see the Significant Investment Accounting Policies Section in Note 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. For a discussion of impairments recorded, see the Other-Than-Temporary Impairments within the Investment Portfolio Risks and Risk Management section of the MD&A.
[2] These assets primarily support the European variable annuity business. Changes in these balances are also reflected in the respective liabilities.
[1] Relates to the Japanese fixed annuity product (adjustment of product liability for changes in spot currency exchange rates, related derivative hedging instruments, excluding net period coupon settlements, and Japan FVO securities).
• Gross gains and losses on sales for the year ended December 31, 2011 were predominately from investment grade corporate securities, U.S. Treasuries and commercial real estate related securities. These sales were the result of reinvestment into spread product well-positioned for modest economic growth, as well as the purposeful reduction of certain exposures.
• For the year ended December 31, 2011, the loss on U.S. GMWB related derivatives, net, was primarily due to a decrease in long-term interest rates that resulted in a charge of ($283) and a higher interest rate volatility that resulted in a charge of ($84). The loss on the U.S. macro hedge program for the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily driven by time decay and a decrease in equity market volatility since the purchase date of certain options during the fourth quarter. The gain associated with the international program for the year ended December 31, 2011 was primarily driven by the Japanese yen strengthening, lower global equity markets, and a decrease in interest rates.
The Company’s risk management function is part of The Hartford’s overall risk management program. The Hartford maintains an enterprise risk management function (“ERM”) that is charged with providing analysis of The Hartford’s risks on an individual and aggregated basis and with ensuring that The Hartford’s risks remain within its risk appetite and tolerances. The Hartford has established the Enterprise Risk and Capital Committee (“ERCC”) that includes The Hartford’s CEO, Chief Financial Officer (“CFO”), Chief Investment Officer (“CIO”), Chief Risk Officer, the divisional Presidents and the General Counsel. The ERCC is responsible for managing The Hartford’s risks and overseeing the enterprise risk management program.
The Company is exposed to financial risk associated with changes in interest rates, credit spreads including issuer defaults, equity prices or market indices, and foreign currency exchange rates. The Company is also exposed to credit and counterparty repayment risk. Derivative instruments are utilized in compliance with established Company policy and regulatory requirements and are monitored internally and reviewed by senior management.
To calculate duration, convexity, and key rate durations, projections of asset and liability cash flows are discounted to a present value using interest rate assumptions. These cash flows are then revalued at alternative interest rate levels to determine the percentage change in fair value due to an incremental change in the entire yield curve for duration and convexity, or a particular point on the yield curve for key rate duration. Cash flows from corporate obligations are assumed to be consistent with the contractual payment streams on a yield to worst basis. Yield to worst is a basis that represents the lowest potential yield that can be received without the issuer actually defaulting. The primary assumptions used in calculating cash flow projections include expected asset payment streams taking into account prepayment speeds, issuer call options and contract holder behavior. Mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities are modeled based on estimates of the rate of future prepayments of principal over the remaining life of the securities. These estimates are developed by incorporating collateral surveillance and anticipated future market dynamics. Actual prepayment experience may vary from these estimates.
The Company’s investment portfolios primarily consist of investment grade fixed maturity securities. The fair value of these investments was $49.1 billion and $45.5 billion at December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The fair value of these and other invested assets fluctuates depending on the interest rate environment and other general economic conditions. The weighted average duration of the fixed maturity portfolio was approximately 5.4 years and 5.2 years as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Asset accumulation vehicles primarily require a fixed rate payment, often for a specified period of time, such as fixed rate annuities with a market value adjustment feature. The term to maturity of these contracts generally range from less than one year to ten years. In addition, certain products such as universal life contracts and the general account portion of variable annuity products, credit interest to policyholders subject to market conditions and minimum interest rate guarantees. The term to maturity of the asset portfolio supporting these products may range from short to intermediate.
The Company utilizes a variety of derivative instruments to mitigate interest rate risk. Interest rate swaps are primarily used to convert interest receipts or payments to a fixed or variable rate. The use of such swaps enables the Company to customize contract terms and conditions to customer objectives and manage the interest rate risk profile within established tolerances. Interest rate swaps are also used to hedge the variability in the cash flow of a forecasted purchase or sale of fixed rate securities due to changes in interest rates. Forward rate agreements are used to convert interest receipts on floating-rate securities to fixed rates. These derivatives are used to lock in the forward interest rate curve and reduce income volatility that results from changes in interest rates. Interest rate caps, floors, swaptions, and futures may be used to manage portfolio duration.
At December 31, 2011 and 2010, notional amounts pertaining to derivatives utilized to manage interest rate risk totaled $13.6 billion and $14.2 billion, respectively ($13.3 billion and $13.8 billion, respectively, related to investments and $0.3 billion and $0.4 billion, respectively, related liabilities). The fair value of these derivatives was ($237) and ($158) as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively
The before-tax change in the net economic value of investment contracts (e.g., fixed annuity contracts) and certain insurance product liabilities for which the payment rates are fixed at contract issuance and the investment experience is substantially absorbed by the Company’s operations, along with the corresponding invested assets are included in the following table. Also included in this analysis are the interest rate sensitive derivatives used by the Company to hedge its exposure to interest rate risk in the investment portfolios supporting these contracts. This analysis does not include the assets and corresponding liabilities of certain insurance products such as whole and term life insurance, and certain life contingent annuities. Certain financial instruments, such as limited partnerships and other alternative investments, have been omitted from the analysis due to the fact that the investments are accounted for under the equity method and generally lack sensitivity to interest rate changes. Separate account assets and liabilities, equity securities, trading and the
corresponding liabilities associated with the variable annuity products sold in Europe are excluded from the analysis because gains and losses in separate accounts accrue to policyholders. The calculation of the estimated hypothetical change in net economic value below assumes a 100 basis point upward and downward parallel shift in the yield curve.
The following table provides an analysis showing the estimated before-tax change in the fair value of the Company’s fixed maturity investments and related derivatives, not included in the table above, assuming 100 basis point upward and downward parallel shifts in the yield curve as of December 31, 2011 and 2010. Certain financial instruments, such as limited partnerships and other alternative investments, have been omitted from the analysis due to the fact that the investments are accounted for under the equity method and generally lack sensitivity to interest rate changes
Foreign currency exchange risk is defined as the risk of financial loss due to changes in the relative value between currencies. The Company’s foreign currency exchange risk is related to non-U.S. dollar denominated liability contracts, including its GMDB, GMAB, GMWB and GMIB benefits associated with its reinsurance of Japanese variable annuities and direct U.K. variable annuities, the investment in and net income of the Japanese and U.K. operations, non-U.S. dollar denominated investments, which primarily consist of fixed maturity investments, and a yen denominated individual fixed annuity product. In addition, the Company’s issued non-U.S. dollar denominated funding agreement liability contracts. A portion of the Company’s foreign currency exposure is mitigated through the use of derivatives.
Index to Financial Statements In order to manage the currency exposure related to non-U.S. dollar denominated investments and the non-U.S. dollar denominated funding agreement liability contracts, the Company enters into foreign currency swaps and forwards to hedge the variability in cash flows or fair value. These foreign currency swap and forward agreements are structured to match the foreign currency cash flows of the hedged foreign denominated securities and liabilities.
The Company issued non-U.S. dollar denominated funding agreement liability contracts. The Company hedges the foreign currency risk associated with these liability contracts with currency rate swaps. At December 31, 2011 and 2010, the derivatives used to hedge foreign currency exchange risk related to foreign denominated liability contracts had a total notional amount of $771 and a total fair value of ($57) and ($17), respectively.
Index to Financial Statements The objective of the Company’s enterprise credit risk management strategy is to identify, quantify, and manage credit risk on an aggregate portfolio basis and to limit potential losses in accordance with an established credit risk appetite. The Company manages to its risk appetite by primarily holding a diversified mix of investment grade issuers and counterparties across its investment, reinsurance, and insurance portfolios. Potential losses are also limited within portfolios by diversifying across geographic regions, asset types, and sectors.
The Company exercises various and differing methods to mitigate its credit risk exposure within its investment and reinsurance portfolios. Some of the reasons for mitigating credit risk include financial instability or poor credit, avoidance of arbitration or litigation, future uncertainty, and exposure in excess of risk tolerances. Credit risk within the investment portfolio is most commonly mitigated through the use of derivative instruments or asset sales. Counterparty credit risk is mitigated through the practice of entering into contracts only with highly creditworthy institutions and through the practice of holding and posting of collateral. Systemic credit risk is mitigated through the construction of high-quality, diverse portfolios that are subject to regular underwriting of credit risks. For further discussion of the Company’s investment and derivative instruments, see Investment Management section and Note 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. See Reinsurance section for further discussion on managing and mitigating credit risk from the use of reinsurance via an enterprise security review process.
The Company is not exposed to any credit concentration risk of a single issuer greater than 10% of the Company’s stockholders’ equity other than U.S. government and government agencies backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government. For further discussion of concentration of credit risk, see the Concentration of Credit Risk section in Note 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
Index to Financial Statements The Company uses various derivative counterparties in executing its derivative transactions. The use of counterparties creates credit risk that the counterparty may not perform in accordance with the terms of the derivative transaction. The Company has developed a derivative counterparty exposure policy which limits the Company’s exposure to credit risk.
The derivative counterparty exposure policy establishes market-based credit limits, favors long-term financial stability and creditworthiness of the counterparty and typically requires credit enhancement/credit risk reducing agreements. The Company minimizes the credit risk of derivative instruments by entering into transactions with high quality counterparties primarily rated A or better, which are monitored and evaluated by the Company’s risk management team and reviewed by senior management. In addition, the Company monitors counterparty credit exposure on a monthly basis to ensure compliance with Company policies and statutory limitations. The Company also generally requires that derivative contracts, other than exchange traded contracts, certain forward contracts, and certain embedded and reinsurance derivatives, be governed by an International Swaps and Derivatives Association Master Agreement, which is structured by legal entity and by counterparty and permits right of offset.
As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the notional amount related to credit derivatives that purchase credit protection was $1.1 billion and $1.7 billion, respectively, while the fair value was $23 and ($5), respectively. As of December 31, 2011 and 2010, the notional amount related to credit derivatives that assume credit risk was $2.2 billion and $2.0 billion, respectively, while the fair value was ($545) and ($376), respectively. For further information on credit derivatives, see the Credit Risk section of the MD&A and Note 4 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
[1] Includes amortized cost and fair value of $42 and $42 as of December 31, 2011 and $19 and $19, respectively, as of December 31, 2010 related to limited partnerships and other alternative investments, the majority of which is domiciled in the United Kingdom.
[2] Includes a notional amount and fair value of $441 and $17, respectively, as of December 31, 2011 and $895 and ($8), respectively, as of December 31, 2010 related to credit default swap protection. This includes a notional amount of $66 and $17 as of December 31, 2011 and 2010, respectively, related to single name corporate issuers in the financial services sector.
The Company’s exposure to the financial services sector is predominantly through banking and insurance institutions. The following table presents the Company’s exposure to the financial services sector included in the Securities by Type table above.
The commercial real estate market continued to show signs of improving fundamentals, such as increases in transaction activities, more readily available financing and new issuances. While delinquencies still remain at historically high levels, they are expected to move lower in 2012.
Index to Financial Statements The Company also has AFS exposure to commercial real estate (“CRE”) collateralized debt obligations (“CDOs”) with an amortized cost and fair value of $425 and $296, respectively, as of December 31, 2011 and $562 and $334, respectively, as of December 31, 2010. These securities are comprised of diversified pools of commercial mortgage loans or equity positions of other CMBS securitizations. Although the Company does not plan to invest in this asset class going forward, we continue to monitor these investments as economic and market uncertainties regarding future performance impacts market liquidity and results in higher risk premiums.
Since December 31, 2010, the Company funded $1.4 billion of commercial whole loans with a weighted average loan-to-value (“LTV”) ratio of 62% and a weighted average yield of 4.5%. The Company continues to originate commercial whole loans in primary markets, such as multi-family and retail, focusing on loans with strong LTV ratios and high quality property collateral. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had mortgage loans held-for-sale with a carrying value and valuation allowance of $57 and $4, respectively, and $64 and $4, respectively, as of December 31, 2010.
The following table presents the Company’s investments in limited partnerships and other alternative investments which include hedge funds, mortgage and real estate funds, mezzanine debt funds, and private equity and other funds. Hedge funds include investments in funds of funds and direct funds. These hedge funds invest in a variety of strategies including global macro and long/short credit and equity. Mortgage and real estate funds consist of investments in funds whose assets consist of mortgage loans, mortgage loan participations, mezzanine loans or other notes which may be below investment grade, as well as equity real estate and real estate joint ventures. Mezzanine debt funds include investments in funds whose assets consist of subordinated debt that often incorporates equity-based options such as warrants and a limited amount of direct equity investments. Private equity and other funds primarily consist of investments in funds whose assets typically consist of a diversified pool of investments in small to mid-sized non-public businesses with high growth potential.
The total gross unrealized losses were $2.0 billion as of December 31, 2011, which have improved $397, or 17%, from December 31, 2010 as interest rates declined, partially offset by credit spread widening. As of December 31, 2011, $520 of the gross unrealized losses were associated with securities depressed less than 20% of cost or amortized cost.
Index to Financial Statements The following tables present the Company’s unrealized loss aging for AFS securities continuously depressed over 50% by length of time (included in the tables above).
Credit impairments were primarily concentrated in structured securities associated with commercial real estate, as well as direct private investments. The structured securities were impaired primarily due to property-specific deterioration of the underlying collateral. The Company calculated these impairments utilizing both a top down modeling approach and a security-specific collateral review. The top down modeling approach used discounted cash flow models that considered losses under current and expected future economic conditions. Assumptions used over the current period included macroeconomic factors, such as a high unemployment rate, as well as sector specific factors such as property value declines, commercial real estate delinquency levels and changes in net operating income. The macroeconomic assumptions considered by the Company did not materially change during 2011 and, as such, the credit impairments recognized for the year ended December 31, 2011 were primarily driven by actual or expected collateral deterioration, largely as a result of the Company’s security-specific collateral review.
Impairments on securities for which the Company has the intent to sell were primarily on corporate bonds, certain ABS aircrafts bonds and CMBS as market pricing continues to improve and the Company would like the ability to reduce certain exposures.
For the year ended December 31, 2011, valuation allowances on mortgage loan reversals of $25 were largely driven by the release of a reserve associated with the sale of a previously reserved for mezzanine loan. Continued improvement in commercial real estate property valuations will positively impact future loss development, with future impairments driven by idiosyncratic loan-specific performance.
Index to Financial Statements The Company’s variable products are significantly influenced by the U.S., Japanese, and other equity markets. Increases or declines in equity markets impact certain assets and liabilities related to the Company’s variable products and the Company’s earnings derived from those products. These variable products include annuity, mutual funds, and variable life insurance.
increase the amount of required assets to be held for backing variable annuity guarantees to maintain required regulatory reserve levels and targeted risk based capital ratios;
decrease the Company’s estimated future gross profits. See Estimated Gross Profits Used in the Valuation and Amortization of Assets and Liabilities Associated with Variable Annuity and Other Universal Life-Type Contracts within Critical Accounting Estimates section of the MD&A for further information.
The majority of the Company’s variable annuity contracts include a GMDB rider. A majority of the Company’s GMDB benefits, both direct and assumed, are reinsured with an affiliated captive reinsurer and an external reinsurer. The net amount at risk (“NAR”) is generally defined as the guaranteed minimum benefit amount in excess of the contractholder’s current account value. Global variable annuity account values with guarantee features were $39.7 billion and $45.2 billion as of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, respectively.
The following table summarizes the account values of the Company’s U.S. and U.K. Direct variable annuities with guarantee features and Japan assumed guarantee features as well as the NAR split between various guarantee features:
For assumed GMIB contracts, in general, the policyholder has the right to elect to annuitize benefits, beginning (for certain products) on the tenth or fifteenth anniversary year of contract commencement, receive lump sum payment of the then current account value, or remain in the variable sub-account. For GMIB contracts, if the policyholder makes an election, the policyholder is entitled to receive the original investment value over a 10- to 15- year annuitization period. A small percentage of the contracts will first become eligible to elect annuitization beginning in 2013. The remainder of the contracts will first become eligible to elect annuitization from 2014 to 2022. Because policyholders have various contractual rights to defer their annuitization election, the period over which annuitization election can take place is subject to policyholder behavior and therefore indeterminate. In addition, upon annuitization the contractholder surrenders access to the account value and the account value is transferred to the Company’s general account where it is invested and the additional investment proceeds are used towards payment of the original investment value. If the original investment value exceeds the account value upon annuitization then the contract is “in the money”. As of December 31, 2011 and December 31, 2010, substantially all of the Japan GMIB contracts were “in the money”. For additional information on the Company’s GMIB liability, see Note 8 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
The Company enters into various reinsurance agreements to reinsure GMDB, GMWB and GMIB benefits issued by HLIKK, a Japan affiliate of the Company. In the second quarter of 2009, the Company suspended new product sales in the Company’s Japan affiliate and in the fourth quarter of 2009 the company reinsured 100% of the assumed benefits to an affiliated captive reinsurer. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further discussion.
Accumulation of the portion of fees required to cover expected claims, less accumulation of actual claims paid
[1] Each of these guarantees and the related U.S. GAAP accounting volatility will also be influenced by actual and estimated policyholder behavior.
The Company uses third-party reinsurance for a portion of U.S. contracts issued with GMWB riders prior to the third quarter of 2003 and GMWB risks associated with a block of business sold between the third quarter of 2003 and the second quarter of 2006. The Company also uses third party reinsurance for a majority of the GMDB issued in the U.S.
The Company has reinsured approximately 19% of its risk associated with GMWB with a third party and 15% of its risk associated with GMWB with an affiliated captive reinsurer. The Company has also reinsured 58% of its risk associated with the aggregate GMDB exposure. These reinsurance agreements serve to reduce the Company’s exposure to changes in the statutory reserves and the related capital and RBC ratios associated with changes in the equity markets. The Company also continues to explore other solutions for mitigating the capital market risk effect on surplus, such as internal and external reinsurance solutions, migrating towards a more statutory based hedging program, changes in product design, increasing pricing and expense management.
Certain of the Company’s derivative agreements contain provisions that are tied to the financial strength ratings of the individual legal entity that entered into the derivative agreement as set by nationally recognized statistical rating agencies. If the legal entity’s financial strength were to fall below certain ratings, the counterparties to the derivative agreements could demand immediate and ongoing full collateralization and in certain instances demand immediate settlement of all outstanding derivative positions traded under each impacted bilateral agreement. The settlement amount is determined by netting the derivative positions transacted under each agreement. If the termination rights were to be exercised by the counterparties, it could impact the legal entity’s ability to conduct hedging activities by increasing the associated costs and decreasing the willingness of counterparties to transact with the legal entity. The aggregate fair value of all derivative instruments with credit-risk-related contingent features that are in a net liability position as of December 31, 2011, is $403. Of this $403, the legal entities have posted collateral of $425 in the normal course of business. Based on derivative market values as of December 31, 2011, a downgrade of one level below the current financial strength ratings by either Moody’s or S&P could require an additional $15 to be posted as collateral. Based on derivative market values as of December 31, 2011, a downgrade by either Moody’s or S&P of two levels below the legal entities’ current financial strength ratings would not require additional collateral to be posted. These collateral amounts could change as derivative market values change, as a result of changes in our hedging activities or to the extent changes in contractual terms are negotiated. The nature of the collateral that we would post, if required, would be primarily in the form of U.S. Treasury bills and U.S. Treasury notes.
As of December 31, 2011, the Company’s cash and short-term investments of $5 billion, included $1.9 billion of collateral received from, and held on behalf of, derivative counterparties and $336 of collateral pledged to derivative counterparties. The Company also held $2.8 billion of treasury securities, of which $425 had been pledged to derivative counterparties.
Total general account contractholder obligations are supported by $64 billion of cash and total general account invested assets, excluding equity securities, trading, which includes a significant short-term investment position, as depicted below, to meet liquidity needs.
The Company became a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston (“FHLBB”) in May 2011. Membership allows the Company access to collateralized advances, which may be used to support various spread-based business and enhance liquidity management. The Connecticut Department of Insurance (“CTDOI”) will permit the Company to pledge up to $1.48 billion in qualifying assets to secure FHLBB advances for 2012. The amount of advances that can be taken are dependent on the asset types pledged to secure the advances. The pledge limit is recalculated annually based on statutory admitted assets and capital and surplus. The Company would need to seek the prior approval of the CTDOI if there were a desire to exceed these limits. As of December 31, 2011, the Company had no advances outstanding under the FHLBB facility.
[2] Relates to contracts such as payout annuities or institutional notes, other than guaranteed investment products with an MVA feature (discussed below) or surrenders of term life, group benefit contracts or death and living benefit reserves for which surrenders will have no current effect on the Company’s liquidity requirements.
As of December 31, 2011, these consumer notes have interest rates ranging from 4% to 5% for fixed notes and, for variable notes, based on December 31, 2011 rates, either consumer price index plus 100 to 260 basis points, or indexed to the S&P 500, Dow Jones Industrials, foreign currency, or the Nikkei 225. The aggregate maturities of Consumer Notes are as follows: $155 in 2012, $78 in 2013, $13 in 2014, $30 in 2015, $18 in 2016 and $20 thereafter. For 2011, 2010 and 2009, interest credited to holders of consumer notes was $15, $25 and $51, respectively.
The following table identifies the Company’s contractual obligations as of December 31, 2011:
[1] Estimated life and annuity obligations include death claims, other charges associated with policyholder reserves, policy surrenders and policyholder dividends, offset by expected future deposits on in-force contracts. Estimated life and annuity obligations are based on mortality, morbidity and lapse assumptions comparable with the Company’s historical experience, modified for recent observed trends. The Company has also assumed market growth and interest crediting consistent with other assumptions. In contrast to this table, the majority of the Company’s obligations are recorded on the balance sheet at the current account values and do not incorporate an expectation of future market growth, interest crediting, or future deposits. Therefore, the estimated obligations presented in this table significantly exceed the liabilities recorded in reserve for future policy benefits and unpaid loss and loss adjustment expenses, other policyholder funds and benefits payable and separate account liabilities. Due to the significance of the assumptions used, the amounts presented could materially differ from actual results.
The payment of dividends by Connecticut-domiciled insurers is limited under the insurance holding company laws of Connecticut. These laws require notice to and approval by the state insurance commissioner for the declaration or payment of any dividend, which, together with other dividends or distributions made within the preceding twelve months, exceeds the greater of (i) 10% of the insurer’s policyholder surplus as of December 31 of the preceding year or (ii) net income (or net gain from operations, if such company is a life insurance company) for the twelve-month period ending on the thirty-first day of December last preceding, in each case determined under statutory insurance accounting principles. In addition, if any dividend of a Connecticut-domiciled insurer exceeds the insurer’s earned surplus, it requires the prior approval of the Connecticut Insurance Commissioner. The insurance holding company laws of the other jurisdictions in which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries are incorporated (or deemed commercially domiciled) generally contain similar (although in certain instances somewhat more restrictive) limitations on the payment of dividends.
The Company’s subsidiaries are permitted to pay up to a maximum of approximately $399 in dividends in 2012 without prior approval from the applicable insurance commissioner. In 2011, the Company received dividends of $7 from its subsidiaries. With respect to dividends to its parent, the Company’s dividend limitation under the holding company laws of Connecticut is $592 in 2012. However, because the Company’s earned surplus is negative as of December 31, 2011, the Company will not be permitted to pay any dividends to its parent in 2012 without prior approval from the Connecticut Insurance Commissioner. In 2011, the Company did not pay dividends to its parent company.
Year ended December 31, 2011 compared to Year-ended December 31, 2010
Net cash provided by operating activities increased due to the settlement of a modified coinsurance agreement with an affiliated captive reinsurer.
Net cash used for investing activities in 2011 primarily relates to net payments of available-for-sale securities of $1.4 billion, net payments of mortgage loans of $914, partially offset by net receipts on derivatives of $938. Net cash provided by investing activities in 2010 primarily relates to net proceeds from sales of mortgage loans of $1.1 billion, partially offset by net purchases of available-for-sale securities of $241 and net payments on derivatives of $664.
Operating cash flows in both periods have been more than adequate to meet liquidity requirements.
The agencies consider many factors in determining the final rating of an insurance company. One consideration is the relative level of statutory surplus necessary to support the business written. Statutory surplus represents the capital of the insurance company reported in accordance with accounting practices prescribed by the applicable state insurance department. See Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors - “Downgrades in our finanicial strength or credit ratings, which may make our products less attractive, could increase our cost of capital and inhibit out ability to refinance our debt, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.”