· we may be subject to regulations influenced by or related to international regulatory authorities or initiatives;
· if our business does not perform well, we may be required to recognize an impairment of our goodwill and indefinite lived intangible assets which could adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition;
· Acquisitions segment operating income was $194.7 million. This included expected runoff of the in-force blocks of business.
companies will receive investment income on the reserves assumed which will increase the assuming companies’ profitability on business assumed from the Company. For business ceded under modified coinsurance arrangements, the amount of investment income attributable to the assuming company is included as part of the overall change in policy reserves and, as such, is reflected in benefit and settlement expenses. The net investment income impact to us and the assuming companies has not been quantified as it is not fully reflected in our consolidated financial statements.
Net premiums and policy fees were $128.3 million which consisted of service contract premiums of $77.0 million, GAP premiums of $38.7 million, and credit insurance premiums of $12.6 million.
Total segment sales consisted of $371.2 million in the service contract line, $87.0 million in the GAP product line, and credit insurance sales of $23.8 million.
Net investment income has no direct impact on reinsurance cost. However, by ceding business to the assuming companies, we forgo investment income on the reserves ceded. Conversely, the assuming companies will receive investment income on the reserves assumed which generally will increase the assuming companies’ profitability on business that we cede. The net investment income impact to us and the assuming companies has not been quantified as it is not reflected in our consolidated financial statements.
Operating revenues of $168.5 million were primarily due to $154.1 million of investment income which represents income on assets supporting our equity capital.
As of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company), our investment portfolio was approximately $45.2 billion. The types of assets in which we may invest are influenced by various state insurance laws which prescribe qualified investment assets. Within the parameters of these laws, we invest in assets giving consideration to such factors as liquidity and capital needs, investment quality, investment return, matching of assets and liabilities, and the overall composition of the investment portfolio by asset type and credit exposure.
The following tables categorize the estimated fair value and unrealized gain/(loss) of our mortgage-backed securities collateralized by Alt-A mortgage loans by rating as of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company):
We also offer a type of commercial mortgage loan under which we will permit a loan-to-value ratio of up to 85% in exchange for a participating interest in the cash flows from the underlying real estate. As of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company) and December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company), approximately $449.2 million and $553.6 million, respectively, of our mortgage loans had this participation feature. Cash flows received as a result of this participation feature are recorded as interest income. During the period of February 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (Successor Company), the period of January 1, 2015 to January 31, 2015 (Predecessor Company), and for the year ended December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company), we recognized $29.8 million, $0.1 million, and $16.7 million of participating mortgage loan income, respectively.
accounted for as troubled debt restructurings, none remain on our balance sheet as of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company).
Securities in an unrealized loss position are reviewed at least quarterly to determine if an other-than-temporary impairment is present based on certain quantitative and qualitative factors. We consider a number of factors in determining whether the impairment is other-than-temporary. These include, but are not limited to: 1) actions taken by rating agencies, 2) default by the issuer, 3) the significance of the decline, 4) an assessment of our intent to sell the security (including a more likely than not assessment of whether we will be required to sell the security) before recovering the security’s amortized cost, 5) the time period during which the decline has occurred, 6) an economic analysis of the issuer’s industry, and 7) the financial strength, liquidity, and recoverability of the issuer. Management performs a security-by-security review each quarter in evaluating the need for any other-than-temporary impairments. Although no set formula is used in this process, the investment performance, collateral position, and continued viability of the issuer are significant measures considered, along with an analysis regarding our expectations for recovery of the security’s entire amortized cost basis through the receipt of future cash flows. Based on our analysis, for the period of February 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (Successor Company), we concluded that approximately $27.0 million of investment securities in an unrealized loss position were other-than-temporarily impaired, due to credit related factors, resulting in a charge to earnings. Additionally, we recognized $1.6 million of non-credit losses in other comprehensive income (loss). For the period of January 1, 2015 to January 31, 2015 (Predecessor Company), we concluded that approximately $0.5 million of investment securities in an unrealized loss position were other-than-temporarily
As of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company), securities in an unrealized loss position that were rated as below investment grade represented 3.8% of the total fair value and 6.1% of the total unrealized loss. We have the ability and intent to hold these securities to maturity. After a review of each security and its expected cash flows, we believe the decline in market value to be temporary.
The following table sets forth the notional amount and fair value of our currency risk related derivative financial instruments and the estimated fair value resulting from a hypothetical immediate plus and minus ten percentage point change in currency level from levels prevailing as of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company) and as of December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company):
The fair value of fixed maturity, short-term, and equity securities is determined by management after considering one of three primary sources of information: third party pricing services, non-binding independent broker quotations, or pricing matrices. Security pricing is applied using a “waterfall” approach whereby publicly available prices are first sought from third party pricing services, the remaining unpriced securities are submitted to independent brokers for non-binding prices, or lastly, securities are priced using a pricing matrix. Typical inputs used by these three pricing methods include, but are not limited to: benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, and reference data including market research publications. Based on the typical trading volumes and the lack of quoted market prices for available-for-sale and trading fixed maturities, third party pricing services derive the majority of security prices from observable market inputs such as recent reported trades for identical or similar securities making adjustments through the reporting date based upon available market observable information as outlined above. If there are no recent reported trades, the third party pricing services and brokers may use matrix or model processes to develop a security price where future cash flow expectations are developed based upon collateral performance and discounted at an estimated market rate. Certain securities are priced via independent non-binding broker quotations, which are considered to have no significant unobservable inputs. When using non-binding independent broker quotations, the Company obtains one quote per security, typically from the broker from which the Company purchased the security. A pricing matrix is used to price securities for which the Company is unable to obtain or effectively rely on either a price from a third party service or an independent broker quotation. Included in the pricing of other asset-backed securities, collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”), and mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) are estimates of the rate of future prepayments of principal and underlying collateral support over the remaining life of the securities. Such estimates are derived based on the characteristics of the underlying structure and rates of prepayments previously experienced at the interest rate levels projected for the underlying collateral. The basis for the cost of securities sold was determined at the Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures (“CUSIP”) level. The committee supplies a unique nine-character identification, called a CUSIP number, for each class of security approved for trading in the U.S., to facilitate clearing and settlement. These numbers are used when any buy and sell orders are recorded.
ASU No. 2016-01 - Financial Instruments - Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. The amendments in this Update address certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. Most notably, the Update requires that equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. The amendments in this Update are effective for annual and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company is reviewing its policies and processes to ensure compliance with the revised guidance.
At or immediately prior to the effective time of the Merger, each restricted stock unit with respect to a share of Common Stock granted under any Stock Plan (each, a “RSU”) that was outstanding immediately prior to the Merger, whether or not vested, was cancelled and converted into the right to receive an amount in cash, without interest, less any applicable withholding taxes, determined by multiplying (i) the Per Share Merger Consideration by (ii) the number of RSUs.
For the year ended December 31, 2013 (Predecessor Company), the Company sold securities in an unrealized loss position with a fair value (proceeds) of $398.2 million. The loss realized on the sale of these securities was $6.3 million. The Company made the decision to exit these holdings in conjunction with our overall asset liability management process.
The other asset-backed securities have a gross unrealized loss greater than twelve months of $29.5 million as of December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company). This category predominately includes student-loan backed auction rate securities, the underlying collateral, of which is at least 97% guaranteed by the Federal Family Education Loan Program (“FFELP”). These unrealized losses have occurred within the Company’s auction rate securities (“ARS”) portfolio since the market collapse during 2008. At this time, the Company has no reason to believe that the U.S. Department of Education would not honor the FFELP guarantee, if it were necessary.
During 2012, the Company issued $150.0 million of its Subordinated Debentures due in 2042. These Subordinated Debentures were offered and sold pursuant to the Company’s shelf registration statement on Form S-3. The Company used the net proceeds from the offering to call $125.0 million of Capital Securities due in 2066 at par value and the remaining for general working capital purposes.
A number of civil jury verdicts have been returned against insurers, broker dealers and other providers of financial services involving sales, refund or claims practices, alleged agent misconduct, failure to properly supervise representatives, relationships with agents or persons with whom the insurer does business, and other matters. Often these lawsuits have resulted in the award of substantial judgments that are disproportionate to the actual damages, including material amounts of punitive and non-economic compensatory damages. In some states, juries, judges, and arbitrators have substantial discretion in awarding punitive non-economic compensatory damages which creates the potential for unpredictable material adverse judgments or awards in any given lawsuit or arbitration. Arbitration awards are subject to very limited appellate review. In addition, in some class action and other lawsuits, companies have made material settlement payments. Publicly held companies in general and the financial services and insurance industries in particular are also sometimes the target of law enforcement and regulatory investigations relating to the numerous laws and regulations that govern such companies. Some companies have been the
The criteria for payment of the 2014 performance awards was based on the Company’s average operating return on average equity (“ROE”) over a three-year period. If the Company’s ROE was below 10.5%, no award was earned. If the Company’s ROE was at or above 12.0%, the award maximum was earned.
For the year ended December 31, 2015 (Successor Company) and December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company), there were no transfers between levels.
Prior to 2009, employee contributions to the Company’s 401(k) Plan were matched through use of an ESOP established by the Company. Beginning in 2009, the Company adopted a cash match for employee contributions to the 401(k) plan. For the period of February 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015 (Successor Company) and for the year ended December 31, 2014 (Predecessor Company), the Company recorded an expense of $6.3 million and $6.3 million, respectively.
Therefore, the changes in fair value on derivatives reported in Level 3 may not reflect the offsetting impact of the changes in fair value of the associated assets and liabilities.
The Company has considered all reasonably available quantitative inputs as of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company), but the valuation techniques and inputs used by some brokers in pricing certain financial instruments are not shared with the Company. This resulted in $200.5 million of financial instruments being classified as Level 3 as of December 31, 2015 (Successor Company). Of the $200.5 million, $152.9 million are other asset-backed securities, $44.5 million are corporate securities, and $3.1 million are equity securities.
The fair value of the FIA account balance liability is predominantly impacted by observable inputs such as discount rates and equity returns. However, the fair value of the FIA embedded derivative is sensitive to non-performance risk, which is unobservable. The value of the liability increases with decreases in discount rate and non-performance risk and decreases with increases in the discount rate and non-performance risk. The value of the liability increases with increases in equity returns and the liability decreases with a decrease in equity returns.
· The Company is involved in various modified coinsurance arrangements which contain embedded derivatives. Changes in their fair value are recorded in current period earnings. The investment portfolios that support the related modified coinsurance reserves had fair value changes which substantially offset the gains or losses on these embedded derivatives.