company subsequent to June 1, 2010. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of First American Financial Corporation and all controlled subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Investments in which the Company exercises significant influence, but does not control and is not the primary beneficiary, are accounted for using the equity method. Investments in which the Company does not exercise significant influence over the investee are accounted for under the cost method.
The corporate division consists of certain financing facilities as well as the corporate services that support the Company’s business operations.
Interest on loans of the Company’s thrift subsidiary is recognized on the outstanding principal balance on the accrual basis. Revenues earned by the other products in the Company’s trust and banking operations are recognized at the time of delivery, as the Company has no significant ongoing obligation after delivery.
Fair Value of Investment Portfolio. The Company classifies the fair value of its debt and equity securities using a three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements that distinguishes between market participant assumptions developed based on market data obtained from sources independent of the reporting entity (observable inputs) and the reporting entity’s own assumptions about market participant assumptions developed based on the best information available in the circumstances (unobservable inputs). The hierarchy level assigned to each security in the Company’s available-for-sale portfolio is based on management’s assessment of the transparency and reliability of the inputs used in the valuation of such instrument at the measurement date. The three hierarchy levels are defined as follows:
Typical inputs and assumptions to pricing models used to value the Company’s U.S. Treasury bonds, municipal bonds, foreign bonds, governmental agency bonds, governmental agency mortgage-backed securities and corporate debt securities include, but are not limited to, benchmark yields, reported trades, broker-dealer quotes, credit spreads, credit ratings, bond insurance (if applicable), benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data and industry and economic events. For mortgage-backed securities, inputs and assumptions may also include the structure of issuance, characteristics of the issuer, collateral attributes and prepayment speeds. The fair value of non-agency mortgage-backed securities was obtained from the independent pricing service referenced above and subject to the Company’s validation procedures discussed above. However, due to the fact that these securities were not actively traded, there were fewer observable inputs available requiring the pricing service to use more judgment in determining the fair value of the securities, therefore the Company classified non-agency mortgage-backed securities as Level 3.
The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed securities are prepayment rates, default rates and loss severity in the event of default. Significant increases (decreases) in any of those inputs in isolation would result in a significantly lower (higher)
fair value measurement. Generally, a change in the assumption used for default rates is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumption used for prepayment rates.
The fair value of equity securities, including preferred and common stocks, was based on quoted market prices for identical assets that are readily and regularly available in an active market.
Impairment testing for goodwill. The Company is required to perform an annual goodwill impairment assessment for each reporting unit. The Company’s four reporting units are title insurance, home warranty, property and casualty insurance and trust and other services. The Company has elected to perform this annual assessment in the fourth quarter of each fiscal year or sooner if circumstances indicate possible impairment. Based on current guidance, the Company has the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if the fair value is more likely than not (i.e. a likelihood of greater than 50%) less than the carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative impairment test, or may choose to forego the qualitative assessment and perform the quantitative impairment test. The qualitative factors considered in this assessment may include macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance as well as other relevant events and circumstances as determined by the Company. The Company evaluates the weight of each factor to determine whether it is more likely than not that impairment may exist. If the results of the qualitative assessment indicate the more likely than not threshold was not met, the Company may choose not to perform the quantitative impairment test. If however, the more likely than not threshold is met, the Company performs the quantitative test as required and discussed below.
The quantitative impairment test for goodwill utilizes a variety of valuation techniques, all of which require the Company to make estimates and judgments. Fair value is determined by employing an expected present value technique, which utilizes multiple cash flow scenarios that reflect a range of possible outcomes and an appropriate discount rate. The use of comparative market multiples (the “market approach”) compares the reporting unit to other comparable companies (if such comparables are present in the marketplace) based on
Impairment testing for other indefinite-lived intangible assets. The Company’s other indefinite-lived intangible assets consist of licenses which are not amortized but rather tested for impairment by comparing the fair value of the license with its carrying value at least annually or when an indicator of potential impairment has occurred. Management’s impairment test involves calculating the fair value by using a discounted cash flow analysis and market approach valuations. If the fair value of the asset exceeds its carrying amount, the asset is not considered impaired and no additional analysis is required. However, if the carrying amount is greater than the fair value, an impairment loss is recorded equal to the excess. The impairment loss establishes a new basis and the subsequent reversal of impairment losses is not permitted.
Employee benefit plans. The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of defined benefit postretirement plans as an asset or liability on its consolidated balance sheets and recognizes changes in the funded status in the year in which changes occur, through accumulated other comprehensive loss. The funded status is measured as the difference between the fair value of plan assets and benefit obligation (the projected benefit obligation for pension plans and the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for the other postretirement plans). Actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs and credits that have not been recognized as a component of net periodic benefit cost previously are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss. Plan assets and obligations are measured as of December 31.
In June 2011, the FASB issued updated guidance that is intended to increase the prominence of other comprehensive income in financial statements. The updated guidance eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity, and requires either consecutive presentation of the statement of net income and other comprehensive income or in a
single continuous statement of comprehensive income. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of the guidance had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In December 2011, the FASB issued updated guidance requiring entities to disclose both gross information and net information about both instruments and transactions eligible for offset in the statement of financial position and instruments and transactions subject to an agreement similar to a master netting arrangement. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. Management does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
A substantial portion of the revenues for the Company’s title insurance and services segment results from the sale, refinancing and foreclosure of residential and commercial real estate. In the specialty insurance segment, revenues associated with the initial year of coverage in both the home warranty and property and casualty operations are impacted by volatility in real estate transactions. Traditionally, the greatest volume of real estate activity, particularly residential resale, has occurred in the spring and summer months. However, changes in interest rates, as well as other economic factors, can cause fluctuations in the traditional pattern of real estate activity.
A low interest rate environment typically has a favorable impact on many of the Company’s businesses. However, in recent years mortgage credit has been generally tight, which together with the uncertainty in general economic conditions, has impacted the demand for most of the Company’s products and services. During 2012, primarily due to the improvement in both the general economy and availability of mortgage credit, coupled with the historically low interest rate environment, the Company observed a sizable increase in mortgage activity.
Agent premiums increased 14.6% in 2012 from 2011 and decreased 1.7% in 2011 from 2010. Agent premiums are recorded when notice of issuance is received from the agent, which is generally when cash payment is received by the Company. As a result, there is generally a one quarter delay between the agent’s issuance of a title policy and the Company’s recognition of agent premiums. Therefore, full year agent premiums primarily reflect mortgage origination activity from the fourth quarter of the prior year through the third quarter of the current year. The increase in 2012 from 2011 was consistent with the 28.3% growth in direct premiums and escrow fees for the same period. The decrease in 2011 from 2010 was primarily due to the same factors impacting direct title operations. The Company evaluates the profitability of its agency relationships on an ongoing basis, including a review of premium splits, deductibles and claims. As a result, from time to time the Company may terminate or renegotiate the terms of some of its agency relationships.
Net realized investment gains for the title insurance and services segment totaled $27.8 million, $1.9 million and $8.7 million for 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The gains for 2012, 2011 and 2010 were primarily from the sale of debt and equity securities. The gains recognized in 2012, 2011 and 2010 were partially offset by $6.6 million, $6.9 million and $3.4 million, respectively, in impairment losses recognized on certain non-marketable investments and notes receivable as well as other long-term investments. The 2012 net realized investment gains included $15.0 million in gains resulting from the sale of CoreLogic common stock during the third quarter of 2012.
Net other-than-temporary impairment losses for the title insurance and services segment totaled $3.6 million, $9.1 million and $7.9 million for 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. The majority of the net other-than-temporary impairment losses recognized in 2012, 2011 and 2010 related to the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed securities portfolio.
The title insurance and services segment (primarily direct operations) is labor intensive; accordingly, a major expense component is personnel costs. This expense component is affected by two competing factors: the need to monitor personnel changes to match the level of corresponding or anticipated new orders and the need to provide quality service.
Personnel costs increased 13.6% in 2012 from 2011 and decreased 1.5% in 2011 from 2010. The increase in 2012 compared with 2011 was primarily attributable to higher incentive compensation driven by improved revenues and profitability and higher staffing levels required to support increased order volume. The decrease in 2011 compared with 2010 was primarily attributable to a reduction in domestic employees and decreased expenses related to the Company’s employee benefit plans. These expense reductions were partially offset by increased commissions in the commercial division, which were the result of increased commercial revenues, and increased severance expense associated with a reduction in employees.
The Company continues to closely monitor order volumes and related staffing levels and will adjust staffing levels as considered necessary. The Company’s direct title operations opened 1,635,000, 1,254,100 and 1,469,100 domestic title orders in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, representing an increase of 30.4% in 2012 from 2011 and a decrease of 14.6% in 2011 from 2010.
The premium split between underwriter and agents is in accordance with the respective agency contracts and can vary from region to region due to divergences in real estate closing practices, as well as rating structures. As a result, the percentage of title premiums retained by agents varies due to the geographical mix of revenues from agency operations. The percentage of title premiums retained by agents decreased in 2011 when compared with 2010 due to the cancellation and/or modification of certain agency relationships with unfavorable splits and a more favorable geographic mix of agency revenues. In 2011, the agent retention percentage was also impacted by a large commercial deal that closed in the first quarter with a favorable agent split.
Other operating expenses (principally related to direct operations) increased 9.5% in 2012 from 2011 and decreased 5.4% in 2011 from 2010. The increase in 2012 from 2011 was primarily attributable to increased production related expenses and higher temporary labor driven by the increase in order volumes, partially offset by a decline in legal expenses. The decrease in 2011 from 2010 was primarily attributable to lower furniture and equipment related lease costs due to several lease buyouts that occurred during 2010, lower office related expenses resulting from the Company’s consolidation and/or closure of certain title offices, and a reduction in consulting expenses. These decreases were partially offset by an increase in production related expenses in the Company’s commercial, default and international businesses, and by higher legal expenses. The increased production related costs in the Company’s commercial and international businesses were due to higher transaction volumes, while the increase in the default business was due to product mix.
The current year rate of 6.9% reflected an ultimate loss rate of 5.1% for the current policy year and a net increase in the loss reserve estimates for prior policy years of $62.1 million. The increase in loss reserve estimates for prior policy years reflected claims development above expected levels during 2012, primarily from domestic lenders policies and international business, including the guaranteed valuation product offered in Canada. The reserve strengthening associated with domestic lenders policies was $25.6 million and was primarily attributable to policy years 2005 through 2007. This strengthening was primarily due to an increase in claims frequency experienced during 2012, partially offset by a slight decrease in severity. The reserve strengthening associated with the international business, excluding the guaranteed valuation product, was $15.6 million and was primarily related to increased severity experienced during 2012 for policy years 2003 through 2011. The reserve strengthening associated with the guaranteed valuation product was $11.8 million and reflected an increase in claims frequency experienced during the first half of 2012. The increase in frequency primarily related to policy years 2008 and 2009. There is substantial uncertainty as to the ultimate loss emergence for the guaranteed valuation product due to the following factors, among others, (i) claims associated with this product are generally made only after a foreclosure on the related property and foreclosure rates in Canada are difficult to predict and (ii) limited historical loss data exists as a result of the relatively recent introduction of this product in 2003. While the Company believes its claims reserve attributable to the guaranteed valuation product is adequate, this uncertainty increases the potential for adverse loss development relative to this product.
The prior year rate of 9.5% reflected an ultimate loss rate of 5.6% for policy year 2011 and included a $45.3 million reserve strengthening adjustment related to the Company’s guaranteed valuation product offered in Canada, a $32.2 million charge in connection with the settlement of Bank of America’s lawsuit against the Company and $34.2 million in unfavorable development for certain prior policy years, primarily 2007. The reserve strengthening adjustment related to the guaranteed valuation product reflected a significant increase in claim frequency experienced in the first quarter of 2011. More specifically, the number of claims reported in the first quarter of 2011, when annualized, increased approximately 150% when compared with the number of claims reported in 2010. The increase in frequency primarily related to policy years 2005 through 2009 (reflecting the relatively long claims development lag for the guaranteed valuation product). These policy years began showing evidence of higher claims frequencies than prior policy years during the first quarter of 2011. In addition, adverse loss development in 2011 included higher-than-expected claims emergence for commercial and lenders policies, particularly for policy years 2005 through 2007. Management believes that these policy years have higher ultimate loss ratios than historical averages, and that they also have experienced accelerated reporting and payment of claims, particularly on lenders policies. Reasons for higher loss levels and acceleration of claims reporting and payment include adverse underwriting conditions in real estate markets during 2005 through 2007, declines in real estate prices, increased levels of foreclosures and increased mechanics lien exposure due to failures of development projects. For additional discussion regarding the Bank of America lawsuit see Note 21 Litigation and Regulatory Contingencies to the consolidated financial statements.
Insurers generally are not subject to state income or franchise taxes. However, in lieu thereof, a premium tax is imposed on certain operating revenues, as defined by statute. Tax rates and bases vary from state to state; accordingly, the total premium tax burden is dependent upon the geographical mix of operating revenues. The Company’s noninsurance subsidiaries are subject to state income tax and do not pay premium tax. Accordingly, the Company’s total tax burden at the state level for the title insurance and services segment is composed of a combination of premium taxes and state income taxes. Premium taxes as a percentage of title insurance premiums and escrow fees were 1.3%, 1.4% and 1.2% for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Investment income decreased 14.0% in 2012 from 2011 and 12.6% in 2011 from 2010. These decreases primarily reflected a decrease in interest income earned from the investment portfolio reflecting a decline in yields.
Personnel costs and other operating expenses increased 10.2% in 2012 from 2011 and decreased 5.0% in 2011 from 2010. The increase in 2012 from 2011 was primarily due to increased salary expense associated with higher employee headcount, increased incentive compensation, increased commissions associated with increased volume in the home warranty and property and casualty businesses and increased amortization of deferred acquisition costs. The decrease in 2011 from 2010 was primarily due to reduced marketing costs in the home warranty division.
Premium taxes as a percentage of specialty insurance segment premiums were 1.7% in 2012 and 2011, and 1.5% in 2010.
The substantial majority of the Company’s business is dependent upon activity in the real estate and mortgage markets, which are cyclical and seasonal. Periods of increasing interest rates and reduced mortgage financing availability generally have an adverse effect on residential real estate activity and therefore typically decrease the Company’s revenues. In contrast, periods of declining interest rates and increased mortgage financing availability generally have a positive effect on residential real estate activity which typically increases the Company’s revenues. Residential purchase activity is typically slower in the winter months with increased volumes in the spring and summer months. Residential refinance activity is typically more volatile than purchase
The Company continually assesses its capital allocation strategy, including decisions relating to dividends, share repurchases, capital expenditures, acquisitions and investments. In October of 2012, the Company’s board of directors declared a quarterly cash dividend of $0.12 per common share, representing a 50% increase from the prior level of $0.08 per common share. Management expects that the Company will continue to pay quarterly cash dividends at or above the current level. The timing, declaration and payment of future dividends, however, falls within the discretion of the Company’s board of directors and will depend upon many factors, including the Company’s financial condition and earnings, the capital requirements of the Company’s businesses, industry practice, restrictions imposed by applicable law and any other factors the board of directors deems relevant from time to time.
Holding Company. First American Financial Corporation is a holding company that conducts all of its operations through its subsidiaries. The holding company’s current cash requirements include payments of principal and interest on its debt, taxes, payments in connection with employee benefit plans, dividends on its common stock and other expenses. The holding company is dependent upon dividends and other payments from its operating subsidiaries to meet its cash requirements. The Company’s target is to maintain a cash balance at the holding company equal to at least twelve months of estimated cash requirements. At certain points in time, the actual cash balance at the holding company may vary from this target due to, among other potential factors, the timing and amount of cash payments made and dividend payments received. Pursuant to insurance and other regulations under which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries operate, the amount of dividends, loans and advances available to the holding company is limited, principally for the protection of policyholders. As of December 31, 2012, under such regulations, the maximum amount of dividends, loans and advances available to the holding company from its insurance subsidiaries in 2013, without prior approval from applicable regulators, was $405.4 million. Such restrictions have not had, nor are they expected to have, an impact on the holding company’s ability to meet its cash obligations.
As of December 31, 2012, the holding company’s primary sources of liquidity include $163.5 million of cash and $440.0 million available on the Company’s $600.0 million revolving credit facility described below. In January 2013, the Company issued $250.0 million of senior notes and used a portion of the proceeds to repay all
Financing. On April 17, 2012, the Company entered into a senior secured credit agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”) in its capacity as administrative agent and the lenders party thereto. The credit agreement is comprised of a $600.0 million revolving credit facility. Unless terminated earlier, the revolving loan commitments will terminate on April 17, 2016. The agreement replaced the Company’s $400.0 million senior secured credit agreement that had been in place since April 2010. In connection with the closing, the Company paid off the $200.0 million outstanding balance under the prior agreement and borrowed $200.0 million under the new agreement. Proceeds under the credit agreement may be used for general corporate purposes. At December 31, 2012, the Company had outstanding borrowings of $160.0 million under the facility and the interest rate associated with amounts borrowed under the facility was 2.21%. Those borrowings have since been repaid as discussed further below.
In the event that the rating by Standard & Poor’s Ratings Group (“S&P”) is below BBB- (or there is no rating from S&P) and, in addition, such rating by Moody’s Investor Services, Inc. (“Moody’s”) is lower than Baa3 (or there is no rating from Moody’s), then the loan commitments are subject to mandatory reduction from (a) 50 percent of the net proceeds of certain equity issuances by any of the Company or certain subsidiaries of the Company (collectively, the “Designated Parties”), and (b) 50 percent of the net proceeds of certain debt incurred or issued by any of the Designated Parties, provided that the commitment reductions described above are only required to the extent necessary to reduce the total loan commitments to $300.0 million. The Company is only required to prepay loans to the extent that, after giving effect to any mandatory commitment reduction, the aggregate principal amount of all outstanding loans exceeds the remaining total loan commitments.
The credit agreement includes representations and warranties, reporting covenants, affirmative covenants, negative covenants, financial covenants and events of default customary for financings of this type. Upon the occurrence of certain insolvency and bankruptcy events of default the loans automatically accelerate. As of December 31, 2012, the Company was in compliance with the financial covenants under the credit agreement.
Investment Portfolio. The Company’s investment portfolio is primarily held at its insurance and banking subsidiaries. The Company maintains a high quality, liquid investment portfolio. As of December 31, 2012, the Company’s debt and equity investment securities portfolio consists of approximately 93% of fixed income securities. As of that date, over 70% of the Company’s fixed income investments are held in securities that are United States government-backed or rated AAA, and approximately 99% of the fixed income portfolio is rated or classified as investment grade. Percentages are based on the amortized cost basis of the securities. Credit ratings are based on S&P and Moody’s published ratings. If a security was rated differently by both rating agencies, the lower of the two ratings was selected.
The table below outlines the composition of the investment portfolio currently in an unrealized loss position by credit rating (percentages are based on the amortized cost basis of the investments). Credit ratings are based on S&P and Moody’s published ratings and are exclusive of insurance effects. If a security was rated differently by both rating agencies, the lower of the two ratings was selected:
Contractual obligations. A summary, by due date, of the Company’s total contractual obligations at December 31, 2012, is as follows:
The Company facilitates tax-deferred property exchanges for customers pursuant to Section 1031 of the Internal Revenue Code and tax-deferred reverse exchanges pursuant to Revenue Procedure 2000-37. As a facilitator and intermediary, the Company holds the proceeds from sales transactions and takes temporary title to property identified by the customer to be acquired with such proceeds. Upon the completion of such exchange, the identified property is transferred to the customer or, if the exchange does not take place, an amount equal to the sales proceeds or, in the case of a reverse exchange, title to the property held by the Company is transferred to the customer. Like-kind exchange funds held by the Company totaled $1.4 billion and $0.6 billion at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. The like-kind exchange deposits were held at third-party financial institutions and, due to the structure utilized to facilitate these transactions, the proceeds and property are not considered assets of the Company and, therefore, are not included in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. All such amounts are placed in deposit accounts insured, up to applicable limits, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The Company could be held contingently liable to the customer for the transfers of property, disbursements of proceeds and the return on the proceeds.
As discussed in Note 1, amounts recorded for allocations of certain expenses directly attributable to the operations of First American Financial Corporation prior to June 1, 2010 are not necessarily representative of the amounts that would have been reflected in the financial statements had the Company operated as a separate, stand-alone entity.
To effect the Separation, TFAC and the Company entered into a Separation and Distribution Agreement (the “Separation and Distribution Agreement”) that governs the rights and obligations of the Company and CoreLogic regarding the Distribution. It also governs the relationship between the Company and CoreLogic subsequent to the completion of the Separation and provides for the allocation between the Company and CoreLogic of TFAC’s assets and liabilities. The Separation and Distribution Agreement identifies assets, liabilities and contracts that were allocated between CoreLogic and the Company as part of the Separation and describes the transfers, assumptions and assignments of these assets, liabilities and contracts. In particular, the Separation and Distribution Agreement provides that, subject to the terms and conditions contained therein:
The Separation resulted in a net distribution from the Company to TFAC of $151.4 million. In connection with such distribution, the Company assumed $22.1 million of accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax, which was primarily related to the Company’s assumption of the unfunded portion of the defined benefit pension obligation associated with participants who were employees of the businesses retained by CoreLogic. See Note 14 Employee Benefit Plans to the consolidated financial statements for additional discussion of the defined benefit pension plan.
The consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and reflect the consolidated operations of the Company as a separate, stand-alone publicly traded company subsequent to June 1, 2010. The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of First American Financial Corporation and all controlled subsidiaries. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated. Investments in which the Company exercises significant influence, but does not control and is not the primary beneficiary, are accounted for using the equity method. Investments in which the Company does not exercise significant influence over the investee are accounted for under the cost method.
The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 include assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses directly attributable to the Company’s operations. The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 reflect allocations of corporate expenses from TFAC for certain functions provided by TFAC,
including, but not limited to, general corporate expenses related to finance, legal, information technology, human resources, communications, compliance, facilities, procurement, employee benefits, and share-based compensation. These expenses have been allocated to the Company on the basis of direct usage when identifiable, with the remainder allocated on the basis of net revenue, domestic headcount or assets or a combination of such drivers. The Company considers the basis on which the expenses have been allocated to be a reasonable reflection of the utilization of services provided to or the benefit received by the Company during the periods presented. The Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 do not reflect the debt or interest expense it might have incurred if it had been a stand-alone entity. In addition, the Company expects to incur other expenses, not reflected in its historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010, as a result of being a separate publicly traded company. As a result, the Company’s historical financial statements prior to June 1, 2010 do not necessarily reflect what its financial position or results of operations would have been if it had been operated as a stand-alone public entity during the periods covered prior to June 1, 2010, and may not be indicative of the Company’s future results of operations and financial position.
The consolidated statements of cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 were corrected to reflect adjustments that increased cash provided by operating activities and decreased the effect of exchange rate changes on cash by $2.9 million and $1.5 million, respectively. In addition, for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010 an adjustment was made to correct the classification of net purchase of subsidiary shares from /other decreases in noncontrolling interests which decreased cash used for investing activities and increased cash used for financing activities by $4.2 million in 2011, and in 2010, decreased cash used for investing activities and decreased cash provided by financing activities by $3.6 million. These adjustments had no impact on the net change in cash and cash equivalents and were not considered material, individually or in the aggregate, to previously issued financial statements.
Deposits with savings and loan associations and banks are short-term investments with initial maturities of generally more than 90 days.
The performance of the Company’s loan portfolio is evaluated on an ongoing basis by management. Loans receivable are impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Impaired loans receivable are measured at the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate. As a practical expedient, the loan may be valued based on its observable market price or the fair value of the collateral, if the loan is collateral-dependent. No indications of material impairment of loans receivable were identified during the three-year period ended December 31, 2012.
The Company is required to perform an annual goodwill impairment assessment for each reporting unit. The Company’s four reporting units are title insurance, home warranty, property and casualty insurance and trust and other services. The Company has elected to perform this annual assessment in the fourth quarter of each fiscal year or sooner if circumstances indicate possible impairment. Based on current guidance, the Company has the option to perform a qualitative assessment to determine if the fair value is more likely than not (i.e. a likelihood of greater than 50%) less than the carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform a quantitative impairment test, or may choose to forego the qualitative assessment and perform the quantitative impairment test. The qualitative factors considered in this assessment may include macroeconomic conditions, industry and market considerations, overall financial performance as well as other relevant events and circumstances as determined by the Company. The Company evaluates the weight of each factor to determine whether it is more likely than not that impairment may exist. If the results of the qualitative assessment indicate the more likely than not threshold was not met, the Company may choose not to perform the quantitative impairment test. If however, the more likely than not threshold is met, the Company performs the quantitative test as required and discussed below.
Step 2 involves calculating an implied fair value of goodwill for each reporting unit for which the first step indicated impairment. The implied fair value of goodwill is determined in a manner similar to the amount of goodwill calculated in a business combination, by measuring the excess of the estimated fair value of the
The Company’s intangible assets consist of covenants not to compete, customer lists, trademarks, patents and licenses. Each of these intangible assets, excluding licenses, is amortized on a straight-line basis over their useful lives ranging from 2 to 20 years and is subject to impairment tests when there is an indication of a triggering event or abandonment. Licenses are an intangible asset with an indefinite life and are therefore not amortized but rather tested for impairment by comparing the fair value of the license with its carrying value at least annually and when an indicator of potential impairment has occurred.
For recent policy years at early stages of development (generally the last three years), IBNR is estimated using a combination of expected loss rate and multiplicative loss development factor calculations. For more mature policy years (generally, policy years aged more than three years), IBNR generally is estimated using multiplicative loss development factor calculations. The expected loss rate method estimates IBNR by applying an expected loss rate to total title insurance premiums and escrow fees, and adjusting for policy year maturity using the estimated loss development patterns. Multiplicative loss development factor calculations estimate IBNR by applying factors derived from loss development patterns to losses realized to date. The expected loss rate and loss development patterns are based on historical experience and the relationship of the history to the applicable policy years.
each of the last six policy years increased or decreased by 50 basis points, the resulting impact on the IBNR reserve would be an increase or decrease, as the case may be, of $110.5 million. The estimates made by management in determining the appropriate level of IBNR reserves could ultimately prove to be materially different from actual claims experience.
Interest on loans receivable is recognized on the outstanding principal balance on the accrual basis. Revenues earned by the other products in the Company’s trust and banking operations are recognized at the time of delivery, as the Company has no significant ongoing obligation after delivery.
differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. The Company evaluates the need to establish a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets based upon the amount of existing temporary differences, the period in which they are expected to be recovered and expected levels of taxable income. A valuation allowance to reduce deferred tax assets is established when it is considered more likely than not that some or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized.
The Company measures the cost of employee services received in exchange for an award of equity instruments based on the grant-date fair value of the award. The cost is recognized in the Company’s financial statements over the requisite service period of the award using the straight-line method for awards that contain only a service condition and the graded vesting method for awards that contain a performance or market condition. The share-based compensation expense recognized is based on the number of shares ultimately expected to vest, net of forfeitures. Forfeitures are estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates.
Per share information for 2010 was computed using the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately following the Separation, as if such shares were outstanding for the entire period.
The Company recognizes the overfunded or underfunded status of defined benefit postretirement plans as an asset or liability on its consolidated balance sheets and recognizes changes in the funded status in the year in which changes occur, through accumulated other comprehensive loss. The funded status is measured as the difference between the fair value of plan assets and the benefit obligation (the projected benefit obligation for pension plans and the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for the other postretirement plans). Actuarial gains and losses and prior service costs and credits that have not been recognized as a component of net periodic benefit cost previously are recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive loss. Plan assets and obligations are measured as of December 31.
The Company assumes and cedes large title insurance risks through reinsurance. Additionally, the Company’s property and casualty insurance business uses reinsurance to limit risk associated with natural disasters such as windstorms, winter storms, wildfires and earthquakes. In reinsurance arrangements, the primary insurer retains a certain amount of risk under a policy and cedes the remainder of the risk under the policy to the reinsurer. The primary insurer pays the reinsurer a premium in exchange for accepting this risk of loss. The primary insurer generally remains liable to its insured for the total risk, but is reinsured under the terms of the reinsurance agreement. The amount of premiums assumed and ceded is recorded as a component of direct
premiums and escrow fees on the Company’s income statement. The total amount of premiums assumed and ceded in connection with reinsurance was less than 1.0% of consolidated premium and escrow fees for each of the three years ended December 31, 2012. Payments and recoveries on reinsured losses for the Company’s title insurance and property and casualty businesses were immaterial during the three years ended December 31, 2012.
Trust assets totaled $2.8 billion at December 31, 2012 and 2011, and were held or managed by First American Trust, FSB. Escrow deposits held at third-party financial institutions and trust assets are not considered assets of the Company and, therefore, are not included in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets. However, the Company could be held contingently liable for the disposition of these assets.
In October 2010, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued updated guidance related to accounting for costs associated with acquiring or renewing insurance contracts. The updated guidance modifies the definition of the types of costs incurred by insurance entities that can be capitalized in the acquisition of new
In June 2011, the FASB issued updated guidance that is intended to increase the prominence of other comprehensive income in financial statements. The updated guidance eliminates the option to present the components of other comprehensive income as part of the statement of changes in stockholders’ equity, and requires either consecutive presentation of the statement of net income and other comprehensive income or in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income. The updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011. The adoption of the guidance had no impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
updated guidance is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning on or after January 1, 2013. Management does not expect the adoption of this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Investments totaling $111.9 million and $152.5 million were on deposit with state treasurers in accordance with statutory requirements for the protection of policyholders at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
Pursuant to insurance and other regulations under which the Company’s insurance subsidiaries operate, the amount of dividends, loans and advances available to the Company is limited, principally for the protection of policyholders. As of December 31, 2012, under such regulations, the maximum amount of dividends, loans and advances available to the Company from its insurance subsidiaries in 2013, without prior approval from applicable regulators, was $405.4 million.
The Company’s principal title insurance subsidiary, FATICO, maintained total statutory capital and surplus of $959.0 million and $834.1 million as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Statutory net income for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $301.9 million, $92.3 million and $42.4 million, respectively. FATICO was in compliance with the minimum statutory capital and surplus requirements as of December 31, 2012.
Statutory accounting principles differ in some respects from generally accepted accounting principles, and these differences include, but are not limited to, non-admission of certain assets (principally limitations on deferred tax assets, capitalized furniture and other equipment, premiums and other receivables 90 days past due, assets acquired in connection with claim settlements other than real estate or mortgage loans secured by real estate and limitations on goodwill), reporting of bonds at amortized cost, deferral of premiums received as statutory premium reserve and supplemental reserve (if applicable) and exclusion of incurred but not reported claims reserve.
The cost and estimated fair value of investments in equity securities, all of which are classified as available-for-sale, are as follows:
Sales of debt and equity securities resulted in realized gains of $70.1 million, $12.4 million and $15.2 million and realized losses of $0.3 million, $1.4 million and $2.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Substantially all securities in the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed portfolio are senior tranches and all were investment grade at the time of purchase, however all have been downgraded to below investment grade since initial purchase. The table below summarizes the composition of the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed securities by collateral type, year of issuance and current credit ratings. Percentages are based on the amortized cost basis of the securities and credit ratings are based on Standard & Poor’s Ratings Group (“S&P”) and Moody’s Investors Service, Inc. (“Moody’s”) published ratings. If a security was rated differently by either rating agency, the lower of the two ratings was selected. All amounts and ratings are as of December 31, 2012.
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of debt securities at December 31, 2012, by contractual maturities, are as follows:
is the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis of the debt security. The cash flows expected to be collected are discounted at the rate implicit in the security immediately prior to the recognition of the other-than-temporary impairment.
The Company determines if a non-agency mortgage-backed security in a loss position is other-than-temporarily impaired by comparing the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected from the security to its amortized cost basis. If the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected exceed the amortized cost of the security, the Company concludes that the security is not other-than-temporarily impaired. The Company performs this analysis on all non-agency mortgage-backed securities in its portfolio that are in an unrealized loss position. For the securities that were determined not to be other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2012, the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected exceeded the amortized cost of each security.
Cash flows expected to be collected for each non-agency mortgage-backed security are estimated by analyzing loan-level detail to estimate future cash flows from the underlying assets, which are then applied to the security based on the underlying contractual provisions of the securitization trust that issued the security (e.g. subordination levels, remaining payment terms, etc.). The Company uses third-party software to determine how the underlying collateral cash flows will be distributed to each security issued from the securitization trust. The primary assumptions used in estimating future collateral cash flows are prepayment speeds, default rates and loss severity. In developing these assumptions, the Company considers the financial condition of the borrower, loan to value ratio, loan type and geographical location of the underlying property. The Company utilizes publicly available information related to specific assets, generally available market data such as forward interest rate curves and a third party’s securities, loans and property data and market analytics tools.
As a result of the Company’s security-level review, it recognized other-than-temporary impairment losses considered to be credit related on its non-agency mortgage-backed securities of $3.6 million, $9.1 million and $6.3 million in earnings for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively. It is possible that the Company could recognize additional other-than-temporary impairment losses on some securities it owns at December 31, 2012 if future events or information cause it to determine that a decline in value is other-than-temporary.
When a decline in the fair value of an equity security, including common and preferred stock, is considered to be other-than-temporary, such equity security is written down to its fair value. When assessing if a decline in value is other-than-temporary, the factors considered include the length of time and extent to which fair value has been below cost, the probability that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the security, the seniority of the securities, issuer-specific news and other developments, the financial condition and prospects of the issuer (including credit ratings), macro-economic changes (including the outlook for industry sectors, which includes government policy initiatives) and the Company’s ability and intent to hold the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery.
When an equity security has been in an unrealized loss position for greater than twelve months, the Company’s review of the security includes the above noted factors as well as the evidence, if any exists, that supports the Company’s view that the security will recover its value in the foreseeable future, typically within the next twelve months. If objective, substantial evidence does not indicate a likely recovery during that timeframe, the Company’s policy is that such losses are considered other-than-temporary and therefore an impairment loss is recorded. For the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company did not record other-than-temporary impairment charges related to its equity securities. The Company recorded other-than-temporary impairment of $1.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2010 related to the Company’s preferred equity securities.
Typical inputs and assumptions to pricing models used to value the Company’s U.S. Treasury bonds, governmental agency bonds, governmental agency mortgage-backed securities, municipal bonds, foreign bonds and corporate debt securities include, but are not limited to, benchmark yields, reported trades, broker-dealer quotes, credit spreads, credit ratings, bond insurance (if applicable), benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data and industry and economic events. For mortgage-backed securities, inputs and assumptions may also include the structure of issuance, characteristics of the issuer, collateral attributes and prepayment speeds. The fair value of non-agency mortgage-backed securities was obtained from the independent pricing service referenced above and subject to the Company’s validation procedures discussed above. However, due to the fact that these securities were not actively traded, there were fewer observable inputs available requiring the pricing service to use more judgment in determining the fair value of the securities, therefore the Company classified non-agency mortgage-backed securities as Level 3.
The significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of the Company’s non-agency mortgage-backed securities are prepayment rates, default rates and loss severity in the event of default. Significant increases (decreases) in any of those inputs in isolation would result in a significantly lower (higher) fair value measurement. Generally, a change in the assumption used for default rates is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumption used for prepayment rates.
The Company did not purchase any non-agency mortgage-backed securities during the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011.
Real estate loans are collateralized by properties located primarily in Southern California. The average yield on the loan portfolio was 6.31% and 6.51% for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively. Average yields are affected by prepayment penalties recorded as income, prepayment speeds, loan fees amortized to income and the market interest rates.
Amortization expense for finite-lived intangible assets was $12.0 million, $13.9 million and $14.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The current economic environment continues to show potential for volatility over the short term, particularly in regard to real estate prices and mortgage defaults, which affect title claims. Relevant contributing factors include continuing elevated foreclosure volume, general economic uncertainty and government actions that may mitigate or exacerbate recent trends. Other factors, including factors not yet identified, may also influence claims development. At this point, real estate and financial market conditions appear to be stabilizing and improving in some respects, yet significant uncertainty remains, particularly in regard to governmental regulatory changes and fiscal policies which affect economic conditions broadly. The current environment continues to create an increased potential for actual claims experience to vary significantly from projections, in either direction, which would directly affect the claims provision. If actual claims vary significantly from expected, reserves may be adjusted to reflect updated estimates of future claims.
On April 17, 2012, the Company entered into a senior secured credit agreement with JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. (“JPMorgan”) in its capacity as administrative agent and the lenders party thereto. The credit agreement is comprised of a $600.0 million revolving credit facility. Unless terminated earlier, the revolving loan commitments will terminate on April 17, 2016. The agreement replaced the Company’s $400.0 million senior secured credit agreement that had been in place since April 2010. In connection with the closing, the Company paid off the $200.0 million outstanding balance under the prior agreement and borrowed $200.0 million under the new agreement. Proceeds under the credit agreement may be used for general corporate purposes. At December 31, 2012, the Company had outstanding borrowings of $160.0 million under the facility and the interest rate associated with amounts borrowed under the facility was 2.21%. Those borrowings have since been repaid as discussed further below.
In the event that the rating by S&P is below BBB- (or there is no rating from S&P) and, in addition, such rating by Moody’s is lower than Baa3 (or there is no rating from Moody’s), then the loan commitments are subject to mandatory reduction from (a) 50 percent of the net proceeds of certain equity issuances by any of the Company or certain subsidiaries of the Company (collectively, the “Designated Parties”), and (b) 50 percent of the net proceeds of certain debt incurred or issued by any of the Designated Parties, provided that the commitment reductions described above are only required to the extent necessary to reduce the total loan commitments to $300.0 million. The Company is only required to prepay loans to the extent that, after giving effect to any mandatory commitment reduction, the aggregate principal amount of all outstanding loans exceeds the remaining total loan commitments.
The aggregate annual maturities for notes and contracts payable in each of the five years after December 31, 2012, are as follows:
The exercise of stock options represents a tax benefit and has been reflected as a reduction of taxes payable and an increase to equity. The benefits recorded were $2.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 and $1.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010.
The Company evaluates the realizability of its deferred tax assets by assessing the valuation allowance and by adjusting the amount of such allowance, if necessary. The factors used to assess the likelihood of realization are the Company’s forecast of future taxable income and available tax planning strategies that could be implemented to realize the net deferred tax assets. Failure to achieve the forecasted taxable income in the applicable taxing jurisdictions could affect the ultimate realization of deferred tax assets and could result in an increase in the Company’s effective tax rate on future earnings.
As of December 31, 2012, United States taxes were not provided for on the earnings of the Company’s foreign subsidiaries of $116.4 million, as the Company has invested or expects to invest the undistributed earnings indefinitely. If in the future these earnings are repatriated to the United States, or if the Company determines that the earnings will be remitted in the foreseeable future, additional tax provisions may be required. It is not practicable to calculate the deferred taxes associated with these earnings because of the variability of multiple factors that would need to be assessed at the time of any assumed repatriation; however, foreign tax credits may be available to reduce federal income taxes in the event of distribution.
It is reasonably possible that the amount of the unrecognized benefit with respect to certain of the Company’s unrecognized tax positions may significantly increase or decrease within the next 12 months. These changes may be the result of items such as ongoing audits or the expiration of federal and state statute of limitations for the assessment of taxes. Based on the status of its current tax audits, the Company estimates that there will be no significant increase or decrease in unrecognized tax benefits within the next 12 months.
For the year ended December 31, 2010, basic earnings per share was computed using the number of shares of common stock outstanding immediately following the Separation, as if such shares were outstanding for the entire period prior to the Separation, plus the weighted average number of such shares outstanding following the Separation through December 31, 2010.
For the year ended December 31, 2012, 0.7 million stock options and RSUs were excluded from the weighted-average diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect. For the years ended December 31, 2011 and 2010, 1.4 million stock options and RSUs were excluded from the weighted-average diluted common shares outstanding due to their antidilutive effect.
The Company adopted TFAC’s 401(k) Savings Plan, which is now the First American Financial Corporation 401(k) Savings Plan (the “Savings Plan”). The account balances of employees of CoreLogic who had previously participated in TFAC’s 401(k) Savings Plan were transferred to the CoreLogic, Inc. 401(k) Savings Plan.
The Company adopted TFAC’s deferred compensation plan. The Company assumed the portion of the deferred compensation liability associated with its employees and former employees of its businesses and CoreLogic assumed the portion of the deferred compensation liability associated with its employees and former employees of its businesses. Plan assets were divided in the same proportion as liabilities.
and 2010, respectively. This expense represents the discretionary contribution made by the Company following the Separation and by TFAC to the Company’s employees’ accounts prior to the Separation. The Savings Plan allows the participants to purchase the Company’s common stock as one of the investment options, subject to certain limitations. The Savings Plan held 4,144,000 shares and 4,417,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, representing 3.9% and 4.2% of the total shares outstanding, at December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.
The Company’s deferred compensation plan allows participants to defer up to 100% of their salary, commissions and bonus. Participants allocate their deferrals among a variety of investment crediting options (known as “deemed investments”). Deemed investments mean that the participant has no ownership interest in the funds they select; the funds are only used to measure the gains or losses that will be attributed to their deferral account over time. Participants can elect to have their deferral balance paid out in a future year while they are still employed or after their employment ends. The deferred compensation plan is exempt from most provisions of the Employee Retirement Income Security Act (“ERISA”) because it is only available to a select group of management and highly compensated employees and is not a qualified employee benefit plan. To preserve the tax-deferred savings advantages of a nonqualified deferred compensation plan, federal law requires that it be unfunded or informally funded. The participants’ deferrals and any earnings on those deferrals are general unsecured obligations of the Company. The Company is informally funding the deferred compensation plan through a tax-advantaged investment known as variable universal life insurance. Deferred compensation plan assets are held as an asset of the Company within a special trust, called a “Rabbi Trust.” At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the value of the assets in the Rabbi Trust of $64.4 million and $59.5 million, and the unfunded liabilities of $61.6 million and $58.2 million, were included in the consolidated balance sheets in other assets and pension costs and other retirement plans, respectively.
The Company’s net actuarial loss and prior service credit for defined benefit pension and supplemental benefit plans that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive loss into net periodic cost over the next fiscal year are expected to be an expense of $32.1 million and a credit of $4.4 million, respectively.
Under the new investment policy, asset allocation targets are segmented into liability tracking assets and return seeking assets. The objective of this allocation strategy is to increase the percentage of assets in liability tracking investments as settlement funded status improves. Return seeking assets generally include pooled investment vehicles, foreign and domestic equities, fixed income securities, cash, REITs, and commodities. Liability tracking assets generally include fixed income securities and pooled investment vehicles. The plan maintains a level of cash and cash equivalents appropriate for the timely disbursement of benefits and payment of expenses.
Subject to the requirements of the investment policy, the investment manager may use commingled investment vehicles including but not limited to mutual funds, common trust funds, commingled trusts, and exchange traded funds. The investment policy prohibits certain investment transactions, including derivatives and other illiquid investments (e.g. private equity and real estate), subject to certain exceptions.
A summary of the asset allocation as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 are as follows:
The Company expects to make cash contributions to its defined benefit and unfunded supplemental benefit plans of $29.3 million and $13.7 million, respectively, during 2013.
The fair value of loans receivable, net is estimated based on the discounted value of the future cash flows using the current rates being offered for loans with similar terms to borrowers of similar credit quality.
The carrying value of escrow and passbook accounts approximates fair value due to the short-term nature of this liability. The fair value of investment certificate accounts is estimated based on the discounted value of future cash flows using a discount rate approximating current market rates for similar liabilities.
The carrying amount for accounts payable and accrued liabilities is a reasonable estimate of fair value due to the short-term maturity of these liabilities. The Company does not include the carrying amounts and fair values of pension costs and other retirement plans as the guidance excludes them from disclosure.
The fair value of notes and contracts payable are estimated based on the current rates offered to the Company for debt of the same remaining maturities.
The carrying amounts and fair values of the Company’s financial instruments as of December 31, 2012 and 2011 are presented in the following table.
The following table presents the fair value of the Company’s financial instruments as of December 31, 2012 and 2011, classified using the three-level hierarchy for fair value measurements:
In connection with the Separation, the Company established the First American Financial Corporation 2010 Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Incentive Compensation Plan”). The Incentive Compensation Plan was adopted by the Company’s board of directors and approved by TFAC, as the Company’s sole stockholder, on May 28, 2010. Eligible participants in the Incentive Compensation Plan include the Company’s directors and officers, as well as other employees. The Incentive Compensation Plan permits the granting of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock, RSUs, performance units, performance shares and other stock-based awards. Under the terms of the Incentive Compensation Plan, 16.0 million shares of common stock can be awarded from either authorized and unissued shares or previously issued shares acquired by the Company, subject to certain annual limits on the amounts that can be awarded based on the type of award granted. The Incentive Compensation Plan terminates 10 years from the effective date unless cancelled prior to that date by the Company’s board of directors.
In connection with the Separation, the Company established the First American Financial Corporation 2010 Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the “ESPP”). The ESPP allows eligible employees to purchase common stock of the Company at 85.0% of the closing price on the last day of each month. Prior to the Separation, the Company’s employees participated in TFAC’s employee stock purchase plan. There were 323,000 and 352,000 shares issued in connection with the Company’s plan for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively, and 175,000 shares issued in connection with the Company’s and TFAC’s plans for the year ended December 31, 2010. At December 31, 2012, there were 1,151,000 shares reserved for future issuances.
As of December 31, 2012, there was $15.1 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested RSUs that is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of 2.5 years. The fair value of RSUs is generally based on the market value of the Company’s shares on the date of grant. The total fair value of shares vested and not distributed for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 was $2.3 million, $2.2 million and $3.5 million, respectively.
All stock options issued under the Company’s plans are vested and no share-based compensation expense related to such stock options remains to be recognized.
Future minimum rental payments under operating leases that have initial or remaining noncancelable lease terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2012 are as follows:
In connection with the Separation, the Company and TFAC entered into various transition services agreements with effective dates of June 1, 2010. The agreements included transitional services in the areas of information technology, tax, accounting and finance, employee benefits and internal audit. As of December 31,
Under the Separation and Distribution Agreement and other agreements, subject to certain exceptions contained in the Tax Sharing Agreement, each of the Company and CoreLogic agreed to assume and be responsible for 50% of certain of TFAC’s contingent and other corporate liabilities. All external costs and expenses associated with the management of these contingent and other corporate liabilities will be shared equally. These contingent and other corporate liabilities primarily relate to consolidated securities litigation and any actions with respect to the Separation or the Distribution brought by any third party. Contingent and other corporate liabilities that are related to only TFAC’s information solutions or financial services businesses are generally fully allocated to CoreLogic or the Company, respectively. At December 31, 2012 and 2011, no reserves were considered necessary for such liabilities.
In connection with the Separation, TFAC issued to the Company and FATICO a number of shares of its common stock that resulted in the Company and FATICO collectively owning 12.9 million shares of CoreLogic’s common stock immediately following the Separation. During 2011 the Company sold 4.0 million shares for an aggregate cash price of $75.8 million and during 2012 the Company and FATICO sold the remaining 8.9 million shares for an aggregate cash price of $207.9 million. At December 31, 2012, the Company no longer owns any CoreLogic common stock.
On June 1, 2010, the Company received a note receivable from CoreLogic in the amount of $19.9 million that accrued interest at 6.52% and was due on May 31, 2017. The note approximated the unfunded portion of the benefit obligation attributable to participants of the defined benefit pension plan who were employees of TFAC’s businesses that were retained by CoreLogic in connection with the Separation. In September 2011, the Company received $17.3 million from CoreLogic in satisfaction of the remaining balance of the note. See Note 14 Employee Benefit Plans to the consolidated financial statements for further discussion of the defined benefit pension plan.
At December 31, 2012 and 2011, the Company’s federal savings bank subsidiary, First American Trust, FSB, held $2.3 million and $4.3 million, respectively, of interest and non-interest bearing deposits owned by CoreLogic. These deposits are included in deposits in the consolidated balance sheets. Interest expense on the deposits was immaterial for all periods presented.
Prior to the Separation, the Company owned three office buildings that were leased to the information solutions businesses of TFAC under the terms of formal lease agreements. In connection with the Separation, the Company distributed one of the office buildings to CoreLogic, and at December 31, 2012, owns two office buildings that were leased to CoreLogic under a formal lease agreement. Rental income associated with these properties totaled $4.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011and $6.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2010.
The Company and CoreLogic are also parties to certain ordinary course commercial agreements and transactions. The expenses associated with these transactions, which primarily relate to purchases of data and other settlement services totaled $19.1 million, $15.0 million and $21.4 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, and are included in other operating expenses in the Company’s consolidated
statements of income. The Company also sells data and provides other settlement services to CoreLogic through ordinary course commercial agreements and transactions resulting in revenues totaling $1.6 million, $4.2 million and $11.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively, which are included in information and other in the Company’s consolidated statements of income.
The change in net unrealized gains on securities includes reclassification adjustments of $69.8 million, $11.0 million and $12.5 million of net realized gains on debt and equity securities for the years ended December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
For a substantial majority of these lawsuits, however, it is not possible to assess the probability of loss. Most of these lawsuits are putative class actions which require a plaintiff to satisfy a number of procedural requirements before proceeding to trial. These requirements include, among others, demonstration to a court that the law proscribes in some manner the Company’s activities, the making of factual allegations sufficient to suggest that the Company’s activities exceeded the limits of the law and a determination by the court-known as class certification-that the law permits a group of individuals to pursue the case together as a class. In certain instances the Company may also be able to compel the plaintiff to arbitrate its claim on an individual basis. If these procedural requirements are not met, either the lawsuit cannot proceed or, as is the case with class certification or compelled arbitration, the plaintiffs lose the financial incentive to proceed with the case (or the amount at issue effectively becomes de minimus). Frequently, a court’s determination as to these procedural requirements is subject to appeal to a higher court. As a result of, among other factors, ambiguities and inconsistencies in the myriad laws applicable to the Company’s business and the uniqueness of the factual issues presented in any given lawsuit, the Company often cannot determine the probability of loss until a court has finally determined that a plaintiff has satisfied applicable procedural requirements.
Haskins v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed on September 29, 2010 and pending in the United States District Court of New Jersey,
All of these lawsuits are putative class actions. A court has only granted class certification in Hamilton, Lewis, Raffone and Slapikas. For the reasons stated above, the Company has been unable to assess the probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss or, where the Company has been able to make an estimate, the Company believes the amount is immaterial to the financial statements as a whole.
Klein v. First American Title Insurance Company, et al., filed on July 10, 2012 and pending in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia.
Klein is a putative class action for which a class has not been certified. For the reasons described above, the Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.
Gale v. First American Title Insurance Company, et al., filed on October 16, 2006 and pending in the United States District Court of Connecticut, and
Katin is a putative class action for which a class has not been certified. The class originally certified in Gale was subsequently decertified. For the reasons described above, the Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.
Bartko v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed on November 8, 2011, and pending in the Superior Court of the State of California, Los Angeles.
Coleman v. First American Home Buyers Protection Corporation, et al., filed on August 24, 2009 and pending in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,
On March 5, 2010, Bank of America, N.A. filed a complaint in the North Carolina General Court of Justice, Superior Court Division against United General Title Insurance Company and First American Title Insurance Company alleging that the defendants failed to pay or failed to timely respond to certain claims made on title insurance policies issued in connection with home equity loans or lines of credit that are now in default. On April 1, 2010, the Company filed a third party complaint within the same litigation against Fiserv Solutions, Inc. for other matters relating to the plaintiff’s allegations. During the fourth quarter of 2011, the Company, Bank of America and Fiserv settled the lawsuit through mediation. In connection with the case, the Company recorded a charge of $19.2 million in the fourth quarter of 2011 and $13.0 million in the third quarter of 2011, which is net of all recoveries. These charges were recorded to provision for policy losses and other claims on the accompanying consolidated statements of income. The settlement extinguished all Company liability in connection with policies issued to Bank of America of the type that are the subject of the lawsuit, whether or not Bank of America submitted a claim with respect to such policies. The court approved of the settlement on December 8, 2011 and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The Company also is a party to non-ordinary course lawsuits other than those described above. With respect to these lawsuits, the Company has determined either that a loss is not reasonably possible or that the estimated loss or range of loss, if any, is not material to the financial statements as a whole.
The Company’s title insurance, property and casualty insurance, home warranty, banking, thrift, trust and investment advisory businesses are regulated by various federal, state and local governmental agencies. Many of the Company’s other businesses operate within statutory guidelines. Consequently, the Company may from time
During the year ended December 31, 2012, the Company completed five acquisitions for an aggregate purchase price of $31.1 million in cash and contingent consideration of $0.8 million. The purchase price of each acquisition was allocated to the assets acquired and liabilities assumed using a variety of valuation techniques including discounted cash flow analysis. These five acquisitions have been included in the Company’s title insurance and services segment.
The Company’s title insurance and services segment issues title insurance policies on residential and commercial property in the United States and offers similar or related products and services internationally. This segment also provides escrow and closing services; accommodates tax-deferred exchanges of real estate; maintains, manages and provides access to title plant records and images and provides banking, trust and investment advisory services. The Company, through its principal title insurance subsidiary and such subsidiary’s affiliates, transacts its title insurance business through a network of direct operations and agents. Through this network, the Company issues policies in the 49 states that permit the issuance of title insurance policies and the District of Columbia. The Company also offers title insurance and other insurance and guarantee products, as well as related settlement
Long-lived assets separated between domestic and foreign operations and by segment as of December 31, 2012, 2011 and 2010 are as follows:
The Company received cash dividends from subsidiaries of $11.8 million and $75.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011, respectively.