We and our insurance subsidiaries share administrative headquarters with Donegal Mutual in a building in Marietta, Pennsylvania that Donegal Mutual owns. Donegal Mutual charges us and our insurance subsidiaries for an appropriate portion of the building expenses under an inter-company allocation agreement. The Marietta headquarters has approximately 235,000 square feet of office space. Southern owns a facility of approximately 10,000 square feet in Glen Allen, Virginia. Le Mars owns a facility of approximately 25,500 square feet in Le Mars, Iowa, Peninsula owns a facility of approximately 14,600 square feet in Salisbury, Maryland and Sheboygan owns a facility of approximately 8,800 square feet in Sheboygan Falls, Wisconsin.
On July 18, 2013, our board of directors authorized a share repurchase program pursuant to which we have the authority to purchase up to 500,000 additional shares of our Class A common stock at prices prevailing from time to time in the open market subject to the provisions of the SEC Rule 10b-18 and in privately negotiated transactions. We did not purchase any shares of our Class A common stock under this program during 2016. We purchased 57,658 shares of our Class A common stock under this program during 2015. We have purchased a total of 57,658 shares of our Class A common stock under this program from its inception through December 31, 2016.
Our insurance subsidiaries make estimates and assumptions that can have a significant effect on amounts and disclosures we report in our financial statements. The most significant estimates relate to the reserves of our insurance subsidiaries for property and casualty insurance unpaid losses and loss expenses, valuation of investments and determination of other-than-temporary investment impairments and the policy acquisition costs of our insurance subsidiaries. While we believe our estimates and the estimates of our insurance subsidiaries are appropriate, the ultimate amounts may differ from the estimates we provided. We regularly review our methods for making these estimates, and we reflect any adjustment we consider necessary in our results of operations for the period in which we make an adjustment.
Our insurance subsidiaries maintain liabilities for the payment of losses and loss expenses with respect to both reported and unreported claims. Our insurance subsidiaries establish these liabilities for the purpose of covering the ultimate costs of settling all losses, including investigation and litigation costs. Our insurance subsidiaries base the amount of their liability for reported losses primarily upon a case-by-case evaluation of the type of risk involved, knowledge of the circumstances surrounding each claim and the insurance policy provisions relating to the type of loss the policyholder incurred. Our insurance subsidiaries determine the amount of their liability for unreported claims and loss expenses on the basis of historical information by line of insurance. Our insurance subsidiaries account for inflation in the reserving function through analysis of costs and trends and reviews of historical reserving results. Our insurance subsidiaries closely monitor their liabilities and recompute them periodically using new information on reported claims and a variety of statistical techniques. Our insurance subsidiaries do not discount their liabilities for losses.
Reserve estimates can change over time because of unexpected changes in assumptions related to our insurance subsidiaries’ external environment and, to a lesser extent, assumptions related to our insurance subsidiaries’ internal operations. For example, our insurance subsidiaries have experienced a decrease in claims frequency on workers’ compensation claims during the past several years while claims severity has gradually increased. These trend changes give rise to greater uncertainty as to the pattern of future loss settlements on workers’ compensation claims. Related uncertainties regarding future trends include the cost of medical technologies and procedures and changes in the utilization of medical procedures. Assumptions related to our insurance subsidiaries’ external environment include the absence of significant changes in tort law and the legal environment that increase liability exposure, consistency in judicial interpretations of insurance coverage and policy provisions and the rate of loss cost inflation. Internal assumptions include consistency in the recording of premium and loss statistics, consistency in the recording of claims, payment and case reserving methodology, accurate measurement of the impact of rate changes and changes in policy provisions, consistency in the quality and characteristics of business written within a given line of business and consistency in reinsurance coverage and collectability of reinsured losses, among other items. To the extent our insurance subsidiaries determine that underlying factors impacting their assumptions have changed, our insurance subsidiaries attempt to make appropriate adjustments for such changes in their reserves. Accordingly, our insurance subsidiaries’ ultimate liability for unpaid losses and loss expenses will likely differ from the amount recorded at December 31, 2016. For every 1% change in our insurance subsidiaries’ estimate for loss and loss expense reserves, net of reinsurance recoverable, the effect on our pre-tax results of operations would be approximately $3.5 million.
The establishment of appropriate liabilities is an inherently uncertain process and we can provide no assurance that our insurance subsidiaries’ ultimate liability will not exceed our insurance subsidiaries’ loss and loss expense reserves and have an adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Furthermore, we cannot predict the timing, frequency and extent of adjustments to our insurance subsidiaries’ estimated future liabilities, since the historical conditions and events that serve as a basis for our insurance subsidiaries’ estimates of ultimate claim costs may change. As is the case for substantially all property and casualty insurance companies, our insurance subsidiaries have found it necessary in the past to increase their estimated future liabilities for losses and loss expenses in certain periods and, in other periods, their estimates of future liabilities have exceeded their actual liabilities. Changes in our insurance subsidiaries’ estimate of their liability for losses and loss expenses generally reflect actual payments and their evaluation of information received since the prior reporting date. Our insurance subsidiaries recognized an increase in their liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years of $3.0 million, $7.2 million and $14.5 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Our insurance subsidiaries made no significant changes in their reserving philosophy, key reserving assumptions or claims management personnel, and have made no significant offsetting changes in estimates that increased or decreased their loss and loss expense reserves in these years. The 2016 development represented 0.9% of the December 31, 2015 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile liability lines of business in accident years prior to 2016.
Our insurance subsidiaries’ liability for losses and loss expenses by major line of business at December 31, 2016 and 2015 consisted of the following:
The following table presents 2016 and 2015 claim count and payment amount information for workers’ compensation. Workers’ compensation losses primarily consist of indemnity and medical costs for injured workers.
We make estimates concerning the valuation of our investments and the recognition of other-than-temporary declines in the value of our investments. For equity securities, when we consider a decline in the value of an individual investment to be other than temporary, we write down the investment to its fair value and reflect the amount of the write-down as a realized loss in our results of operations. We individually monitor all investments for other-than-temporary declines in value. Generally, we assume there has been an other-than-temporary decline in value if an individual equity security has depreciated in value by more than 20% of original cost and has been in such an unrealized loss position for more than six months. We held 13 equity securities that were in an unrealized loss position at December 31, 2016. Based upon our analysis of general market conditions and underlying factors impacting these equity securities, we considered these declines in value to be temporary. With respect to a debt security that is in an unrealized loss position, we first assess if we intend to sell the debt security. If we determine we intend to sell the debt security, we recognize the impairment loss in our results of operations. If we do not intend to sell the debt security, we determine whether it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the security prior to recovery. If we determine it is more likely than not that we will be required to sell the debt security prior to recovery, we recognize an impairment loss in our results of operations. If we determine it is more likely than not that we will not be required to sell the debt security prior to recovery, we then evaluate whether a credit loss has occurred. We determine whether a credit loss has occurred by comparing the amortized cost of the debt security to the present value of the cash flows we expect to collect. If we expect a cash flow shortfall, we consider that a credit loss has occurred. If we determine that a credit loss has occurred, we consider the impairment to be other than temporary. We then recognize the amount of the impairment loss related to the credit loss in our results of operations, and we recognize the remaining portion of the impairment loss in our other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes. In addition, we may write down securities in an unrealized loss position based on a number of other factors, including when the fair value of an investment is significantly below its cost, when the financial condition of the issuer of a security has deteriorated, the occurrence of industry, company or geographic events that have negatively impacted the value of a security and rating agency downgrades. We held 247 debt securities that were in an unrealized loss position at December 31, 2016. Based upon our analysis of general market conditions and underlying factors impacting these debt securities, we considered these declines in value to be temporary. We did not recognize any impairment losses in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
We present our investments in available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities at estimated fair value. The estimated fair value of a security may differ from the amount that we could realize if we sold the security in a forced transaction. In addition, the valuation of fixed maturity investments is more subjective when markets are less liquid, increasing the potential that the estimated fair value does not reflect the price at which an actual transaction would occur. We utilize nationally recognized independent pricing services to estimate fair values or obtain market quotations for substantially all of our fixed maturity and equity investments. We generally obtain two prices per security. The pricing services utilize market quotations for fixed maturity and equity securities that have quoted prices in active markets. For fixed maturity securities that generally do not trade on a daily basis, the pricing services prepare estimates of fair value measurements based predominantly on observable market inputs. The pricing services do not use broker quotes in determining the fair values of our investments. Our investment personnel review the estimates of fair value the pricing services provide to determine if the estimates we obtain are representative of fair values based upon their general knowledge of the market, their research findings related to unusual fluctuations in value and their comparison of such values to execution prices for similar securities. Our investment personnel monitor the market and are familiar with current trading ranges for similar securities and pricing of specific investments. Our investment personnel review all pricing estimates that we receive from the pricing services against the expectations of our investment personnel with respect to pricing based on fair market curves, security ratings, coupon rates, security type and recent trading activity. Our investment personnel review documentation with respect to the pricing services’ pricing methodology that they obtain periodically to determine if the primary pricing sources, market inputs and pricing frequency for various security types are reasonable. At December 31, 2016, we received two estimates per security from the pricing services, and we priced substantially all of our Level 1 and Level 2 investments using those prices. In our review of the estimates the pricing services provided at December 31, 2016, we did not identify any material discrepancies, and we did not make any adjustments to the estimates the pricing services provided.
We had no sales or transfers from the held to maturity portfolio in 2016, 2015 or 2014.
surplus in the industry varies with returns on capital and regulatory barriers to the withdrawal of surplus. Increases in surplus have generally been accompanied by increased price competition among property and casualty insurers. If our insurance subsidiaries were to find it necessary to reduce premiums or limit premium increases due to competitive pressures on pricing, our insurance subsidiaries could experience a reduction in profit margins and revenues, an increase in ratios of losses and expenses to premiums and, therefore, lower profitability. The cyclicality of the insurance market and its potential impact on our results is difficult to predict with any significant reliability. We evaluate the performance of our commercial lines and personal lines segments primarily based upon the underwriting results of our insurance subsidiaries as determined under statutory accounting practices (“SAP”), which our management uses to measure performance for the total business of our insurance subsidiaries.
We evaluate our insurance operations by monitoring certain key measures of growth and profitability. In addition to using GAAP-based performance measurements, we also utilize certain non-GAAP financial measures that we believe are valuable in managing our business and for comparison to our peers. These non-GAAP measures are underwriting income (loss), statutory combined ratio and net premiums written. An insurance company’s statutory combined ratio is a standard measure of underwriting profitability. This ratio is the sum of the ratio of calendar-year incurred losses and loss expenses to premiums earned; the ratio of expenses incurred for commissions, premium taxes and underwriting expenses to premiums written and the ratio of dividends to policyholders to premiums earned. The statutory combined ratio does not reflect investment income, federal income taxes or other non-operating income or expense. A ratio of less than 100 percent generally indicates underwriting profitability. The statutory combined ratio differs from the GAAP combined ratio. In calculating the GAAP combined ratio, we do not deduct installment payment fees from incurred expenses, and we base the expense ratio on premiums earned instead of premiums written. The following table sets forth our insurance subsidiaries’ statutory combined ratios by major line of business for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014:
Our insurance subsidiaries’ installment fees decreased primarily as a result of their customers’ increased usage of payment plans that have lower installment payment fees during 2016.
Our income tax expense was $10.5 million in 2016, compared to $6.6 million in 2015. Our effective tax rate for 2016 was 25.5%, compared to 23.9% for 2015. The increase in our 2016 effective tax rate was primarily due to tax-exempt interest income representing a smaller proportion of income before income tax expense in 2016 compared to 2015.
Our insurance subsidiaries’ expense ratio, which is the ratio of policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses to premiums earned, was 32.6% in 2015, compared to 31.4% in 2014. We attribute the increase to higher underwriting-based incentives in 2015.
Our insurance subsidiaries’ combined ratio was 99.0% and 101.7% in 2015 and 2014, respectively. The combined ratio represents the sum of the loss ratio, the expense ratio and the dividend ratio, which is the ratio of workers’ compensation policy dividends incurred to premiums earned. We attribute the decrease in our combined ratio primarily to the decrease in our loss ratio.
We have historically generated sufficient net positive cash flow from our operations to fund our commitments and build our investment portfolio, thereby increasing future investment returns. The pooling agreement with Donegal Mutual historically has been cash flow positive because of the profitability of the underwriting pool. Because we settle the pool monthly, our cash flows are substantially similar to the cash flows that would result from the underwriting of direct business. We maintain a high degree of liquidity in our investment portfolio in the form of marketable fixed maturities, equity securities and short-term investments. We structure our fixed-maturity investment portfolio following a “laddering” approach so that projected cash flows from investment income and principal maturities are evenly distributed from a timing perspective. This laddering approach provides an additional measure of liquidity to meet our obligations and the obligations of our insurance subsidiaries should an unexpected variation occur in the future. Net cash flows provided by operating activities in 2016, 2015 and 2014 were $60.0 million, $68.2 million and $44.5 million, respectively.
The following table shows expected payments for our significant contractual obligations at December 31, 2016:
At December 31, 2016, the net unrealized gain on our available-for-sale fixed maturity investments, net of deferred taxes, amounted to $2.2 million, compared to $8.0 million at December 31, 2015.
At December 31, 2016, the net unrealized gain on our equity securities, net of deferred taxes, amounted to $3.0 million, compared to $972,264 at December 31, 2015.
In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance that requires lessees to recognize leases, including operating leases, on the lessee’s balance sheet, unless a lease is considered a short-term lease. The guidance also requires entities to make new judgments to identify leases. The guidance is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 and permits early adoption. We do not expect the adoption of this new guidance to have a significant impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Donegal Mutual Insurance Company (”Donegal Mutual”) organized us as an insurance holding company on August 26, 1986. Our insurance subsidiaries, Atlantic States Insurance Company (“Atlantic States”), Southern Insurance Company of Virginia (“Southern”), Le Mars Insurance Company (“Le Mars”), the Peninsula Insurance Group (“Peninsula”), which consists of Peninsula Indemnity Company and The Peninsula Insurance Company, Sheboygan Falls Insurance Company (“Sheboygan”) and Michigan Insurance Company (“MICO”), write personal and commercial lines of property and casualty coverages exclusively through a network of independent insurance agents in certain Mid-Atlantic, Midwestern, New England and Southern states. We also own 48.2% of the outstanding stock of Donegal Financial Services Corporation (“DFSC”), a grandfathered unitary savings and loan holding company that owns Union Community Bank (“UCB”), a state savings bank. UCB has 15 banking offices, substantially all of which are located in Lancaster County, Pennsylvania. Donegal Mutual owns the remaining 51.8% of the outstanding stock of DFSC.
At December 31, 2016, Donegal Mutual held approximately 46% of our outstanding Class A common stock and approximately 83% of our outstanding Class B common stock. This ownership provides Donegal Mutual with approximately 73% of the total voting power of our common stock. Our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual have interrelated operations due to a pooling agreement and other intercompany agreements and transactions. While each company maintains its separate corporate existence, our insurance subsidiaries and Donegal Mutual conduct business together as the Donegal Insurance Group. As such, Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries share the same business philosophy, the same management, the same employees and the same facilities and offer the same types of insurance products.
We amortize premiums and discounts for mortgage-backed debt securities using anticipated prepayments.
In 2016, 2015 and 2014, we realized $788,700, $437,474 and $304,533, respectively, in tax benefits upon the exercise of stock options.
We have two classes of common stock, which we refer to as Class A common stock and Class B common stock. Our Class A common stock is entitled to the declaration and payment of cash dividends that are at least 10% higher than those we declare and pay on our Class B common stock. Accordingly, we use the two-class method for the computation of earnings per common share. The two-class method is an earnings allocation formula that determines earnings per share separately for each class of common stock based on dividends declared and an allocation of remaining undistributed earnings using a participation percentage that reflects the dividend rights of each class.
In August 2014, the FASB issued an ASU related to the disclosure of uncertainties about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The intent of this standard is to help reduce the diversity in the timing and content of footnote disclosures as those disclosures relate to an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern. The standard was effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016. If conditions or events raise substantial doubt that is not alleviated, an entity should disclose that there is substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date that the financial statements are issued (or available to be issued), along with the principal conditions or events that raise substantial doubt, management’s evaluation of the significance of those conditions or events in relation to the entity’s ability to meet its obligations and management’s plans that are intended to mitigate those conditions. The adoption of this new guidance had no impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In April 2015, the FASB issued updated guidance to clarify the required presentation of debt issuance costs. The updated guidance requires entities to present debt issuance costs in the balance sheet as a direct reduction from the carrying amount of the recognized debt liability, consistent with the treatment of debt discounts, and to report amortization of debt issuance costs as interest expense. The updated guidance does not affect recognition and measurement guidance for debt issuance costs. The guidance was effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of this new guidance had no impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
In June 2016, the FASB issued guidance that amends previous guidance on the impairment of financial instruments by adding an impairment model that requires an entity to recognize expected credit losses as an allowance rather than impairments as credit losses are incurred. The intent of the new guidance is to reduce complexity and result in a more timely recognition of expected credit losses. The guidance is effective for annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. We do not expect the adoption of this new guidance to have a significant impact on our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
Until February 1, 2016, Donegal Mutual and Le Mars had a quota-share reinsurance agreement under which Le Mars assumed 100% of the premiums and losses related to certain products Donegal Mutual offered in certain Midwestern states, which provided the availability of complementary products to Le Mars’ commercial accounts. Until October 31, 2012, Donegal Mutual and Southern had a quota-share reinsurance agreement whereby Southern assumed 100% of the premiums and losses related to personal lines products Donegal Mutual offered in Virginia through the use of its automated policy quoting and
The following amounts represent reinsurance ceded to Donegal Mutual pursuant to these quota-share reinsurance agreements during 2016, 2015 and 2014:
Atlantic States, Southern and Le Mars each have a catastrophe reinsurance agreement with Donegal Mutual that provides coverage under any one catastrophic occurrence above a set retention ($2,000,000, $1,500,000 and $750,000 for Atlantic States, Southern and Le Mars, respectively), with a combined retention of $4,000,000 for a catastrophe involving a combination of these subsidiaries, up to the amount Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries retain under catastrophe reinsurance agreements with unaffiliated reinsurers. The set retention for Le Mars was $500,000 in 2014. Donegal Mutual and Southern have an excess of loss reinsurance agreement in which Donegal Mutual assumes up to $500,000 of Southern’s losses in excess of $500,000.
The following amounts represent reinsurance that our insurance subsidiaries ceded to Donegal Mutual pursuant to these reinsurance agreements during 2016, 2015 and 2014:
The following amounts represent the effect of affiliated reinsurance transactions on net premiums our insurance subsidiaries earned during 2016, 2015 and 2014:
We lease office equipment and automobiles with terms ranging from 3 to 10 years to Donegal Mutual under a 10-year lease agreement dated January 1, 2011.
At December 31, 2016 and 2015, we had $16,981,744 and $24,030,780, respectively, in checking accounts with UCB, a wholly owned subsidiary of DFSC. We earned $87,941, $3,317 and $2,757 in interest on these accounts during 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
At December 31, 2016, our holdings of obligations of states and political subdivisions included general obligation bonds with an aggregate fair value of $220.1 million and an amortized cost of $211.0 million. Our holdings also included special revenue bonds with an aggregate fair value of $96.8 million and an amortized cost of $91.7 million. With respect to both categories of bonds, we held no securities of any issuer that comprised more than 10% of that category at December 31, 2016. Education bonds and water and sewer utility bonds represented 62% and 23%, respectively, of our total investments in special revenue bonds based on their carrying values at December 31, 2016. Many of the issuers of the special revenue bonds we held at December 31, 2016 have the authority to impose ad valorem taxes. In that respect, many of the special revenue bonds we held are similar to general obligation bonds.
We include our share of DFSC’s net income in our results of operations. We have compiled the following summary financial information for DFSC at December 31, 2016 and 2015 from the financial statements of DFSC.
We received distributions from DFSC of $1.6 million and $1.8 million during 2016 and 2015, respectively. Based on the nature of the activities that generated these distributions, we made an accounting policy election to classify these distributions as a return on our investment in DFSC.
We did not recognize any impairment losses in 2016, 2015 or 2014. We had no sales or transfers from our held to maturity portfolio in 2016, 2015 or 2014. We had no derivative instruments or hedging activities during 2016, 2015 or 2014.
We account for financial assets using a framework that establishes a hierarchy that ranks the quality and reliability of inputs, or assumptions, used in the determination of fair value, and we classify financial assets and liabilities carried at fair value in one of the following three categories:
We present our investments in available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities at estimated fair value. The estimated fair value of a security may differ from the amount that we could realize if we sold the security in a forced transaction. In addition, the valuation of fixed maturity investments is more subjective when markets are less liquid, increasing the potential that the estimated fair value does not reflect the price at which an actual transaction would occur. We utilize nationally recognized independent pricing services to estimate fair values or obtain market quotations for substantially all of our fixed maturity and equity investments. We generally obtain two prices per security. The pricing services utilize market quotations for fixed maturity and equity securities that have quoted prices in active markets. For fixed maturity securities that generally do not trade on a daily basis, the pricing services prepare estimates of fair value measurements based predominantly on observable market inputs. The pricing services do not use broker quotes in determining the fair values of our investments. Our investment personnel review the estimates of fair value the pricing services provide to determine if the estimates we obtain are representative of fair values based upon the general knowledge of the market of our investment personnel, their research findings related to unusual fluctuations in value and their comparison of such values to execution prices for similar securities. Our investment personnel monitor the market and are familiar with current trading ranges for similar securities and pricing of specific investments. Our investment personnel review all pricing estimates that we receive from the pricing services against their expectations with respect to pricing based on fair market curves, security ratings, coupon rates, security type and recent trading activity. Our investment personnel review documentation with respect to the pricing services’ pricing methodology that they obtain periodically to determine if the primary pricing sources, market inputs and pricing frequency for various security
The following table presents our fair value measurements for our investments in available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities at December 31, 2016:
The following table presents our fair value measurements for our investments in available-for-sale fixed maturity and equity securities at December 31, 2015:
Changes in our insurance subsidiaries’ deferred policy acquisition costs are as follows:
Our insurance subsidiaries recognized an increase in their liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years of $3.0 million, $7.2 million and $14.5 million in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Our insurance subsidiaries made no significant changes in their reserving philosophy, key reserving assumptions or claims management personnel, and they have made no significant offsetting changes in estimates that increased or decreased their loss and loss expense reserves in those years. The 2016 development represented 0.9% of the December 31, 2015 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile liability lines of business, offset by lower-than-expected severity in the workers’ compensation line of business, in accident years prior to 2016. The majority of the 2016 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern. The 2015 development represented 2.5% of the December 31, 2014 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the private passenger automobile liability, commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile lines of business in accident years prior to 2015. The majority of the 2015 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern. The 2014 development represented 5.4% of the December 31, 2013 net carried reserves and resulted primarily from higher-than-expected severity in the private passenger automobile liability, commercial multiple peril and commercial automobile lines of business in accident years prior to 2014. The majority of the 2014 development related to increases in the liability for losses and loss expenses of prior years for Atlantic States and Southern.
Our insurance subsidiaries determine incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) reserves by subtracting the cumulative loss and loss expense amounts our insurance subsidiaries have paid and the case reserves our insurance subsidiaries have established at the balance sheet date from their actuaries’ estimate of the ultimate cost of losses and loss expenses. Accordingly, our insurance subsidiaries’ IBNR reserves include their actuaries’ projections of the cost of unreported claims as well as their actuaries’ projected development of case reserves on known claims and reopened claims. Our insurance subsidiaries’ methodology for estimating IBNR reserves has been in place for many years, and their actuaries made no significant changes to that methodology during 2016.
The following tables present information about incurred and paid claims development as of December 31, 2016, net of reinsurance, as well as cumulative claim frequency and the total of IBNR reserves plus expected development on reported claims that our insurance subsidiaries included within their net incurred claims amounts. The tables include unaudited information about incurred and paid claims development for the years ended December 31, 2007 through 2015, which we present as supplementary information. We present amounts retrospectively for MICO, which we acquired in December 2010, for all accident years prior to 2010.
MICO has an agreement with the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) of Indianapolis. Through its membership, MICO has the ability to issue debt to the FHLB of Indianapolis in exchange for cash advances. There were no outstanding borrowings at December 31, 2016 or 2015. The table below presents the amount of FHLB of Indianapolis stock MICO purchased, collateral pledged and assets related to MICO’s agreement at December 31, 2016.
Atlantic States is a member of the FHLB of Pittsburgh. Through its membership, Atlantic States has the ability to issue debt to the FHLB of Pittsburgh in exchange for cash advances. During 2013, Atlantic States issued secured debt in the principal amount of $15.0 million to the FHLB of Pittsburgh in exchange for cash advances in the amount of $15.0 million. Atlantic States then loaned $15.0 million to us. We used the proceeds of our loan from Atlantic States to fund our prepayment of subordinated debentures. In July 2015, Atlantic States issued secured debt in the principal amount of $20.0 million to the FHLB of Pittsburgh in exchange for cash advances in the amount of $20.0 million. Atlantic States then loaned $20.0 million to us. We used the proceeds of our loan from Atlantic States to repay borrowings under our line of credit with M&T. The interest rate on the advances was .63% at December 31, 2016. The table below presents the amount of FHLB of Pittsburgh stock Atlantic States purchased, collateral pledged and assets related to Atlantic States’ membership in the FHLB of Pittsburgh at December 31, 2016.
In January 2002, West Bend purchased a surplus note from MICO for $5.0 million to increase MICO’s statutory surplus. On December 1, 2010, Donegal Mutual purchased the surplus note from West Bend at face value. The surplus note carries an interest rate of 5.00%, and any repayment of principal or interest requires prior insurance regulatory approval. Upon receipt of regulatory approval, MICO paid $250,000 in interest to Donegal Mutual during each of 2016, 2015 and 2014.
amount of coverage provided under each of these types of reinsurance depends upon the amount, nature, size and location of the risks being reinsured. Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries also purchased facultative reinsurance to cover exposures from losses that exceeded the limits provided by the treaty reinsurance Donegal Mutual and our insurance subsidiaries purchased. In order to write automobile insurance in the State of Michigan, MICO is required to be a member of the Michigan Catastrophic Claims Association (“MCCA”). The MCCA provides reinsurance to MICO for personal automobile and commercial automobile personal injury claims in the State of Michigan over a set retention.
The following amounts represent ceded reinsurance transactions with unaffiliated reinsurers during 2016, 2015 and 2014:
The following amounts represent the effect of reinsurance on premiums written for 2016, 2015 and 2014:
The following amounts represent the effect of reinsurance on premiums earned for 2016, 2015 and 2014:
Our effective tax rate is different from the amount computed at the statutory federal rate of 35% for 2016, 2015 and 2014. The reasons for such difference and the related tax effects are as follows:
The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of our deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities at December 31, 2016 and 2015 are as follows:
We provide a valuation allowance when we believe it is more likely than not that we will not realize some portion of a deferred tax asset. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, we established a valuation allowance of $440,778 related to a portion of the net operating loss carryforward of Le Mars that we acquired on January 1, 2004. We determined that we were not required to establish a valuation allowance for the other net deferred tax assets of $43.1 million and $42.7 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, since it is more likely than not that we will realize these deferred tax assets through reversals of existing temporary differences, future taxable income and our implementation of tax-planning strategies.
On July 18, 2013, our board of directors authorized a share repurchase program pursuant to which we have the authority to purchase up to 500,000 additional shares of our Class A common stock at prices prevailing from time to time in the open market subject to the provisions of the SEC Rule 10b-18 and in privately negotiated transactions. We did not purchase any shares of our Class A common stock under this program during 2016. We purchased 57,658 shares of our Class A common stock under this program during 2015. We did not purchase any shares of our Class A common stock under this program during 2014. We have purchased a total of 57,658 shares of our Class A common stock under this program from its inception through December 31, 2016.
At December 31, 2016 and 2015, our treasury stock consisted of 3,002,588 and 72,465 shares of Class A common stock and Class B common stock, respectively.
Since 1996, we have maintained an Equity Incentive Plan for Employees. During 2015, we adopted a plan that made a total of 4,500,000 shares of Class A common stock available for issuance to employees of our subsidiaries and affiliates. The plan provides for the granting of awards by our board of directors in the form of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted stock or any combination of the above. The plan provides that stock options may become exercisable up to five years from their date of grant, with an option price not less than fair market value on the date preceding the date of grant. We have not granted any stock appreciation rights.
We charged compensation expense for our stock compensation plans against income before income taxes of $2.5 million, $2.6 million and $2.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, with a corresponding income tax benefit of $864,210, $896,753 and $700,487. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, our total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share-based compensation granted under our stock compensation plans was $3.7 million and $4.0 million, respectively. We expect to recognize this cost over a weighted average period of 1.5 years.
On January 1, 2017, we issued 18,512 shares at a price of $13.76 per share under this plan.
Our principal source of cash for payment of dividends is dividends from our insurance subsidiaries. State insurance laws require our insurance subsidiaries to maintain certain minimum capital and surplus amounts on a statutory basis. Our insurance subsidiaries are subject to regulations that restrict the payment of dividends from statutory surplus and may require prior approval of their domiciliary insurance regulatory authorities. Our insurance subsidiaries are also subject to risk-based capital (“RBC”) requirements that may further impact their ability to pay dividends. Our insurance subsidiaries’ statutory capital and surplus at December 31, 2016 exceeded the amount of statutory capital and surplus necessary to satisfy regulatory requirements, including the RBC requirements, by a significant margin. Amounts available for distribution to us as dividends from our insurance subsidiaries without prior approval of insurance regulatory authorities in 2017 are $22.8 million from Atlantic States, $6.3 million from Southern, $2.6 million from Le Mars, $1.6 million from Peninsula, $643,035 from Sheboygan and $5.0 million from MICO, or a total of approximately $38.9 million.
The following table reflects net income taxes and interest we paid during 2016, 2015 and 2014:
We present below a reconciliation of the numerators and denominators we used in the basic and diluted per share computations for our Class A common stock:
Our insurance subsidiaries’ liabilities for guaranty fund and other insurance-related assessments were $1,490,376 and $1,348,427 at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. These liabilities included $447,620 and $400,690 related to surcharges collected by our insurance subsidiaries on behalf of regulatory authorities for 2016 and 2015, respectively.
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Donegal Group Inc. and subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements of income and comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2016. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these consolidated financial statements based on our audits. We did not audit the financial statements of Donegal Financial Services Corporation (a 48.2 percent owned investee company). The Company’s investment in Donegal Financial Services Corporation at December 31, 2016 and 2015 was $37,884,918 and $38,476,708, respectively, and its equity in earnings of Donegal Financial Services Corporation was $1,086,157, $1,277,229 and $1,242,910 for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The financial statements of Donegal Financial Services Corporation were audited by other auditors whose report has been furnished to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts included for Donegal Financial Services Corporation, is based solely on the report of the other auditors.
In our opinion, based on our audits and the reports of the other auditors, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Donegal Group Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2016, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Donegal Group Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO), and our report dated March 10, 2017 expressed an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.