UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549
FORM 10-K
[X] ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014
OR
[ ] TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
Commission File Number 0-24000
ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY | ||
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Pennsylvania | 25-0466020 | |||
(State or other jurisdiction | (I.R.S. Employer | |||
of incorporation or organization) | Identification No.) | |||
100 Erie Insurance Place, Erie, Pennsylvania | 16530 | |||
(Address of principal executive offices) | (Zip code) | |||
(814) 870-2000 | ||
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Class A common stock, stated value $0.0292 per share, listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC | |||
(Title of each class) | (Name of each exchange on which registered) | ||
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes X No
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes No X
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes X No
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes X No ___
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. [ ]
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large Accelerated Filer X | Accelerated Filer | Non-Accelerated Filer | Smaller Reporting Company | ||||
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company) | |||||||
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes No X
Aggregate market value of voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter: $1.8 billion of Class A non-voting common stock as of June 30, 2014. There is no active market for the Class B voting common stock. The Class B common stock is closely held by few shareholders.
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date:
46,189,068 shares of Class A common stock and 2,542 shares of Class B common stock outstanding on February 20, 2015.
DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Portions of Part III of this Form 10-K (Items 10, 11, 12, 13, and 14) are incorporated by reference to the information statement on Form 14(C) to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission no later than 120 days after December 31, 2014.
INDEX
PART | ITEM NUMBER AND CAPTION | PAGE | |
2
PART I
ITEM 1. BUSINESS
General
Erie Indemnity Company (“Indemnity”) is a publicly held Pennsylvania business corporation that has been the managing attorney-in-fact for the subscribers (policyholders) at the Erie Insurance Exchange (“Exchange”) since 1925. The Exchange is a subscriber owned, Pennsylvania-domiciled, reciprocal insurer that writes property and casualty insurance.
Indemnity’s primary function is to perform certain services for the Exchange relating to the sales, underwriting, and issuance of policies on behalf of the Exchange. This is done in accordance with a subscriber’s agreement (a limited power of attorney) executed by each subscriber (policyholder), which appoints Indemnity as their common attorney-in-fact to transact business on their behalf and to manage the affairs of the Exchange. Pursuant to the subscriber’s agreement and for its services as attorney-in-fact, Indemnity earns a management fee calculated as a percentage of the direct premiums written by the Exchange and the other members of the Property and Casualty Group (defined below), which are assumed by the Exchange under an intercompany pooling arrangement.
Indemnity has the power to direct the activities of the Exchange that most significantly impact the Exchange’s economic performance by acting as the common attorney-in-fact and decision maker for the subscribers (policyholders) at the Exchange.
The Exchange, together with its wholly owned subsidiaries, Erie Insurance Company (“EIC”), Erie Insurance Company of New York (“ENY”), Erie Insurance Property and Casualty Company (“EPC”), and Flagship City Insurance Company (“Flagship”), operate as a property and casualty insurer and are collectively referred to as the “Property and Casualty Group”. The Property and Casualty Group operates in 12 Midwestern, Mid-Atlantic, and Southeastern states and the District of Columbia and writes primarily private passenger automobile, homeowners, commercial multi-peril, commercial automobile, and workers compensation lines of insurance.
Erie Family Life Insurance Company (“EFL”), a wholly owned subsidiary of the Exchange, operates as a life insurer that underwrites and sells individual and group life insurance policies and fixed annuities.
The Property & Casualty Group and EFL began writing private passenger automobile, home insurance, personal excess liability insurance, and life insurance and annuity products in Kentucky in the fourth quarter of 2014.
All property and casualty and life insurance operations are owned by the Exchange and Indemnity functions solely as the management company.
The consolidated financial statements of Erie Indemnity Company reflect the results of Indemnity and its variable interest entity, the Exchange, which we refer to collectively as the “Erie Insurance Group” (“we,” “us,” “our”).
“Indemnity shareholder interest” refers to the interest in Erie Indemnity Company owned by the Class A and Class B shareholders. “Noncontrolling interest” refers to the interest in the Erie Insurance Exchange held for the subscribers (policyholders).
Business Segments
We operate our business as four reportable segments – management operations, property and casualty insurance operations, life insurance operations, and investment operations. Financial information about these segments is set forth in and referenced to Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 5, Segment Information, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained within this report. Further discussion of financial results by operating segment is provided in and referenced to Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” contained within this report.
Management operations – We generate internal management fee revenue, which accrues to the Indemnity shareholder interest, as Indemnity provides services to the Exchange relating to the sales, underwriting, and issuance of policies. The Exchange is the sole customer of our management operations. Indemnity charges the Exchange a management fee, determined by our Board of Directors, not to exceed 25% of all premiums written or assumed by the Exchange for its services as attorney-in-fact. Management fee revenue is eliminated upon consolidation.
3
Property and casualty insurance operations – The Property and Casualty Group generates revenue, which accrues to the noncontrolling interest, by insuring preferred and standard risks, with personal lines comprising 71% of the 2014 direct written premiums and commercial lines comprising the remaining 29%. The principal personal lines products based upon 2014 direct written premiums were private passenger automobile (43%) and homeowners (27%). The principal commercial lines products based upon 2014 direct written premiums were commercial multi-peril (13%), commercial automobile (7%), and workers compensation (7%).
The members of the Property and Casualty Group pool underwriting results under an intercompany pooling agreement. Under the pooling agreement, the Exchange retains a 94.5% interest in the net underwriting results of the Property and Casualty Group, while EIC retains a 5.0% interest, and ENY retains a 0.5% interest.
Historically, due to policy renewal and sales patterns, the Property and Casualty Group’s direct written premiums are greater in the second and third quarters than in the first and fourth quarters of the calendar year. Property and casualty insurance premiums earned accounted for approximately 86% of our total consolidated revenue in 2014, 77% in 2013, and 80% in 2012.
The Property and Casualty Group is represented by nearly 2,200 independent agencies comprising over 11,000 licensed property and casualty representatives, which is our sole distribution channel. In addition to their principal role as salespersons, the independent agents play a significant role as underwriting and service providers and are fundamental to the Property and Casualty Group’s success.
The Property and Casualty Group writes business in Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, New York, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. The states of Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and Ohio made up 74% of the Property and Casualty Group’s direct written premium in 2014.
While sales, underwriting, and policy issuance services are centralized at our home office, the Property and Casualty Group maintains 25 field offices throughout its operating region to provide claims services to policyholders and marketing support for the independent agencies that represent us.
The Property and Casualty Group ranked as the 12th largest automobile insurer in the United States based upon 2013 direct premiums written and as the 16th largest property and casualty insurer in the United States based upon 2013 total lines net premiums written according to A.M. Best Company.
Life insurance operations – Our life insurance operations generate revenue from the sale of individual and group life insurance policies and fixed annuities. These products are offered through our property and casualty insurance agency force to provide an opportunity to cross-sell both personal and commercial accounts. EFL writes business in 11 states including Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland, North Carolina, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Virginia, West Virginia, Wisconsin, and the District of Columbia. The state of Pennsylvania made up 46% of EFL’s 2014 premium and annuity considerations, with Maryland, Virginia, and Ohio making up nearly 10% each.
Investment operations – Our investment operations generate revenue from our fixed maturity, equity security, and limited partnership investment portfolios to support our underwriting business. The Indemnity and Exchange portfolios are managed with the objective of maximizing after-tax returns on a risk-adjusted basis, while the EFL portfolio is managed to be closely aligned to its liabilities and to maintain a sufficient yield to meet profitability targets. We actively evaluate the portfolios for impairments. We record impairment writedowns on investments in instances where the fair value of the investment is substantially below cost, and we conclude that the decline in fair value is other-than-temporary, which includes consideration for intent to sell. Revenues and losses included in investment operations consist of net investment income, net realized gains and losses, net impairment losses recognized in earnings for our fixed maturity and preferred equity portfolios, and equity in earnings and losses from our limited partnership investments, which include private equity, mezzanine debt, and real estate limited partnerships. The volatility inherent in the financial markets has the potential to impact our investment portfolio from time-to-time. Net revenues from our investment operations accounted for approximately 12% of our total consolidated revenue in 2014, 21% in 2013, and 18% in 2012.
4
Competition
Property and casualty insurers generally compete on the basis of customer service, price, consumer recognition, coverages offered, claims handling, financial stability, and geographic coverage. Vigorous competition, particularly in the personal lines automobile and homeowners lines of business, is provided by large, well-capitalized national companies, some of which have broad distribution networks of employed or captive agents, by smaller regional insurers, and by large companies who market and sell personal lines products directly to consumers. In addition, because the insurance products of the Property and Casualty Group are marketed exclusively through independent insurance agents, the Property and Casualty Group faces competition within its appointed agencies based upon ease of doing business, product, price, and service relationships.
Market competition bears directly on the price charged for insurance products and services subject to regulatory limitations. Growth is driven by a company’s ability to provide insurance services and competitive prices while maintaining target profit margins. Industry capital levels can also significantly affect prices charged for coverage. Growth is a product of a company’s ability to retain existing customers and to attract new customers, as well as movement in the average premium per policy.
The Erie Insurance Group has a strategic focus that we believe will result in long-term underwriting performance. First, we employ an underwriting philosophy and product mix targeted to produce a Property and Casualty Group underwriting profit on a long-term basis through careful risk selection and rational pricing. The careful selection of risk allows for lower claims frequency and loss severity, thereby enabling insurance to be offered at favorable prices. The Property and Casualty Group has continued to refine its risk measurement and price sophistication models used in the underwriting and pricing processes. Second, the Property and Casualty Group focuses on consistently providing superior service to policyholders and agents. Third, the Property and Casualty Group’s business model is designed to provide the advantages of localized marketing and claims servicing with the economies of scale and low cost of operations from centralized accounting, administrative, underwriting, investment, information management, and other support services.
Finally, we carefully select the independent agencies that represent the Property and Casualty Group. The Property and Casualty Group seeks to be the lead insurer with its agents in order to enhance the agency relationship and the likelihood of receiving the most desirable underwriting opportunities from its agents. We have ongoing, direct communications with our agency force. Agents have access to a number of venues we sponsor designed to promote the sharing of ideas, concerns and suggestions with the senior management of the Property and Casualty Group, with the goal of improving communications and service. We continually evaluate new ways to support our agents’ efforts, from marketing programs to identifying potential customer leads, to grow the business of the Property and Casualty Group and sustain our long-term agency relationships. High agency penetration and long-term relationships allow for greater efficiency in providing agency support and training.
EFL, our life insurer, is subject to many of the same structural advantages and environmental challenges as the Property and Casualty Group. Term life business accounts for the majority of policies issued by EFL, and this product line is extremely competitive and increasingly transparent due in part to the proliferation of on-line quoting services. Besides price, ease of application and processing improvements represent areas where companies are finding ways to differentiate themselves among independent producers. EFL continues to progress in these areas using state-of-the-art technology and third-party vendors. Historically, sound underwriting and disciplined approaches to pricing and investing have contributed to favorable operating results. While EFL will be challenged to maintain these trends in the face of intensified competition going forward, we continually shape our strategy and core processes to respond more effectively to the needs of our policyholders and independent agents.
Employees
We employed nearly 4,700 full-time people at December 31, 2014.
5
Reserves for Property and Casualty Losses and Loss Expenses
Loss reserves are established to account for the estimated ultimate costs of losses and loss expenses for claims that have been reported but not yet settled and claims that have been incurred but not reported. While we exercise professional diligence to establish reserves at the end of each period that are fully reflective of the ultimate value of all claims incurred, these reserves are, by nature, only estimates and cannot be established with absolute certainty. The factors which may potentially cause the greatest variation between current reserve estimates and the actual future paid amounts include unforeseen changes in statutory or case law altering the amounts to be paid on existing claim obligations, new medical procedures and/or drugs with costs significantly different from those seen in the past, inflation, and claims patterns on current business that differ significantly from historical claims patterns. A discussion of our property and casualty loss reserve methodology can be found in and is referenced to Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Critical Accounting Estimates” contained within this report.
Losses and loss expense reserves are presented on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position on a gross basis. The table that follows provides a reconciliation of our loss and loss expense reserve beginning and ending balances established for the Property and Casualty Group for the years ended December 31:
(in millions) | Property and Casualty Group | |||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2012 | ||||||||||
Losses and loss expense reserves, beginning of year – Gross | $ | 3,747 | $ | 3,598 | $ | 3,499 | ||||||
Less: reinsurance recoverable, beginning of year | 156 | 154 | 151 | |||||||||
Losses and loss expense reserves, beginning of year – Net | 3,591 | 3,444 | 3,348 | |||||||||
Incurred losses and loss expenses related to: | ||||||||||||
Current accident year | 3,969 | 3,379 | 3,494 | |||||||||
Prior accident years | (116 | ) | (19 | ) | (115 | ) | ||||||
Total incurred losses and loss expenses | 3,853 | 3,360 | 3,379 | |||||||||
Paid losses and loss expenses related to: | ||||||||||||
Current accident year | 2,513 | 2,007 | 2,166 | |||||||||
Prior accident years | 1,220 | 1,206 | 1,117 | |||||||||
Total paid losses and loss expenses | 3,733 | 3,213 | 3,283 | |||||||||
Losses and loss expense reserves, end of year – Net | 3,711 | 3,591 | 3,444 | |||||||||
Add: reinsurance recoverable, end of year | 142 | 156 | 154 | |||||||||
Losses and loss expense reserves, end of year – Gross | $ | 3,853 | $ | 3,747 | $ | 3,598 | ||||||
The Property and Casualty Group estimates loss reserves at ultimate cost except for workers compensation loss reserves, which are discounted on a nontabular basis as prescribed by the Insurance Department of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. An interest rate of 2.5% is used to discount these reserves based upon the Property and Casualty Group’s historical workers compensation payout patterns. Loss and loss expense reserves were reduced by $89 million, $85 million, and $85 million at December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively, as a result of this discounting.
The Property and Casualty Group’s reserves for losses and loss expenses are reported net of receivables for salvage and subrogation which totaled $171 million, $149 million, and $150 million at December 31, 2014, 2013, and 2012, respectively.
Additional discussions of our property and casualty loss reserve activity can be found in and is referenced to Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Results of Operations, Property and Casualty Insurance Operations” and “Financial Condition” sections contained within this report.
6
The following table illustrates the change over time of our loss and loss expense reserve estimates established for the Property and Casualty Group at the end of the last ten calendar years:
Property and Casualty Group Reserves for Unpaid Losses and Loss Expenses | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | At December 31, | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Gross liability for unpaid losses and loss expenses (LAE) | $ | 3,779 | $ | 3,830 | $ | 3,684 | $ | 3,586 | $ | 3,598 | $ | 3,584 | $ | 3,499 | $ | 3,598 | $ | 3,747 | $ | 3,853 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Gross liability re-estimated as of: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One year later | 3,651 | 3,559 | 3,487 | 3,502 | 3,336 | 3,282 | 3,385 | 3,581 | 3,614 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Two years later | 3,508 | 3,467 | 3,409 | 3,320 | 3,068 | 3,216 | 3,389 | 3,456 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Three years later | 3,464 | 3,412 | 3,307 | 3,101 | 3,043 | 3,223 | 3,289 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Four years later | 3,437 | 3,358 | 3,111 | 3,084 | 3,053 | 3,152 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Five years later | 3,404 | 3,174 | 3,102 | 3,097 | 3,004 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Six years later | 3,224 | 3,170 | 3,113 | 3,062 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seven years later | 3,225 | 3,189 | 3,087 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eight years later | 3,243 | 3,173 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nine years later | 3,240 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cumulative (deficiency) redundancy | $ | 539 | $ | 657 | $ | 597 | $ | 524 | $ | 594 | $ | 432 | $ | 210 | $ | 142 | $ | 133 | N/A | |||||||||||||||||||||
Gross liability for unpaid losses and LAE | $ | 3,779 | $ | 3,830 | $ | 3,684 | $ | 3,586 | $ | 3,598 | $ | 3,584 | $ | 3,499 | $ | 3,598 | $ | 3,747 | $ | 3,853 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses(1) | 155 | 183 | 190 | 187 | 200 | 188 | 151 | 154 | 156 | 142 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net liability for unpaid losses and LAE | $ | 3,624 | $ | 3,647 | $ | 3,494 | $ | 3,399 | $ | 3,398 | $ | 3,396 | $ | 3,348 | $ | 3,444 | $ | 3,591 | $ | 3,711 | ||||||||||||||||||||
Cumulative amount of gross liability paid through: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
One year later | $ | 1,067 | $ | 1,019 | $ | 1,042 | $ | 1,033 | $ | 955 | $ | 1,042 | $ | 1,121 | $ | 1,212 | $ | 1,226 | ||||||||||||||||||||||
Two years later | 1,630 | 1,621 | 1,573 | 1,538 | 1,474 | 1,591 | 1,705 | 1,819 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Three years later | 2,016 | 1,962 | 1,889 | 1,862 | 1,817 | 1,935 | 2,064 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Four years later | 2,235 | 2,147 | 2,079 | 2,070 | 2,018 | 2,152 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Five years later | 2,342 | 2,270 | 2,216 | 2,193 | 2,145 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Six years later | 2,427 | 2,368 | 2,291 | 2,274 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Seven years later | 2,500 | 2,423 | 2,348 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Eight years later | 2,542 | 2,470 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Nine years later | 2,575 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(1) | Reinsurance recoverable on unpaid losses represents the related ceded amounts. |
Government Regulation
Property and casualty insurers are subject to supervision and regulation in the states in which business is transacted. The extent of such regulation varies, but generally derives from state statutes that delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative authority to state insurance departments. Accordingly, the authority of the state insurance departments includes the establishment of standards of solvency that must be met and maintained by insurers, the licensing to do business of insurers and agents, the nature of the limitations on investments, the approval of premium rates for property and casualty insurance, the provisions that insurers must make for current losses and future liabilities, the deposit of securities for the benefit of policyholders, the approval of policy forms, notice requirements for the cancellation of policies, and the approval of certain changes in control. In addition, many states have enacted variations of competitive rate-making laws that allow insurers to set certain premium rates for certain classes of insurance without having to obtain the prior approval by the state insurance department. State insurance departments also conduct periodic examinations of the affairs of insurance companies and require the filing of quarterly and annual reports relating to the financial condition of insurance companies.
The Property and Casualty Group is also required to participate in various involuntary insurance programs for automobile insurance, as well as other property and casualty lines, in states in which these companies operate. These involuntary programs provide various insurance coverages to individuals or other entities that are otherwise unable to purchase such coverages in the voluntary market. These programs include joint underwriting associations, assigned risk plans, fair access to insurance requirements (“FAIR”) plans, reinsurance facilities, and windstorm plans.
7
Legislation establishing these programs generally provides for participation in proportion to voluntary writings of related lines of business in that state. The loss ratio on insurance written under involuntary programs has traditionally been greater than the loss ratio on insurance in the voluntary market. Although currently the federal government does not directly regulate the insurance industry, federal programs, such as federal terrorism backstop legislation and the Federal Insurance Office established under the Dodd-Frank Act can also impact the insurance industry.
Our life insurer, EFL, is subject to similar state regulations as the Property and Casualty Group, although specific laws and statutes applicable to life insurance and annuity carriers govern its activities. Valuation laws require statutory reserves to be held at conservative levels, which can have a substantial impact on the amount of free surplus that is available for financing new business and other growth opportunities.
Most states have enacted legislation that regulates insurance holding company systems such as the Erie Insurance Group. Each insurance company in the holding company system is required to register with the insurance supervisory authority of its state of domicile and furnish information regarding the operations of companies within the holding company system that may materially affect the operations, management, or financial condition of the insurers within the system. Pursuant to these laws, the respective insurance departments may examine Indemnity, as the management company, the Property and Casualty Group and EFL at any time, and may require disclosure and/or prior approval of certain transactions with the insurers and Indemnity, as an insurance holding company.
All transactions within a holding company system affecting the member insurers of the holding company system must be fair and reasonable. Approval by the applicable insurance commissioner is required prior to the consummation of transactions affecting the control of an insurer. Approval by the applicable insurance commissioner is also required in order to declare extraordinary dividends. See Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Note 21, Statutory Information, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained within this report.
Website Access
Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to those reports are available free of charge on our website at www.erieinsurance.com as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is filed electronically with the Securities Exchange Commission. Additionally, copies of our annual report on Form 10-K are available free of charge, upon written request, by contacting Investor Relations, Erie Indemnity Company,
100 Erie Insurance Place, Erie, PA 16530, or calling 1-800-458-0811.
Our Code of Conduct and Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers are also available on our website and in printed form upon request, and our information statement on Form 14(C) is available free of charge on our website at www.erieinsurance.com.
8
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our business involves various risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to those discussed in this section. The risks and uncertainties described in the risk factors below, or any additional risk outside of those discussed below, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, operating results, cash flows, or liquidity if they were to develop into actual events. This information should be considered carefully together with the other information contained in this report and in other reports and materials we file periodically with the Securities and Exchange Commissions.
Risk Factors Related to the Indemnity Shareholder Interest
If the management fee rate paid to Indemnity by the Exchange is reduced or if there is a significant decrease in the amount of premiums written or assumed by the Exchange, Indemnity revenues and profitability could be materially adversely affected.
Indemnity is dependent upon management fees paid by the Exchange, which represent its principal source of revenue. Pursuant to the subscriber’s agreements with the policyholders at the Exchange, Indemnity may retain up to 25% of all premiums written or assumed by the Exchange. Therefore, management fee revenue from the Exchange is calculated by multiplying the management fee rate by the direct premiums written by the Exchange and the other members of the Property and Casualty Group, which are assumed by the Exchange under an intercompany pooling arrangement. Accordingly, any reduction in direct premiums written by the Property and Casualty Group would have a negative effect on Indemnity’s revenues and net income. See “Risk Factors Related to the Non-Controlling Interest Owned by the Exchange”, which includes our Property and Casualty Group and EFL insurance operations, within this section for a discussion of risks impacting direct written premium.
The management fee rate is determined by our Board of Directors and may not exceed 25% of the premiums written or assumed by the Exchange. The Board of Directors sets the management fee rate each December for the following year. At their discretion, the rate can be changed at any time. The factors considered by the Board of Directors in setting the management fee rate include Indemnity’s financial position in relation to the Exchange and the long-term needs of the Exchange for capital and surplus to support its continued growth and competitiveness. If the Exchange’s surplus were significantly reduced, the management fee rate could be reduced and Indemnity’s revenues and profitability could be materially adversely affected.
If the costs of providing services to the Exchange are not controlled, Indemnity’s profitability could be materially adversely affected.
Pursuant to the subscriber’s agreements with the policyholders at the Exchange, Indemnity is appointed to perform certain services. These services relate to the sales, underwriting, and issuance of policies on behalf of the Exchange. Indemnity incurs significant costs related to commissions, employees, and technology in order to provide these services.
Commissions to independent agents are the largest component of Indemnity’s cost of operations. Commissions include scheduled commissions to agents based upon premiums written as well as additional commissions and bonuses to agents, which are earned by achieving certain targeted measures. Changes to commission rates or bonus programs may result in increased future costs and lower profitability.
Employees are an essential part of the operating costs related to providing services for the Exchange. As a result, Indemnity’s profitability is affected by employee costs, including salaries, healthcare, pension, and other benefit costs. Recent regulatory developments, provider relationships, and economic factors that are beyond our control indicate that employee healthcare costs will continue to increase. Although Indemnity actively manages these cost increases, there can be no assurance that future cost increases will not occur and reduce its profitability.
Technological development is necessary to facilitate ease of doing business for the agents and policyholders of the Property and Casualty group and employees of Indemnity. If we are unable to keep pace with advancements in technology, our ability to compete with other insurance companies may be negatively affected and result in lower revenues and reduced profitability for Indemnity. In order to achieve a greater ease of doing business, additional costs may be incurred as we invest in new technology and systems, which may negatively impact the profitability of Indemnity.
Our ability to attract, develop, and retain talented executives, key managers, and employees is critical to our success.
Our success is largely dependent upon our ability to attract and retain executives and other key management. The loss of the services and leadership of certain key officers and the failure to attract and develop talented new executives and managers
9
could prevent us from successfully communicating, implementing, and executing business strategies, and therefore have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Our success also depends on our ability to attract, develop, and retain a talented employee base. The inability to staff all functions of our business with employees possessing the appropriate technical expertise could have an adverse effect on our business performance. Staffing appropriately skilled employees for the handling of claims and servicing of customers, rendering of disciplined underwriting, and effective sales and marketing are critical to the core functions of our business. In addition, skilled employees in the actuarial, finance, and information technology areas are also essential to support our core functions.
If we are unable to ensure system availability, unable to secure sensitive information, or we make significant decisions based on inaccurate data, the Erie Insurance Group may experience adverse financial consequences and/or may be unable to compete effectively in the industry. Our business depends on the uninterrupted operations of our facilities, systems, and business functions.
Indemnity is responsible for providing the technological resources necessary to support the operations of the Erie Insurance Group. Our business is highly dependent upon the effective operations of our technology and information systems. We also conduct business functions and computer operations using the systems of third-party vendors, which may provide software, data storage, and other computer services to us. We rely upon our systems, and those of third-party vendors, to assist in key functions of core business operations including processing claims, applications, and premium payments, providing customer support, performing actuarial and financial analysis, and maintaining key data.
We necessarily collect, use, and hold data concerning individuals, businesses, strategic plans, and intellectual property. Threats to data security, including unauthorized access, cyber-attacks, and other computer related penetrations, expose us to additional costs for protection or remediation to secure our data in accordance with customer expectations and statutory and regulatory requirements, including data privacy laws. Preventative actions we take, or our third-party vendors take, to reduce the risk of cyber incidents and protect our information may be insufficient to prevent physical and electronic break-ins or other security breaches to our computer system. Additionally, a breach of security that results in unauthorized access to our data could expose us to an operational disruption, data loss, litigation, fines and penalties, increased compliance costs, and reputational damages. While we maintain cyber liability insurance to mitigate the amount of financial loss, our insurance coverage may not be sufficient to protect against all loss.
We depend on a large amount of data to price policies appropriately, track exposures, perform financial analysis, and ultimately make business decisions. Should this data be inaccurate or insufficient, risk exposure may be underestimated and/or poor business decisions may be made. This may in turn lead to adverse operational or financial performance.
We have an established business continuity plan to ensure the continuation of core business operations in the event that normal business operations could not be performed due to a catastrophic event. While we continue to test and assess our business continuity plan to ensure it meets the needs of our core business operations and addresses multiple business interruption events, there is no assurance that core business operations could be performed upon the occurrence of such an event. Systems failures or outages could compromise our ability to perform our business functions in a timely manner, which could harm our ability to conduct business and hurt our relationships with our business partners and customers. Our business continuity is also dependent on third-party systems on which our information technology systems interface and rely. Our systems and those of our third-party vendors may become vulnerable to damage or disruption due to circumstances beyond our or their control, such as from catastrophic events, power anomalies or outages, natural disasters, network failures, and viruses. The failure of our information systems for any reason could result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.
The performance of Indemnity’s investment portfolio is subject to a variety of investment risks, which may in turn have a material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition.
Indemnity’s investment portfolio is comprised principally of fixed-income maturities and limited partnerships. At December 31, 2014, Indemnity’s investment portfolio consisted of approximately 80% fixed income securities, 16% limited partnerships, and 4% equity securities.
All of Indemnity’s marketable securities are subject to market volatility. To the extent that future market volatility negatively impacts Indemnity’s investments, its financial condition will be negatively impacted. We review the investment portfolio on a continuous basis to evaluate positions that might have incurred other-than-temporary declines in value. Inherent in management’s evaluation of a security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. The primary factors considered in our review of investment valuation include the extent and duration to which fair
10
value is less than cost, historical operating performance and financial condition of the issuer, short- and long-term prospects of the issuer and its industry, specific events that occurred affecting the issuer, including rating downgrades, and, depending on the type of security, our intent to sell or our ability and intent to retain the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for a recovery in value. As the process for determining impairments is highly subjective, changes in our assessments may have a material effect on Indemnity’s operating results and financial condition. See also Item 7A. “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”.
If the fixed income, equity, or limited partnership portfolios were to suffer a substantial decrease in value, Indemnity’s financial position could be materially adversely affected through increased unrealized losses or impairments.
Currently, 41% of the fixed-income portfolio is invested in municipal securities. The performance of the fixed-income portfolio is subject to a number of risks including, but not limited to:
• | Interest rate risk - the risk of adverse changes in the value of fixed-income securities as a result of increases in market interest rates. A sustained low interest rate environment would pressure our net investment income. |
• | Investment credit risk - the risk that the value of certain investments may decrease due to the deterioration in financial condition of, or the liquidity available to, one or more issuers of those securities or, in the case of asset-backed securities, due to the deterioration of the loans or other assets that underlie the securities, which, in each case, also includes the risk of permanent loss. |
• | Sector/Concentration risk - the risk that the portfolio may be too heavily concentrated in the securities of one or more issuers, sectors, or industries. Events or developments that have a negative impact on any particular industry, group of related industries, or geographic region may have a greater adverse effect on our investment portfolio to the extent that the portfolio is concentrated within those issuers, sectors, or industries. |
• | Liquidity risk - the risk that Indemnity will not be able to convert investment securities into cash on favorable terms and on a timely basis, or that Indemnity will not be able to sell them at all, when desired. Disruptions in the financial markets or a lack of buyers for the specific securities that Indemnity is trying to sell, could prevent it from liquidating securities or cause a reduction in prices to levels that are not acceptable to Indemnity. |
General economic conditions and other factors beyond our control can adversely affect the value of our equity investments and the realization of net investment income, or result in realized investment losses. In addition, downward economic trends also may have an adverse effect on our investment results by negatively impacting the business conditions and impairing credit for the issuers of securities held in their respective investment portfolios. This could reduce fair values of investments and generate significant unrealized losses or impairment charges which may adversely affect our financial results.
In addition to the fixed-income securities, a significant portion of Indemnity’s portfolio is invested in limited partnerships. At December 31, 2014, Indemnity had investments in limited partnerships of $113 million, or 9% of total assets. In addition, Indemnity is obligated to invest up to an additional $24 million in limited partnerships, including private equity, mezzanine debt, and real estate partnership investments. Limited partnerships are significantly less liquid and generally involve higher degrees of price risk, the risk of potential loss in estimated fair value resulting from an adverse change in prices, than publicly traded securities. Limited partnerships, like publicly traded securities, have exposure to market volatility; but unlike fixed-income securities, cash flows and return expectations are less predictable. In addition, a portion of Indemnity’s limited partnership portfolio is invested in partnerships denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, and therefore exposed to foreign exchange rate risk. Indemnity does not hedge its exposure to foreign exchange rate risk inherent in these investments.
The primary basis for the valuation of limited partnership interests are financial statements prepared by the general partner. Because of the timing of the preparation and delivery of these financial statements, the use of the most recently available financial statements provided by the general partners result in a quarter delay in the inclusion of the limited partnership results in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Due to this delay, Indemnity’s financial statements at December 31, 2014, do not reflect market conditions experienced in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Indemnity’s equity securities have exposure to price risk. Indemnity does not hedge its exposure to equity price risk inherent in its equity investments. Equity markets, sectors, industries, and individual securities may also be subject to some of the same risks that affect Indemnity’s fixed-income portfolio, as discussed above.
11
Indemnity is subject to credit risk from the Exchange because the management fees from the Exchange are not paid immediately when premiums are written.
Indemnity recognizes management fees due from the Exchange as income when the premiums are written because at that time Indemnity has performed substantially all of the services it is required to perform, including sales, underwriting, and policy issuance activities. However, such fees are not paid to Indemnity by the Exchange until the Exchange collects the premiums from policyholders. As a result, Indemnity holds receivables for management fees since such fees are based upon premiums that have been written and assumed. Indemnity also holds receivables from the Exchange for costs it pays on the Exchange’s behalf. The receivable from the Exchange totaled $335 million or 25% of our total assets at December 31, 2014.
Deteriorating capital and credit market conditions or a failure to accurately estimate capital needs may significantly affect Indemnity’s ability to meet liquidity needs and access capital.
Sufficient liquidity and capital levels are required to pay operating expenses, income taxes, and to provide the necessary resources to fund future growth opportunities, pay dividends on common stock, and repurchase common stock. Management estimates the appropriate level of capital necessary based upon current and projected results, which include a loading for potential risks. Failure to accurately estimate Indemnity’s capital needs may have a material adverse effect on its financial condition until additional sources of capital can be located. Further, a deteriorating financial condition may create a negative perception of Indemnity by third parties, including rating agencies, investors, agents, and customers which could impact Indemnity’s ability to access additional capital in the debt or equity markets.
The primary sources of liquidity for Indemnity are management fees and cash flows generated from its investment portfolio. In the event Indemnity’s current sources do not satisfy its liquidity needs, Indemnity has the ability to access its $100 million bank revolving line of credit, from which there were no borrowings as of December 31, 2014, or sell assets in its investment portfolio. Volatility in the financial markets could impair Indemnity’s ability to sell certain of its fixed income securities or, to a greater extent, it’s significantly less liquid limited partnership investments, or cause such investments to sell at deep discounts.
In the event these traditional sources of liquidity are not available, Indemnity may have to seek additional financing. Indemnity’s access to funds will depend upon a number of factors including current market conditions, the availability of credit, market liquidity, and credit ratings. In deteriorating market conditions, there can be no assurance that Indemnity will obtain additional financing, or, if available, that the cost of financing will not substantially increase and affect our overall profitability.
Indemnity is subject to applicable insurance laws, tax statutes, and regulations, as well as claims and legal proceedings, which, if determined unfavorably, could have a material adverse effect on Indemnity’s business, results of operations, or financial condition.
Indemnity faces a significant risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating its businesses including the risk of class action lawsuits. Indemnity’s pending legal and regulatory actions include proceedings specific to Indemnity and others generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which it operates. In Indemnity’s operations, we are, have been, or may become subject to class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to sales or underwriting practices, payment of contingent or other sales commissions, product design, product disclosure, policy issuance and administration, additional premium charges for premiums paid on a periodic basis, charging excessive or impermissible fees on products, recommending unsuitable products to customers, and breaching alleged fiduciary or other duties (including our obligations to indemnify directors and officers in connection with certain legal matters). Indemnity is also subject to litigation arising out of its general business activities such as its contractual and employment relationships. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against Indemnity may seek very large or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, which may remain unknown for substantial periods of time. Indemnity is also subject to various regulatory inquiries, such as information requests, subpoenas, and books and record examinations from state and federal regulators and authorities. Changes in the way regulators administer those laws, tax statutes, or regulations could adversely impact Indemnity’s business, results of operations, or financial condition. See “Risk Factors Related to the Non-Controlling Interest Owned by the Exchange, which includes the Property and Casualty Group and EFL,” that follows for additional discussion of litigation risks.
12
Risk Factors Related to the NonControlling Interest Owned by the Exchange, which Includes the Property and Casualty Group and EFL
Deteriorating general economic conditions may have an adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.
Unfavorable changes in economic conditions, including declining consumer confidence, inflation, high unemployment, and the threat of recession, among others, may lead the Property and Casualty Group’s customers to modify coverage, not renew policies, or even cancel policies, which could adversely affect the premium revenue of the Property and Casualty Group, and consequently Indemnity’s management fee. These conditions could also impair the ability of customers to pay premiums when due, and as a result, the Property and Casualty Group’s bad debt write-offs could increase.
The Property and Casualty Group depends on independent insurance agents, which exposes the Property and Casualty Group to risks not applicable to companies with exclusive agents or other forms of distribution.
The Property and Casualty Group markets and sells its insurance products through independent, non-exclusive insurance agencies. These agencies are not obligated to sell only the Property and Casualty Group’s insurance products, and generally also sell competitors’ insurance products. We must offer insurance products that meet the needs of these agencies and their clients and maintain good relationships with these agencies. The results of operations and business of the Property and Casualty Group could be adversely affected by the following:
• | Agencies’ marketing efforts not being maintained at their current levels or agencies binding the Property and Casualty Group to unacceptable insurance risks, failing to comply with established underwriting guidelines, or otherwise improperly marketing the Property and Casualty Group’s products. |
• | Agencies placing business with competing insurers due to compensation arrangements, real or perceived product or price differences, ease of doing business, including the perception that our technology solutions do not match their needs, perceived delivery of customer service, or other reasons. |
• | If the Property and Casualty Group is unsuccessful in maintaining and/or increasing the number of agencies in its independent agent distribution system. |
• | Computer systems of our independent agencies experiencing cyber-attacks and other security breaches, loss or corruption of information, or systems failures or outages. |
• | Consumer preferences, especially in personal lines insurance products, causing the insurance industry to migrate to a delivery system other than independent agencies. |
Our ability to maintain our reputation is a key factor to the Property and Casualty Group’s success.
The Property and Casualty Group maintains a brand recognized for customer service. The perceived performance, actions, and behaviors of employees, independent insurance agency representatives, and third party service partners may result in reputational harm to the Property and Casualty Group's brand and the potential for a reduction in business. Specific incidents which may cause harm include but are not limited to disputes, long customer wait times, errors in processing a claim, failure to protect sensitive customer data, and inappropriate social media communications. The degree of control we have over these events varies based upon the event type and who is responsible for causing the incident. If an extreme catastrophic event were to occur in a heavily concentrated area of policyholders, an extraordinarily high number of claims could have the potential to strain claims processing and affect our ability to satisfy our customers. While we maintain and execute processes to minimize these events, we cannot completely eliminate this risk.
If our third party service providers fail to perform as anticipated, we may experience operational difficulties, increased costs, reputational damage and a loss of business that may have an adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
The Property and Casualty Group faces significant competition from other regional and national insurance companies. Failure to keep pace with competitors may result in lower market share and revenues, which may have a material adverse effect on the Property and Casualty Group’s financial condition.
The Property and Casualty Group competes with regional and national property and casualty insurers including direct writers of insurance coverage. Many of these competitors are larger and many have greater financial, technical, and operating resources.
If we are unable to perform at industry best practice levels in terms of quality, cost containment, and speed-to-market due to inferior operating resources and/or problems with external relationships, the Property and Casualty Group’s business
13
performance may suffer. As the business environment changes, if we are unable to adapt timely to emerging industry changes, or if our people do not conform to the changes, the Property and Casualty Group’s business could be materially impacted.
The property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive on the basis of product, price, and service. If competitors offer property and casualty products with more coverage and/or better service or offer lower rates, and we are unable to implement product or service improvements quickly enough to keep pace, the Property and Casualty Group’s ability to grow and renew its business may be adversely impacted. In addition, due to our focus on the automobile and homeowners insurance markets, we may be more sensitive to trends that could affect auto and home insurance coverages and rates over time. For example, if economic conditions, demographic trends, changing driving patterns, advancements in vehicle or home technology or safety features, or other factors, were to result in decreased demand for auto or home insurance or decreased auto or home insurance rates for an extended period, the automobile and homeowners insurance markets as a whole could shrink and our ability to generate revenue growth could be significantly impacted.
Insurance customers are increasingly expecting to perform service interactions digitally, including but not limited to shopping, paying bills, and reporting and monitoring claims. Examples of digital channels used in these interactions include traditional websites, social media sites, and mobile device applications. We expect competitors to continue to grow these channels, particularly those with some form of direct to consumer sales distribution. Failure to position our digital servicing and distribution technology effectively in light of these trends could inhibit the Property and Casualty Group's ability to grow and maintain its customer base.
Changes in applicable insurance laws, regulations, or changes in the way regulators administer those laws or regulations could adversely change the Property and Casualty Group’s operating environment and increase its exposure to loss or put it at a competitive disadvantage.
Property and casualty insurers are subject to extensive supervision in the states in which they do business. This regulatory oversight includes, by way of example, matters relating to licensing examination, rate setting, market conduct, policy forms, limitations on the nature and amount of certain investments, claims practices, mandated participation in involuntary markets and guaranty funds, reserve adequacy, insurer solvency, restrictions on underwriting standards, accounting standards, and transactions between affiliates. Such regulation and supervision are primarily for the benefit and protection of policyholders and not for the benefit of shareholders. For instance, members of the Property and Casualty Group are subject to involuntary participation in specified markets in various states in which they operate, and the rate levels the Property and Casualty Group is permitted to charge do not always correspond with the underlying costs associated with the coverage issued. Additionally, certain transactions and agreements between Indemnity and the Exchange must be approved by the appropriate state insurance department(s). Although currently the federal government does not directly regulate the insurance industry, federal programs, such as federal terrorism backstop legislation and the Federal Insurance Office established under the Dodd-Frank Act can also impact the insurance industry. In addition to specific insurance regulation, the Property and Casualty Group must also comply with other regulatory, legal, and ethical requirements relating to the general operation of a business.
Premium rates and reserves must be established for members of the Property and Casualty Group from forecasts of the ultimate costs expected to arise from risks underwritten during the policy period. The Property and Casualty Group’s underwriting profitability could be adversely affected to the extent such premium rates or reserves are too low or by the effects of inflation.
One of the distinguishing features of the property and casualty insurance industry in general is that its products are priced before its costs are known, as premium rates are generally determined before losses are reported. Consequently, in establishing premium rates, we attempt to anticipate claims frequency and the potential impact of inflation, including medical cost inflation, construction and auto repair cost inflation and tort issues. Medical costs are a broad element of inflation that impact personal and commercial auto, general liability, workers compensation and commercial multi-peril lines of insurance written by the Property and Casualty Group. Accordingly, premium rates must be established from forecasts of the ultimate costs expected to arise from risks underwritten during the policy period. These premium rates may prove to be inadequate if future claims frequency and/or inflation are significantly higher than the estimates anticipated in pricing.
Property and casualty insurers establish reserves for losses and loss expenses that will not be paid and settled for many years. Numerous factors affect both the current estimates and final settlement value of these losses and loss expenses. It is possible that the ultimate liability for these losses and loss expenses will exceed these reserves because of unanticipated changes in the future development of known losses, the unanticipated emergence of losses that have occurred but are currently unreported, and larger than expected settlements on pending and unreported claims. The process of estimating reserves is inherently judgmental and can be influenced by factors that are subject to variation. If pricing or reserves of the Property and Casualty Group are not sufficient, the Property and Casualty Group’s financial condition may be adversely impacted.
14
The property and casualty insurance industry has historically been cyclical with periods of intense price competition. The Property and Casualty Group seeks an appropriate balance between profitability and premium growth. Periods of intense price competition in the cycle could adversely affect the Property and Casualty Group’s financial condition, profitability, or cash flows.
Emerging claims and coverage issues in the insurance industry are unpredictable and could cause an adverse effect on the Property and Casualty Group’s results of operations or financial condition.
As industry practices and legal, judicial, social and other environmental conditions change, unexpected and unintended issues related to claims and coverage may emerge. These issues may adversely affect the Property and Casualty Group’s business by either extending coverage beyond its underwriting intent or by increasing the number or size of claims. In some instances, these emerging issues may not become apparent for some time after the Property and Casualty Group has issued the affected insurance policies. As a result, the full extent of liability under the Property and Casualty Group’s insurance policies may not be known for many years after the policies are issued.
Changes in reserve estimates may adversely affect EFL’s operating results.
Reserves for life-contingent contract benefits are computed on the basis of long-term actuarial assumptions of future investment yields, mortality, morbidity, persistency, and expenses. We periodically review the adequacy of these reserves on an aggregate basis and, if future experience differs significantly from assumptions, adjustments to reserves and amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs may be required, which could have a material adverse effect on EFL’s operating results.
The financial performance of members of the Property and Casualty Group could be adversely affected by severe weather conditions or other catastrophic losses, including terrorism. The financial performance of EFL could be adversely affected by pandemic events.
The Property and Casualty Group’s insurance operations expose us to claims arising out of catastrophes. A single catastrophic occurrence or aggregation of multiple smaller occurrences could adversely affect the results of operations of members of the Property and Casualty Group. Common natural catastrophic events include hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, hail storms, and severe winter weather. The extent of losses from a catastrophe is a function of both the total amount of insured exposures in the area affected by the event and the severity of the event. The frequency and severity of these catastrophes is inherently unpredictable. Changing climate conditions have added to the unpredictability, frequency and severity of natural disasters and have created additional uncertainty as to future trends and exposures. We cannot predict the impact that changing climate conditions may have on our results of operations.
Our ability to appropriately manage catastrophe risk depends partially on catastrophe models that are based on historical data, current risk exposure, damageability assumptions and meteorological assumption. The unpredictability of some of these inputs and the long-term impact of climate change create uncertainty in the frequency and severity of future events.
The Property and Casualty Group maintains an excess property catastrophe reinsurance program which became effective January 1, 2015. The multi-layer program affords coverage up to a $1.1 billion catastrophe, providing a total of $682 million in coverage excess of the Property and Casualty Group’s per occurrence loss retention of $300 million. If a major catastrophic loss exceeds the reinsurance limit, this catastrophe reinsurance could be inadequate resulting in an adverse effect on the Property and Casualty Group’s underwriting profitability and financial position. There is also a risk that the reinsurance counterparties could default on their obligations.
Terrorist attacks could also cause losses from insurance claims related to the property and casualty insurance operations. The federal Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act ("TRIA") of 2015 requires that some coverage for terrorist losses be offered by primary commercial property insurers and provides federal assistance for recovery of claims. While the Property and Casualty Group is exposed to terrorism losses in commercial lines and workers compensation, these lines are afforded a limited backstop above insurer deductibles for acts of terrorism under this federal program. There is no federal assistance for personal lines terrorism losses. The Property and Casualty Group could incur large net losses if terrorist attacks were to occur. The current federal TRIA expires at the end of 2020.
An epidemic or pandemic affecting one or more of the states in which EFL conducts substantial business could adversely affect its financial and operational results, particularly if the event affected a broad range of the population.
15
The inability to acquire reinsurance coverage at reasonable rates or collect amounts due from reinsurers could have an adverse effect on the Exchange.
The availability and cost of reinsurance are subject to prevailing market conditions, both in terms of price and available capacity. The availability of reinsurance capacity can be impacted by general economic conditions and conditions in the reinsurance market, such as the occurrence of significant reinsured events. The availability and cost of reinsurance could affect the Property and Casualty Group’s business volume and profitability.
Although the reinsurer is liable to the Property and Casualty Group to the extent of the ceded reinsurance, reinsurance contracts do not relieve the Property and Casualty Group from its primary obligations to its policyholders. As a result, ceded reinsurance arrangements do not eliminate the Property and Casualty Group’s obligation to pay claims. The Property and Casualty Group is subject to credit risk with respect to its ability to recover amounts due from reinsurers. The Property and Casualty Group’s inability to collect a material recovery from a reinsurer could have an adverse effect on its underwriting profitability and financial condition.
The performance of the Exchange’s investment portfolio is subject to a variety of investment risks, which may in turn have a material adverse effect on its results of operations or financial condition.
The Exchange’s investment portfolio is comprised principally of fixed-income maturities, common stocks, and limited partnerships. At December 31, 2014, the Exchange’s investment portfolio consisted of approximately 65% fixed income securities, 24% common stocks, 6% limited partnerships, and 5% preferred equity securities.
All of the Exchange’s marketable securities are subject to market volatility. To the extent that future market volatility negatively impacts these investments, the financial condition of the Exchange will be negatively impacted. We review the investment portfolio on a continuous basis to evaluate positions that might have incurred other-than-temporary declines in value. Inherent in management’s evaluation of a security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. The primary factors considered in our review of investment valuation include the extent and duration to which fair value is less than cost, historical operating performance and financial condition of the issuer, short- and long-term prospects of the issuer and its industry, specific events that occurred affecting the issuer including rating downgrades, and, depending on the type of security, our intent to sell or our ability and intent to retain the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for a recovery in value. As the process for determining impairments is highly subjective, changes in our assessments may have a material effect on the Exchange’s operating results and financial condition. See also Item 7A. “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”.
If the fixed-income, equity, or limited partnership portfolios were to suffer a substantial decrease in value, the Exchange’s financial position could be materially adversely affected through increased unrealized losses or impairments. A significant decrease in the Exchange’s portfolio could also put it, or its subsidiaries, at risk of failing to satisfy regulatory or rating agency minimum capital requirements.
The Exchange’s fixed-income portfolio is invested in 34% in financial sector securities and 16% in municipal securities. These results may vary depending on the market environment. The performance of the fixed-income portfolio is subject to a number of risks including, but not limited to:
• | Interest rate risk - the risk of adverse changes in the value of fixed-income securities as a result of increases in market interest rates. A sustained low interest rate environment would pressure our net investment income. |
• | Investment credit risk - the risk that the value of certain investments may decrease due to the deterioration in financial condition of, or the liquidity available to, one or more issuers of those securities or, in the case of asset-backed securities, due to the deterioration of the loans or other assets that underlie the securities, which, in each case, also includes the risk of permanent loss. |
• | Sector/Concentration risk - the risk that the portfolio may be too heavily concentrated in the securities of one or more issuers, sectors, or industries. Events or developments that have a negative impact on any particular industry, group of related industries or geographic region may have a greater adverse effect on our investment portfolio to the extent that the portfolio is concentrated within those issuers, sectors, or industries. |
• | Liquidity risk - the risk that we will not be able to convert investment securities into cash on favorable terms and on a timely basis, or that the we will not be able to sell them at all, when desired. Disruptions in the financial markets, or a lack of buyers for the specific securities that we are trying to sell, could prevent it from liquidating securities or cause a reduction in prices to levels that are not acceptable to us. |
16
The Exchange’s common and preferred equity securities have exposure to price risk, the risk of potential loss in estimated fair value resulting from an adverse change in prices. In addition, a portion of the Exchange's common stock portfolio is invested in securities denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar. These investments also have exposure to foreign exchange rate risk, or the potential loss in estimated fair value resulting from adverse changes in foreign exchange rates. The Exchange does not hedge its exposure to equity price risk or foreign exchange rate risk inherent in the equity investments. The Exchange’s common and preferred equity securities may also be subject to some of the same risks that affect the Exchange’s fixed-income portfolio, as discussed above. General economic conditions and other factors beyond our control can adversely affect the value of our equity investments and the realization of net investment income, or result in realized investment losses. In addition, downward economic trends also may have an adverse effect on our investment results by negatively impacting the business conditions and impairing credit for the issuers of securities held in their respective investment portfolios. This could reduce fair values of investments and generate significant unrealized losses or impairment charges which may adversely affect our financial results.
A portion of the portfolio is invested in limited partnerships, including private equity, mezzanine debt, and real estate partnership investments. At December 31, 2014, the Exchange had investments in limited partnerships of $866 million, or
5% of total assets, with an obligation to invest up to an additional $459 million. Limited partnerships are significantly less liquid and generally involve higher degrees of price risk than publicly traded securities. Limited partnerships, like publicly traded securities, have exposure to market volatility; but unlike fixed income securities, cash flows and return expectations are less predictable. In addition, a portion of the Exchange's limited partnership portfolio is invested in partnerships denominated in currencies other than the U.S. dollar, and therefore exposed to foreign exchange rate risk. The Exchange does not hedge its exposure to foreign exchange rate risk inherent in these investments.
The primary basis for the valuation of limited partnership interests are financial statements prepared by the general partner. Because of the timing of the preparation and delivery of these financial statements, the use of the most recently available financial statements provided by the general partners result in a quarter delay in the inclusion of the limited partnership results in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Due to this delay, the Exchange’s financial statements at December 31, 2014 do not reflect market conditions experienced in the fourth quarter of 2014.
Deteriorating capital and credit market conditions or a failure to accurately estimate capital needs may significantly affect the Exchange’s ability to meet liquidity needs and access capital.
Sufficient liquidity and capital levels are required to pay claims, claims-related expenses, and income taxes as well as to build the Exchange’s investment portfolio, provide for additional protection against possible large, unexpected losses, and maintain adequate surplus amounts. Management estimates the appropriate level of capital necessary based upon current and projected results, which include a loading for potential risks. Failure to accurately estimate the Exchange’s capital needs may have a material adverse effect on the Exchange’s financial condition until additional sources of capital can be located. Further, a deteriorating financial condition may create a negative perception of the Exchange by third parties, including rating agencies, investors, agents, and customers which could impact the Exchange’s ability to access additional capital in the debt or equity markets.
The primary sources of liquidity for the Exchange are insurance premiums and cash flow generated from its investment portfolio. In the event the Exchange’s current sources do not satisfy its liquidity needs, the Exchange has the ability to access its $300 million bank revolving line of credit, from which there were no borrowings as of December 31, 2014, or sell assets in its investment portfolios. Volatility in the financial markets could impair the Exchange’s ability to sell certain fixed income securities or, to a greater extent, our significantly less liquid limited partnership investments, or cause such investments to sell at deep discounts. In the event these traditional sources of liquidity are not available, the Exchange may have to seek additional financing. The Exchange’s access to funds will depend upon a number of factors including current market conditions, the availability of credit, market liquidity, and credit ratings. In deteriorating market conditions, there can be no assurance that the Exchange will obtain additional financing, or, if available, that the cost of financing will not substantially increase and affect our overall profitability.
If there were a failure to maintain commercially acceptable financial strength ratings, the Exchange’s competitive position in the insurance industry would be adversely affected.
Financial strength ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies. Higher ratings generally indicate greater financial stability and a stronger ability to meet ongoing obligations to policyholders. Ratings are assigned by rating agencies to insurers based upon factors that the rating agencies believe are relevant to policyholders. The Property and Casualty Group’s pooled A.M. Best rating is currently A+ ("Superior"). EFL’s A.M. Best rating is currently
A (“Excellent”). Rating agencies periodically review insurers’ ratings and change their ratings criteria; therefore, our current ratings may not be maintained in the future. A significant downgrade in this or other ratings would reduce the competitive
17
position of the Property and Casualty Group and EFL, making it more difficult to attract profitable business in the highly competitive property and casualty insurance market resulting in reduced sales of our products.
The Property and Casualty Group is subject to claims and legal proceedings, which, if determined unfavorably to the Property and Casualty Group, could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition.
The Property and Casualty Group faces a significant risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating its businesses including the risk of class action lawsuits. The Property and Casualty Group’s pending legal and regulatory actions include proceedings specific to the Property and Casualty Group and others generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which it operates. In the Property and Casualty Group’s insurance operations, we are, have been, or may become subject to class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to claims payments and procedures, denial or delay of benefits, charging excessive or impermissible fees on products, and breaching fiduciary or other duties to customers. The Property and Casualty Group is also subject to litigation arising out of its general business activities such as its contractual relationships. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against the Property and Casualty Group may seek very large or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, which may remain unknown for substantial periods of time. The Property and Casualty Group is also subject to various regulatory inquiries, such as information requests, subpoenas, and books and record examinations from state and federal regulators and authorities. See “Risk Factors Related to the Indemnity Shareholder Interest,” within this section for additional discussion of litigation risks.
The Exchange is dependent upon Indemnity to perform certain services, including sales, underwriting, and the issuance of policies and the uninterrupted operation of our facilities, systems and business functions. Failure to perform these services effectively may have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the Exchange.
Pursuant to the attorney-in-fact agreements with the policyholders at the Exchange, Indemnity is responsible for performing key functions for the Exchange including management and operational services, including the technology and systems to perform business functions. The Board of Directors of Indemnity has the responsibility for Exchange-related activities such as setting the management fee paid by the Exchange to Indemnity. The business and financial condition of the Exchange would be materially adversely affected if Indemnity was not able to provide the necessary operating and management services required by the Exchange.
An inability to access our facilities, or a failure of technology or other systems could significantly impair the ability to perform business functions in a timely and effective manner. If our business continuity plan does not sufficiently consider and address the circumstances of an interruption, including without limitation natural events, terrorist attacks, medical epidemics, computer security breaches or cyber-attacks, or interruptions of our data processing and storage systems or the systems of third-party vendors, our operating results and financial condition could be adversely effected.
18
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
The companies comprising the Erie Insurance Group share a corporate home office complex in Erie, Pennsylvania, which comprises approximately 521,000 square feet.
The Erie Insurance Group also operates 25 field offices in 12 states. Of these field offices, 16 provide both agency support and claims services and are referred to as branch offices, while seven provide only claims services and are referred to as claims offices, and two provide only agency support and are referred to as sales offices. Seven field offices are owned by the Erie Insurance Group, while the remaining 18 field offices, one office building and one warehouse facility are leased from unaffiliated parties.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
State Court Lawsuit Against Erie Indemnity Company
Erie Indemnity Company (“Indemnity”) was named as a defendant in a complaint filed on August 1, 2012 by alleged subscribers of the Erie Insurance Exchange (the “Exchange”) in the Court of Common Pleas Civil Division of Fayette County, Pennsylvania captioned Erie Insurance Exchange, an unincorporated association, by Joseph S. Sullivan and Anita Sullivan, Patricia R. Beltz, and Jenna L. DeBord, trustees ad litem v. Erie Indemnity Co. (the “Sullivan” lawsuit).
As subsequently amended, the complaint alleges that, beginning on September 1, 1997, Indemnity retained “Service Charges” (installment fees) and “Added Service Charges” (late fees and policy reinstatement charges) on policies written by the Exchange and its insurance subsidiaries, which allegedly should have been paid to the Exchange, in the amount of approximately $308 million. In addition to their claim for monetary relief on behalf of the Exchange, the plaintiffs seek an accounting of all so-called intercompany transactions between Indemnity and the Exchange from 1996 to date. Plaintiffs allege that Indemnity breached its contractual, fiduciary, and equitable duties by retaining Service Charges and Added Service Charges that should have been retained by the Exchange. Plaintiffs bring these same claims under three separate derivative-type theories. First, plaintiffs purport to bring suit as members of the Exchange on behalf of the Exchange. Second, plaintiffs purport to bring suit as trustees ad litem on behalf of the Exchange. Third, plaintiffs purport to bring suit on behalf of the Exchange pursuant to Rule 1506 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, which allows shareholders to bring suit derivatively on behalf of a corporation or similar entity.
Indemnity filed a motion in the state court in November 2012 seeking dismissal of the lawsuit. On December 19, 2013, the court granted Indemnity’s motion in part, holding that the Pennsylvania Insurance Holding Company Act “provides the [Pennsylvania Insurance] Department with special competence to address the subject matter of plaintiff’s claims” and referring “all issues” in the Sullivan lawsuit to the Pennsylvania Insurance Department (the “Department”) for “its views and any determination.” The court stayed all further proceedings and reserved decision on all other grounds for dismissal raised by Indemnity. Plaintiffs sought reconsideration of the court’s order, and on January 13, 2014, the court entered a revised order affirming its prior order and clarifying that the Department “shall decide any and all issues within its jurisdiction.” On January 30, 2014, Plaintiffs asked the court to certify its order to permit an immediate appeal to the Superior Court and to stay any proceedings in the Department pending completion of any appeal. On February 18, 2014, the court issued an order denying Plaintiffs’ motion. On March 20, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a petition for review with the Superior Court of Pennsylvania. Indemnity filed an answer to the petition on April 3, 2014. On May 5, 2014, the Superior Court denied Plaintiffs’ petition for review.
The Sullivan matter is currently proceeding before the Department and has been assigned to an Administrative Judge for determination. The parties agreed that an evidentiary hearing was not required and they entered into a stipulated record. Briefing in the Department was completed on December 19, 2014, and oral argument was held before the Administrative Judge on January 6, 2015. A ruling by the Department has not yet been made.
Indemnity believes that it has meritorious legal and factual defenses and intends to vigorously defend against all allegations and requests for relief.
19
Federal Court Lawsuit Against Directors
On February 6, 2013, a lawsuit was filed in the United States District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, captioned Erie Insurance Exchange, an unincorporated association, by members Patricia R. Beltz, Joseph S. Sullivan and Anita Sullivan, and Patricia R. Beltz, on behalf of herself and others similarly situate v. Richard L. Stover; J. Ralph Borneman, Jr; Terrence W. Cavanaugh; Jonathan Hirt Hagen; Susan Hirt Hagen; Thomas B. Hagen; C. Scott Hartz; Claude C. Lilly, III; Lucian L. Morrison; Thomas W. Palmer; Martin P. Sheffield; Elizabeth H. Vorsheck; and Robert C. Wilburn (the “Beltz” lawsuit), by alleged policyholders of the Exchange who are also the plaintiffs in the Sullivan lawsuit. The individuals named as defendants in the Beltz lawsuit were the then-current Directors of Indemnity.
As subsequently amended, the Beltz lawsuit asserts many of the same allegations and claims for monetary relief as in the Sullivan lawsuit. Plaintiffs purport to sue on behalf of all policyholders of the Exchange, or, alternatively, on behalf of the Exchange itself. Indemnity filed a motion to intervene as a Party Defendant in the Beltz lawsuit in July 2013, and the Directors filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit in August 2013. On February 10, 2014, the court entered an order granting Indemnity’s motion to intervene and permitting Indemnity to join the Directors’ motion to dismiss; granting in part the Directors’ motion to dismiss; referring the matter to the Department to decide any and all issues within its jurisdiction; denying all other relief sought in the Directors’ motion as moot; and dismissing the case without prejudice. To avoid duplicative proceedings and expedite the Department’s review, the Parties have stipulated that only the Sullivan action will proceed before the Department and any final and non-appealable determinations made by the Department in the Sullivan action will be applied to the Beltz action. On March 7, 2014, Plaintiffs filed a notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. Indemnity filed a motion to dismiss the appeal on March 26, 2014. On November 17, 2014, the Third Circuit deferred ruling on Indemnity’s motion to dismiss the appeal and instructed the parties to address that motion, as well as the merits of Plaintiffs’ appeal, in the parties’ briefing. Plaintiffs filed their Opening Brief on January 12, 2015. Defendants’ responsive briefing is currently due on March 3, 2015.
Indemnity believes that it has meritorious legal and factual defenses and intends to vigorously defend against all allegations and requests for relief in the Beltz lawsuit. The Directors have also advised Indemnity that they intend to vigorously defend against the claims in the Beltz lawsuit and have sought indemnification and advancement of expenses from the Company in connection with the Beltz lawsuit.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
20
PART II
ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Common Stock Market Prices and Dividends
Indemnity’s Class A, non-voting common stock trades on The NASDAQ Stock MarketSM LLC under the symbol “ERIE.” No established trading market exists for the Class B voting common stock. American Stock Transfer & Trust Company serves as Indemnity’s transfer agent and registrar. As of February 20, 2015, there were approximately 724 beneficial shareholders of record for the Class A non-voting common stock and 10 beneficial shareholders of record for the Class B voting common stock.
Historically, Indemnity has declared and paid cash dividends on a quarterly basis at the discretion of its Board of Directors. The payment and amount of future dividends on the common stock will be determined by the Board of Directors and will depend upon, among other things, Indemnity’s operating results, financial condition, cash requirements, and general business conditions at the time such payment is considered. Indemnity’s common stock high and low sales prices and cash dividends declared for each full quarter of the last two years were as follows:
Indemnity Shareholder Interest | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock sales price | Cash dividend declared | Stock sales price | Cash dividend declared | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Quarter ended | High | Low | Class A | Class B | High | Low | Class A | Class B | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
March 31 | $ | 74.57 | $ | 66.63 | $ | 0.635 | $ | 95.25 | $ | 76.66 | $ | 69.28 | $ | 0.5925 | $ | 88.875 | |||||||||||||||||
June 30 | 76.71 | 68.72 | 0.635 | 95.25 | 82.64 | 72.69 | 0.5925 | 88.875 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
September 30 | 78.48 | 72.63 | 0.635 | 95.25 | 82.59 | 72.47 | 0.5925 | 88.875 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
December 31 | 93.35 | 75.72 | 0.681 | 102.15 | 74.23 | 69.42 | 0.6350 | 95.250 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total | $ | 2.586 | $ | 387.90 | $ | 2.4125 | $ | 361.875 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stock Performance
The following graph depicts the cumulative total shareholder return, assuming reinvestment of dividends, for the periods indicated for Indemnity's Class A common stock compared to the Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index and the Standard & Poor's Supercomposite Insurance Industry Group Index. The Standard & Poor's Supercomposite Insurance Industry Group Index is made up of 56 constituent members represented by property casualty insurers, insurance brokers, and life insurers, and is a capitalization weighted index.
2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | |||||||||||||||||||
Erie Indemnity Company Class A common stock | $ | 100 | (1) | $ | 171 | $ | 210 | $ | 199 | $ | 215 | $ | 275 | |||||||||||
Standard & Poor's 500 Stock Index | 100 | (1) | 115 | 117 | 136 | 179 | 204 | |||||||||||||||||
Standard & Poor's Supercomposite Insurance Industry Group Index | 100 | (1) | 116 | 108 | 128 | 187 | 203 | |||||||||||||||||
(1) | Assumes $100 invested at the close of trading, on the last trading day preceding the first day of the fifth preceding fiscal year, in Indemnity’s Class A common stock, the Standard & Poor’s 500 Stock Index, and the Standard & Poor’s Supercomposite Insurance Industry Group Index. |
21
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Indemnity may purchase shares, from time-to-time, in the open market, through trading plans entered into with one or more brokerage firms pursuant to Rule 10b5-1 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or through privately negotiated transactions. The purchase of shares is dependent upon prevailing market conditions and alternate uses of capital, and at times and in a manner that is deemed appropriate.
On January 1, 2004, our Board of Directors authorized a stock repurchase program allowing the repurchase of Indemnity’s outstanding Class A nonvoting common stock. Various approvals for continuation of this program have since been authorized, with the most recent occurring in October 2011 for $150 million, which was authorized with no time limitation. There were no repurchases of Indemnity’s Class A common stock during the quarter ending December 31, 2014. We had approximately
$18 million of repurchase authority remaining under this program at December 31, 2014, based upon trade date. During 2014, shares repurchased under this program totaled 272,057 at a total cost of $19.2 million, based upon trade date. As of February 20, 2015, we had approximately $18 million of repurchase authority remaining under this program.
See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data – Note 17, Indemnity Capital Stock, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained within this report for discussion of additional shares repurchased outside of this program.
22
ITEM 6. SELECTED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL DATA
ERIE INDEMNITY COMPANY | |||||||||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions, except share data) | Years Ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2011 | (1) | 2010 | (2) | |||||||||||||||
Operating Data: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Premiums earned | $ | 5,344 | $ | 4,898 | $ | 4,493 | $ | 4,214 | $ | 3,987 | |||||||||||
Net investment income | 446 | 422 | 438 | 433 | 433 | ||||||||||||||||
Realized gains (losses) on investments | 189 | 758 | 418 | (6 | ) | 307 | |||||||||||||||
Equity in earnings of limited partnerships | 113 | 161 | 131 | 149 | 128 | ||||||||||||||||
Other income | 32 | 32 | 32 | 34 | 35 | ||||||||||||||||
Total revenues | 6,124 | 6,271 | 5,512 | 4,824 | 4,890 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income | 573 | 1,048 | 619 | 268 | 660 | ||||||||||||||||
Less: Net income attributable to noncontrolling interest in consolidated entity – Exchange | 405 | 885 | 459 | 99 | 498 | ||||||||||||||||
Net income attributable to Indemnity | 168 | 163 | 160 | 169 | 162 | ||||||||||||||||
Per Share Data Attributable to Indemnity: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Net income per Class A share – diluted | $ | 3.18 | $ | 3.08 | $ | 2.99 | $ | 3.08 | $ | 2.85 | |||||||||||
Book value per share – Class A common and equivalent B shares | 13.45 | 13.96 | 12.11 | 14.48 | 16.24 | ||||||||||||||||
Dividends declared per Class A share | 2.586 | 2.4125 | 4.25 | 2.0975 | 1.955 | ||||||||||||||||
Dividends declared per Class B share | 387.90 | 361.875 | 637.50 | 314.625 | 293.25 | ||||||||||||||||
Financial Position Data: | |||||||||||||||||||||
Total assets | $ | 17,758 | $ | 16,676 | $ | 15,441 | $ | 14,348 | $ | 14,344 | |||||||||||
Total equity | 7,983 | 7,550 | 6,791 | 6,293 | 6,334 | ||||||||||||||||
Less: Noncontrolling interest in consolidated entity – Exchange | 7,280 | 6,816 | 6,149 | 5,512 | 5,422 | ||||||||||||||||
Total equity attributable to Indemnity | 703 | 734 | 642 | 781 | 912 | ||||||||||||||||
(1) | Due to the sale of Indemnity’s 21.6% ownership interest in EFL to the Exchange on March 31, 2011, 100% of EFL’s life insurance results accrue to the interest of the subscribers (policyholders) of the Exchange, or noncontrolling interest, after March 31, 2011. Prior to and through March 31, 2011, Indemnity retained a 21.6% ownership interest in EFL, which accrued to the Indemnity shareholder interest, and the Exchange retained a 78.4% ownership interest in EFL, which accrued to the interest of the subscribers (policyholders) of the Exchange, or noncontrolling interest. |
(2) | Due to the sale of Indemnity’s property and casualty insurance subsidiaries to the Exchange on December 31, 2010, all property and casualty underwriting results and all investment results for these companies accrue to the interest of the subscribers (policyholders) of the Exchange, or noncontrolling interest, after December 31, 2010. Prior to and through December 31, 2010, the underwriting results retained by EIC and ENY and the investment results of EIC, ENY and EPC accrued to the Indemnity shareholder interest. |
23
ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The following discussion of financial condition and results of operations highlights significant factors influencing the Erie Insurance Group (“we,” “us,” “our”). This discussion should be read in conjunction with the audited financial statements and related notes and all other items contained within this Annual Report on Form 10-K as these contain important information helpful in evaluating our financial condition and results of operations.
INDEX
Page Number | |
CAUTIONARY STATEMENT REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
“Safe Harbor” Statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995:
Statements contained herein that are not historical fact are forward-looking statements and, as such, are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual events and results to differ, perhaps materially, from those discussed herein. Forward-looking statements relate to future trends, events or results and include, without limitation, statements and assumptions on which such statements are based that are related to our plans, strategies, objectives, expectations, intentions, and adequacy of resources. Examples of forward-looking statements are discussions relating to premium and investment income, expenses, operating results, agency relationships, and compliance with contractual and regulatory requirements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. Therefore, actual outcomes and results may differ materially from what is expressed or forecasted in such forward-looking statements. Among the risks and uncertainties, in addition to those set forth in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, that could cause actual results and future events to differ from those set forth or contemplated in the forward-looking statements include the following:
Risk factors related to the Erie Indemnity Company (“Indemnity”) shareholder interest:
• | dependence upon Indemnity’s relationship with the Exchange and the management fee under the agreement with the subscribers at the Exchange; |
• | costs of providing services to the Exchange under the subscriber’s agreement; |
• | ability to attract and retain talented management and employees; |
• | ability to maintain uninterrupted business operations; |
• | factors affecting the quality and liquidity of Indemnity’s investment portfolio; |
• | credit risk from the Exchange; |
• | Indemnity’s ability to meet liquidity needs and access capital; and |
• | outcome of pending and potential litigation. |
24
Risk factors related to the non-controlling interest owned by the Erie Insurance Exchange (“Exchange”), which includes the Property and Casualty Group and Erie Family Life Insurance Company:
• | general business and economic conditions; |
• | dependence upon the independent agency system; |
• | ability to maintain our reputation for customer service; |
• | factors affecting insurance industry competition; |
• | changes in government regulation of the insurance industry; |
• | premium rates and reserves must be established from forecasts of ultimate costs; |
• | emerging claims, coverage issues in the industry, and changes in reserve estimates related to the property and casualty business; |
• | changes in reserve estimates related to the life business; |
• | severe weather conditions or other catastrophic losses, including terrorism and pandemic events; |
• | the Exchange’s ability to acquire reinsurance coverage and collectability from reinsurers; |
• | factors affecting the quality and liquidity of the Exchange’s investment portfolio; |
• | the Exchange’s ability to meet liquidity needs and access capital; |
• | the Exchange’s ability to maintain acceptable financial strength ratings; |
• | outcome of pending and potential litigation; and |
• | dependence upon the service provided by Indemnity. |
A forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made and reflects our analysis only as of that date. We undertake no obligation to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future events, changes in assumptions, or otherwise.
RECENT ACCOUNTING STANDARDS
See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 2, Significant Accounting Policies, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained within this report for a discussion of adopted and/or recently issued accounting standards, none of which are expected to have a material impact on our future financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
25
OPERATING OVERVIEW
Overview
The Erie Insurance Group represents the consolidated results of Indemnity and the results of its variable interest entity, the Exchange. The Erie Insurance Group operates predominantly as a property and casualty insurer through its regional insurance carriers that write a broad range of personal and commercial coverages. Our property and casualty insurance companies include the Exchange and its wholly owned subsidiaries, Erie Insurance Company (“EIC”), Erie Insurance Company of New York (“ENY”), Erie Insurance Property and Casualty Company (“EPC”) and Flagship City Insurance Company (“Flagship”). These entities operate collectively as the “Property and Casualty Group.” The Erie Insurance Group also operates as a life insurer through the Exchange’s wholly owned subsidiary, Erie Family Life Insurance Company (“EFL”), which underwrites and sells individual and group life insurance policies and fixed annuities.
The Exchange is a reciprocal insurance exchange organized under Article X of Pennsylvania's Insurance Company Law of 1921 under which individuals, partnerships, and corporations are authorized to exchange reciprocal or inter-insurance contracts with each other, or with individuals, partnerships, and corporations of other states and countries, providing indemnity among themselves from any loss which may be insured against under any provision of the insurance laws except life insurance. Each applicant for insurance to the Exchange signs a subscriber’s agreement, which contains an appointment of Indemnity as their attorney-in-fact to transact the business of the Exchange on their behalf.
Pursuant to the subscriber’s agreement and for its services as attorney-in-fact, Indemnity earns a management fee calculated as a percentage of the direct premiums written by the Exchange and the other members of the Property and Casualty Group, which are assumed by the Exchange under an intercompany pooling arrangement.
The Indemnity shareholder interest includes Indemnity’s equity and income, but not the equity or income of the Exchange. The Exchange’s equity, which is comprised of its retained earnings and accumulated other comprehensive income, is held for the interest of its subscribers (policyholders) and meets the definition of a noncontrolling interest, which is reflected as such in our consolidated financial statements.
“Indemnity shareholder interest” refers to the interest in Erie Indemnity Company owned by the Class A and Class B shareholders. “Noncontrolling interest” refers to the interest in the Erie Insurance Exchange held for the interest of the subscribers (policyholders).
The Indemnity shareholder interest in income comprises:
• | a management fee of up to 25% of all property and casualty insurance premiums written or assumed by the Exchange, less the costs associated with the sales, underwriting, and issuance of these policies; |
• | net investment income and results on investments that belong to Indemnity; and |
• | other income and expenses, including income taxes, that are the responsibility of Indemnity. |
The Exchange’s or the noncontrolling interest in income comprises:
• | a 100% interest in the net underwriting results of the property and casualty insurance operations; |
• | a 100% interest in the net earnings of EFL's life insurance operations; |
• | net investment income and results on investments that belong to the Exchange and its subsidiaries; and |
• | other income and expenses, including income taxes, that are the responsibility of the Exchange and its subsidiaries. |
26
Results of the Erie Insurance Group’s Operations by Interest
The following table represents a breakdown of the composition of the income attributable to the Indemnity shareholder interest and the income attributable to the noncontrolling interest (Exchange). For purposes of this discussion, EFL’s investments are included in the life insurance operations.
Indemnity shareholder interest | Noncontrolling interest (Exchange) | Eliminations of related party transactions | Erie Insurance Group | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | Years ended December 31, | Years ended December 31, | Years ended December 31, | Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | 2014 | 2013 | 2012 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Management fee revenue, net | $ | 1,376 | $ | 1,266 | $ | 1,157 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | (1,376 | ) | $ | (1,266 | ) | $ | (1,157 | ) | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | |||||||||||||
Service agreement revenue | 31 | 31 | 31 | — | — | — | — | — | — | 31 | 31 | 31 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue from management operations | 1,407 | 1,297 | 1,188 | — | — | — | (1,376 | ) | (1,266 | ) | (1,157 | ) | 31 | 31 | 31 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Cost of management operations | 1,184 | 1,088 | 983 | — | — | — | (1,184 | ) | (1,088 | ) | (983 | ) | — | — | — | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income from management operations before taxes | 223 | 209 | 205 | — | — | — | (192 | ) | (178 | ) | (174 | ) | 31 | 31 | 31 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Property and casualty insurance operations: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net premiums earned | — | — | — | 5,260 | 4,820 | 4,422 | — | — | — | 5,260 | 4,820 | 4,422 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Losses and loss expenses | — | — | — | 3,859 | 3,365 | 3,384 | (6 | ) | (5 | ) | (5 | ) | 3,853 | 3,360 | 3,379 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Policy acquisition and underwriting expenses | — | — | — | 1,502 | 1,387 | 1,284 | (204 | ) | (187 | ) | (182 | ) | 1,298 | 1,200 | 1,102 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
(Loss) income from property and casualty insurance operations before taxes | — | — | — | (101 | ) | 68 | (246 | ) | 210 | 192 | 187 | 109 | 260 | (59 | ) | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Life insurance operations:(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total revenue | — | — | — | 192 | 192 | 178 | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | 190 | 190 | 176 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Total benefits and expenses | — | — | — | 143 | 144 | 132 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 143 | 144 | 132 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income from life insurance operations before taxes | — | — | — | 49 | 48 | 46 | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | (2 | ) | 47 | 46 | 44 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Investment operations:(1) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net investment income | 16 | 15 | 16 | 350 | 325 | 338 | (16 | ) | (12 | ) | (11 | ) | 350 | 328 | 343 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net realized gains on investments | 1 | 1 | 5 | 183 | 753 | 404 | — | — | — | 184 | 754 | 409 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings | 0 | 0 | 0 | (3 | ) | (12 | ) | 0 | — | — | — | (3 | ) | (12 | ) | 0 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Equity in earnings of limited partnerships | 11 | 22 | 15 | 101 | 138 | 116 | — | — | — | 112 | 160 | 131 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income from investment operations before taxes | 28 | 38 | 36 | 631 | 1,204 | 858 | (16 | ) | (12 | ) | (11 | ) | 643 | 1,230 | 883 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
Income from operations before income taxes and noncontrolling interest | 251 | 247 | 241 | 579 | 1,320 | 658 | — | — | — | 830 | 1,567 | 899 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Provision for income taxes | 83 | 84 | 81 | 174 | 435 | 199 | — | — | — | 257 | 519 | 280 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Net income | $ | 168 | $ | 163 | $ | 160 | $ | 405 | $ | 885 | $ | 459 | $ | — | $ | — | $ | — | $ | 573 | $ | 1,048 | $ | 619 | ||||||||||||||||
(1) | Earnings on life insurance related invested assets are integral to the evaluation of the life insurance operations because of the long duration of life products. On that basis, for presentation purposes, the life insurance operations in the table above include life insurance related investment results. However, the life insurance investment results are included in the investment operations segment discussion as part of the Exchange’s investment results. |
Net income decreased in 2014 when compared to 2013 due to an underwriting loss experienced in the property and casualty insurance operations in 2014 compared to an underwriting gain in 2013 and lower levels of income from our investment operations. The underwriting results in the property and casualty insurance operations were negatively impacted by an increase in current accident year losses and catastrophe losses compared to 2013, offset somewhat by favorable development on prior accident year loss reserves. Our income from investment operations recorded lower levels of net realized gains on investments and earnings from limited partnerships in 2014 compared to 2013 offset somewhat by higher levels of net investment income.
Net income increased in 2013 when compared to 2012 due to an underwriting gain experienced in the property and casualty insurance operations in 2013 compared to an underwriting loss in 2012 and increased income from our investment operations. The 2013 underwriting results in the property and casualty insurance operations were positively impacted by lower levels of catastrophe losses compared to 2012, offset somewhat by lower levels of favorable development on prior accident year loss reserves in 2013 compared to 2012. Our income from investment operations improved in 2013 compared to 2012 due primarily to an increase in net realized gains on investments.
The Exchange’s property and casualty insurance operations experienced a 8.6% and 9.6% increase in direct written premium in 2014 and 2013, respectively, driven by increases in policies in force and the average premium per policy, which also positively impacted Indemnity’s management fee revenue.
27
Reconciliation of Operating Income to Net Income
We disclose operating income, a non-GAAP financial measure, to enhance our investors’ understanding of our performance related to the Indemnity shareholder interest. Our method of calculating this measure may differ from those used by other companies, and therefore comparability may be limited.
Indemnity defines operating income as net income excluding realized capital gains and losses, impairment losses, and related federal income taxes.
Indemnity uses operating income to evaluate the results of its operations. It reveals trends that may be obscured by the net effects of realized capital gains and losses including impairment losses. Realized capital gains and losses, including impairment losses, may vary significantly between periods and are generally driven by business decisions and economic developments such as capital market conditions which are not related to our ongoing operations. We are aware that the price to earnings multiple commonly used by investors as a forward-looking valuation technique uses operating income as the denominator. Operating income should not be considered as a substitute for net income prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and does not reflect Indemnity’s overall profitability.
The following table reconciles operating income and net income for the Indemnity shareholder interest for the years ended December 31:
(in millions, except per share data) | Indemnity Shareholder Interest | |||||||||||
2014 | 2013 | 2012 | ||||||||||
Operating income attributable to Indemnity | $ | 167 | $ | 162 | $ | 157 | ||||||
Net realized gains and impairments on investments | 1 | 1 | 5 | |||||||||
Income tax expense | 0 | 0 | (2 | ) | ||||||||
Realized gains and impairments, net of income taxes | 1 | 1 | 3 | |||||||||
Net income attributable to Indemnity | $ | 168 | $ | 163 | $ | 160 | ||||||
Per Indemnity Class A common share-diluted: | ||||||||||||
Operating income attributable to Indemnity | $ | 3.17 | $ | 3.07 | $ | 2.92 | ||||||
Net realized gains and impairments on investments | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.10 | |||||||||
Income tax expense | (0.01 | ) | 0.00 | (0.03 | ) | |||||||
Realized gains and impairments, net of income taxes | 0.01 | 0.01 | 0.07 | |||||||||
Net income attributable to Indemnity | $ | 3.18 | $ | 3.08 | $ | 2.99 | ||||||
28
Operating Segments
Our reportable segments include management operations, property and casualty insurance operations, life insurance operations, and investment operations.
Management operations
Management operations generate internal management fee revenue, which accrues to the Indemnity shareholder interest, as Indemnity provides services relating to the sales, underwriting, and issuance of policies on behalf of the Exchange. Management fee revenue is based upon all premiums written or assumed by the Exchange and the management fee rate, which is not to exceed 25%. Our Board of Directors establishes the management fee rate at least annually, generally in December for the following year, and considers factors such as the relative financial strength of Indemnity and the Exchange and projected revenue streams. The management fee rate was set at 25% for 2014, 2013 and 2012. Our Board of Directors set the 2015 management fee rate again at 25%, its maximum level. Management fee revenue is eliminated upon consolidation.
Property and casualty insurance operations
The property and casualty insurance business is driven by premium growth, the combined ratio, and investment returns. The property and casualty insurance industry is cyclical, with periods of rising premium rates and shortages of underwriting capacity followed by periods of substantial price competition and excess capacity. The cyclical nature of the insurance industry has a direct impact on the direct written premium of the Property and Casualty Group.
The property and casualty insurance operation’s premium growth strategy focuses on growth by expansion of existing operations including a careful agency selection process and increased market penetration in existing operating territories. Expanding the size of our existing agency force of nearly 2,200 independent agencies, with over 11,000 licensed property and casualty representatives, will contribute to future growth as new agents build their books of business with the Property and Casualty Group.
Geographic expansion is also a component of the Property and Casualty Group's premium growth strategy. The Property and Casualty Group began writing private passenger automobile, home insurance, and personal excess liability insurance in Kentucky in the fourth quarter of 2014.
The property and casualty insurance operations insure preferred and standard risks while maintaining a disciplined underwriting approach. The Property and Casualty Group’s principal personal lines products based upon 2014 direct written premiums were private passenger automobile (43%) and homeowners (27%), and the principal commercial lines products were commercial multi-peril (13%), commercial automobile (7%), and workers compensation (7%). Pennsylvania, Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina and Ohio made up 74% of the property and casualty lines insurance business direct written premium in 2014.
Members of the Property and Casualty Group pool the underwriting results under an intercompany pooling agreement. Under the pooling agreement, the Exchange retains a 94.5% interest in the net underwriting results of the Property and Casualty Group, while EIC retains a 5.0% interest, and ENY retains a 0.5% interest.
The key measure of underwriting profitability traditionally used in the property and casualty insurance industry is the combined ratio, which is expressed as a percentage. It is the sum of the ratio of losses and loss expenses to premiums earned (loss ratio) plus the ratio of policy acquisition and other underwriting expenses to premiums earned (expense ratio). When the combined ratio is less than 100%, underwriting results are generally considered profitable; when the combined ratio is greater than 100%, underwriting results are generally considered unprofitable.
Factors affecting losses and loss expenses include the frequency and severity of losses, the nature and severity of catastrophic losses, the quality of risks underwritten, and underlying claims and settlement expenses.
Investments held by the Property and Casualty Group are reported in the investment operations segment, separate from the underwriting business.
Life insurance operations
EFL generates revenues through the sale of its individual and group life insurance policies and fixed annuities. These products provide our property and casualty agency force an opportunity to cross-sell both personal and commercial accounts. EFL’s profitability depends principally on the ability to develop, price, and distribute insurance products, attract and retain deposit funds, generate investment returns, and manage expenses. Other drivers include mortality and morbidity experience, persistency experience to enable the recovery of acquisition costs, maintenance of interest spreads over the amounts credited to deposit funds, and the maintenance of strong ratings from rating agencies. EFL began writing life insurance and annuity products in Kentucky in the fourth quarter of 2014.
29
Earnings on life insurance related invested assets are integral to the evaluation of the life insurance operations because of the long duration of life products. On that basis, for presentation purposes, the life insurance operations segment discussion includes the life insurance related investment results. However, also for presentation purposes, the segment footnote and the investment operations segment discussion include the life insurance investment results as part of the Exchange’s investment results.
Investment operations
We generate revenues from our fixed maturity, equity security, and limited partnership investment portfolios to support our underwriting business. The Indemnity and Exchange portfolios are managed with the objective of maximizing after-tax returns on a risk-adjusted basis, while the EFL portfolio is managed to be closely aligned to its liabilities and to maintain a sufficient yield to meet profitability targets. We actively evaluate the portfolios for impairments, and record impairment writedowns on investments in instances where the fair value of the investment is substantially below cost, and it is concluded that the decline in fair value is other-than-temporary, which includes consideration for intent to sell.
General Conditions and Trends Affecting Our Business
Economic conditions
Unfavorable changes in economic conditions, including declining consumer confidence, inflation, high unemployment, and the threat of recession, among others, may lead the Property and Casualty Group’s customers to modify coverage, not renew policies, or even cancel policies, which could adversely affect the premium revenue of the Property and Casualty Group, and consequently Indemnity’s management fee. These conditions could also impair the ability of customers to pay premiums when due, and as a result, the Property and Casualty Group’s bad debt write-offs could increase. Further, unanticipated increased inflation costs including medical cost inflation, construction and auto repair cost inflation, and tort issues may impact the estimated loss reserves and future premium rates. Our key challenge is to generate profitable revenue growth in a highly competitive market that continues to experience the effects of uncertain economic conditions.
Financial market volatility
Our portfolio of fixed income, preferred and common stocks, and limited partnerships are subject to market volatility especially in periods of instability in the worldwide financial markets. Over time, net investment income could also be impacted by volatility and by the general level of interest rates, which impact reinvested cash flow from the portfolio and business operations. Depending upon market conditions, which are unpredictable and remain uncertain, considerable fluctuation could exist in the fair value of our investment portfolio and reported total investment income, which could have an adverse impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.
30
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING ESTIMATES
The consolidated financial statements include amounts based upon estimates and assumptions that have a significant effect on reported amounts of assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period and related disclosures. We consider an accounting estimate to be critical if 1) it requires assumptions to be made that were uncertain at the time the estimate was made, and 2) different estimates that could have been used, or changes in the estimate that are likely to occur from period-to-period, could have a material impact on our Consolidated Statements of Operations or Financial Position.
The following presents a discussion of those accounting policies surrounding estimates that we believe are the most critical to our reported amounts and require the most subjective and complex judgment. If actual events differ significantly from the underlying assumptions, there could be material adjustments to prior estimates that could potentially adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition, and cash flows. The estimates and the estimating methods used are reviewed continually, and any adjustments considered necessary are reflected in current earnings.
Property and Casualty Insurance Loss and Loss Expense Reserves
Property and casualty insurance loss and loss expense reserves are established to provide for the estimated costs of paying claims under insurance policies written by us. These reserves include estimates for both claims that have been reported (case) and those that have been incurred but not reported (IBNR) and include estimates of all future payments associated with processing and settling these claims.
The process of establishing loss reserves is complex and involves a variety of actuarial techniques. The loss reserve estimation process is based largely on the assumption that past development trends are an appropriate indicator of future events. Reserve estimates are based upon our assessment of known facts and circumstances, review of historical settlement patterns, estimates of trends in claims frequency and severity, legal theories of liability and other factors. Variables in the reserve estimation process can be affected by 1) internal factors, including changes in claims handling procedures and changes in the quality of risk selection in the underwriting process, and 2) external events, such as economic inflation and regulatory and legislative changes. Due to the inherent complexity of the assumptions used, final loss settlements may vary significantly from the current estimates, particularly when those settlements may not occur until well into the future.
How reserves are established
Case reserves are established by a claims handler on each individual claim and are adjusted as new information becomes known during the course of handling the claims. IBNR reserves represent the difference between the case reserves for actual reported loss and loss expenses and the estimated ultimate cost of all claims.
Our loss and loss expense reserves include amounts related to short-tail and long-tail lines of business. Tail refers to the time period between the occurrence of a loss and the final settlement of the claim. The longer the time span between the incidence of a loss and the settlement of the claim, the more the ultimate settlement amount can vary. Most of our loss and loss expense reserves relate to long-tail liability lines of business including workers compensation, bodily injury and other liability coverages, such as commercial liability. Short-tail lines of business, which represent a smaller percentage of our loss reserves, include personal auto physical damage and personal property.
Our actuaries review all direct reserve estimates on a quarterly basis for both current and prior accident years using the most current claim data. Reserves for massive injury lifetime medical claims, including auto no-fault and workers compensation claims, are reviewed at a more detailed level semi-annually. These massive injury claim reserves are relatively few in number and are very long-tail liabilities. In intervening quarters, development on massive injury reserves is monitored to confirm that the estimate of ultimate losses should not change. If an unusual development is observed, a detailed review is conducted to determine whether the reserve estimate should change. Significant changes to the factors discussed above, which are either known or reasonably projected through analysis of internal and external data, are quantified in the reserve estimates each quarter.
Our actuaries review assumed reserve estimates annually for both current and prior accident years. The Property and Casualty Group ceased writing voluntary assumed business in 2003. Outstanding liabilities for the voluntary and involuntary assumed business are immaterial compared to the overall reserves. Our ceded reserves primarily relate to massive injury lifetime medical claims; the ceded estimates for these claims are adjusted when there is a change to the direct reserve estimate. The remainder of the ceded reserves is reviewed by our actuaries annually.
The quarterly reserve reviews incorporate a variety of actuarial methods and judgments and involve rigorous analysis. A comprehensive review is performed of the various estimation methods and reserve levels produced by each. The various
31
methods generate different estimates of ultimate losses by product line and product coverage combination. Thus, reserves are comprised of a set of point estimates of the ultimate losses developed from the various methods. These multiple reserve point estimates are reviewed by our reserving actuaries and reserve best estimates are selected. The selected reserve estimates are discussed with management.
Numerous factors are considered in setting reserve levels, including, but not limited to, the assessed reliability of key loss trends and assumptions that may significantly influence the current actuarial indications, the maturity of the accident year, pertinent claims frequency and severity trends observed over recent years, the level of volatility within a particular line of business and the improvement or deterioration of actuarial rate indications in the current period as compared to prior periods. Certain methods are considered more credible for each product/coverage combination depending on the maturity of the accident quarter, the mix of business and the particular internal and external influences impacting the claims experience or the method.
The following is a discussion of the most common methods used:
Paid development – Paid loss development patterns are generated from historical data and applied to current paid losses to generate estimated ultimate losses. Paid development techniques do not use information about case reserves and therefore are not affected by changes in case reserving practices. These techniques are generally most useful for short-tailed segments since a high percentage of ultimate losses are paid in early periods of development.
Incurred development – Incurred loss development patterns (reflecting cumulative paid losses plus current case reserves) are generated from historical data. The patterns are applied to current incurred losses to generate estimated ultimate losses. Incurred methods and/or combinations of the paid and incurred methods are used in developing estimated ultimate losses for short-tail coverages and long-tail coverages,
Expected loss ratio – An expected loss ratio is developed through a review of historical loss ratios by accident quarter, adjusted for changes to earned premium, mix of business and other factors that are expected to impact the loss ratio for the accident quarter being evaluated. A preliminary estimate of ultimate losses is calculated by multiplying this expected loss ratio by earned premium.
Bornhuetter-Ferguson – Bornhuetter-Ferguson is a method of combining the results of the expected-loss-ratio method and the paid or incurred development method. It places more weight on the paid or incurred development method as the accident period matures. The Bornhuetter-Ferguson method is generally used for less mature accident periods on the long-tail coverages because a low percentage of losses are paid or incurred in the early period of development.
Survival ratio – This method measures the ratio of the average loss and loss expense amount paid annually to the total reserve for the product line or product coverage. The survival ratio represents the number of years of payments that the current level of reserves will cover. The reserve is established so that a particular ratio, representing the time to closing of all claims, is achieved. This method is also used as a reasonability check of reserve adequacy.
Individual claim – This method estimates the ultimate losses on a claim-by-claim basis. An annual payment assumption is made for each claimant and then projected into the future based upon a particular assumption of the future inflation rate and life expectancy of the claimant. This method is used for unusual, large claims.
Weather event paid and reported development – The historical patterns utilized in paid and reported development methods for weather events are derived from historical data for the same type of weather event. Initial weather event ultimate loss estimates are reviewed with claims management.
Line of business methods
For each product line and product/coverage combination, certain methods are given more influence than other methods. The discussion below gives a general indication of which methods are preferred for each line of business. As circumstances change, the methods that are given greater weight can change.
Massive injury lifetime medical claims (such as certain auto no-fault and workers compensation claims) – These claims develop over a long period of time and are relatively few in number. We utilize the individual claim method to evaluate each claim’s ultimate losses.
Personal auto physical damage and homeowners – These lines are fast-developing and we rely more on the paid and incurred development techniques.
32
Personal auto liability (such as bodily injury and uninsured/underinsured motorist) – For auto liability, and bodily injury in particular, we review the results of a greater number of techniques than for physical damage. We tend to rely on the Bornhuetter-Ferguson method for more recent experience periods and paid and incurred development methods for the older accident periods.
Workers compensation and long-tailed liability (such as commercial liability) – We generally rely upon the expected loss ratio, Bornhuetter-Ferguson and incurred development techniques. These techniques are generally weighted together, relying more heavily on the Bornhuetter-Ferguson method at early ages of development and more on the incurred development method as the accident periods mature.
The methods used for estimating loss expenses are as follows:
Defense and cost containment expenses (D&CC) – D&CC is analyzed using paid development techniques and an analysis of the relationship between D&CC payments and loss payments.
Adjusting and other expenses (A&O) – A&O reserves are projected based upon an expected cost per claim year, the anticipated claim closure pattern, and the ratio of paid A&O to paid loss.
Key assumptions for loss reserving
The accuracy of the various methods used to estimate reserves is a function of the degree to which underlying assumptions are satisfied. The most significant key assumptions are:
Development patterns – Historical paid and incurred amounts contain patterns which indicate how unpaid and IBNR amounts will emerge in future periods. Unless reasons or factors are identified that invalidate the extension of historical patterns into the future, these patterns can be used to make projections necessary for estimating loss and loss adjustment expense reserves. This is the most significant assumption and it applies to all methods.
Impact of inflation – Property and casualty insurance reserves are established before the extent to which inflation may impact such reserves is known. Consequently, in establishing reserves, we attempt to anticipate the potential impact of inflation, including medical cost inflation, construction and auto repair cost inflation and tort issues. Medical costs are a broad element of inflation that impacts personal and commercial auto, general liability, workers compensation and commercial multi-peril lines of insurance written by the Property and Casualty Group. Inflation assumptions take the form of explicit numerical values in the survival ratio, individual claim, and massive injury lifetime medical reserving methods. Inflation assumptions are implicitly derived through the selection of applicable loss development patterns for all other reserving methods.
Future cost increase assumptions are derived from a review of historical cost increases and are assumed to persist into the future. Future medical cost increases and claimant mortality assumptions utilized in the reserve estimates for massive injury lifetime medical claims are obtained from industry studies adjusted for our own experience. Reserve levels are sensitive to these assumptions because these amounts represent projections over 30 to 40 years into the future.
Other internal and external factors
Occasionally, unusual aberrations in loss development patterns are caused by external and internal factors such as changes in claim reporting and/or settlement patterns, unusually large losses, process changes, legal or regulatory changes and other influences. In these instances, analyses of alternate development factor selections are performed to evaluate the effect of these factors and actuarial judgment is applied to make appropriate assumptions needed to develop a best estimate of ultimate losses.
Claims with atypical emergence patterns – Characteristics of certain subsets of claims, such as those with high severity, have the potential to distort patterns contained in historical paid loss and reported loss data. When testing indicates this to be the case for a particular subset of claims, our actuaries segregate these claims from the data and analyze them separately.
Changes in loss ratio trends – Prior loss ratio assumptions utilized in the Bornhuetter-Ferguson method are derived from projections of historical loss ratios based upon actual experience from more mature accident periods adjusted for assumed changes in average premiums, frequency and severity. These assumptions influence only the most recent accident periods, but the majority of reserves originate with the most recent accident periods. Reserve levels are highly sensitive to these assumptions.
Relationship of loss expense to losses – D&CC-to-loss ratio assumptions utilized in the Bornhuetter-Ferguson method are initially derived from historical relationships. These historical ratios are adjusted according to the impact of changing internal and external factors. The A&O-to-loss ratio assumption is similarly derived from historical relationships and adjusted as required for identified internal or external changes.
33
Reserve discounting
Loss reserves are set at ultimate cost, except for workers compensation loss reserves, which are discounted on a nontabular basis using an interest rate of 2.5% and our historical workers compensation payout patterns. In our workers compensation discounting methodology, we segregate the workers compensation massive injury claims that have longer payout patterns from the non-massive injury workers compensation claims. The discount on workers compensation reserves was $89 million at December 31, 2014. A 100-basis point increase in the discount rate would result in an increase to the discount of $48 million at December 31, 2014.
Reserve estimate variability
The property and casualty reserves with the greatest potential for variation are the massive injury lifetime medical reserves. These claims arise from the automobile no-fault law in Pennsylvania before 1986 and workers compensation policies which provide unlimited medical benefits. The estimate of ultimate liabilities for these claims is subject to significant judgment due to variations in claimant health, mortality over time and health care cost trends. These claims have been segregated from the total population of claims. Ultimate losses for these claims are estimated on a claim-by-claim basis. We are currently reserving for 245 claimants requiring lifetime medical care, of which 97 involve massive injuries. The annual payment is projected into the future based upon particular assumptions of the future inflation rate and life expectancy of the claimant. The most significant variable in estimating this liability is medical cost inflation. The life expectancy (mortality rate) assumption underlying the estimate reflects the gender specific disabled pensioner mortality table. Actual experience, however, may emerge in a manner that is different relative to the original assumptions, which could have a significant impact on our reserve estimates.
Auto no-fault (massive injury lifetime medical claims) - The automobile massive injury gross reserve carried by the Property and Casualty Group totaled $330 million at December 31, 2014, compared to $345 million at December 31, 2013. The slight decrease in the pre-1986 automobile massive injury reserves in 2014, compared to 2013, was due to continued payments on these claims. A 100-basis point increase in the medical cost inflation assumption would result in an increase in the Property and Casualty Group’s gross year-end reserve of $64 million. This increase in the medical cost inflation assumption would also increase the reinsurance recoverable related to these reserves by $25 million, resulting in a $39 million increase in the net reserve.
Workers compensation (massive injury lifetime medical claims) - The workers compensation massive injury reserve carried by the Property and Casualty Group totaled $82 million at December 31, 2014, compared to $94 million at December 31, 2013, net of discounting. The decrease in the workers compensation massive injury reserves in 2014, compared to 2013, was primarily due to the settlement of two claims, offset somewhat by the addition of two new claims. A 100-basis point increase in the medical cost inflation assumption would result in an increase in the Property and Casualty Group’s December 31, 2014 gross reserve of $20 million. This increase in the medical cost inflation assumption would also increase the related reinsurance recoverable and the workers compensation discount by $16 million, resulting in a $4 million increase in the net reserve.
Reserve adequacy
We also perform analyses to evaluate the adequacy of past total reserve levels for the Property and Casualty Group. Previously established estimates for reserves were not materially different than those determined in these retrospective analyses. At December 31, 2014, our current estimate of direct loss reserves, including salvage and subrogation for accident years 2013 and prior is $120 million, or 3.2% less than the reserve amount we had established at December 31, 2013. At December 31, 2013, our estimate of direct loss reserves, including salvage and subrogation recoveries for accident years 2012 and prior was
$2 million, or 0.1% higher than the reserve amount we had established at December 31, 2012. At December 31, 2012, our estimate of direct loss reserves, including salvage and subrogation recoveries for accident years 2011 and prior was
$92 million, or 2.6% lower than the reserve amount we had established at December 31, 2011. See an additional discussion of our reserve development in the “Prior year loss reserve development” section.
Life Insurance and Annuity Policy Reserves
Reserves for traditional life insurance future policy benefits are computed primarily by the net level premium method. Generally, benefits are payable over an extended period of time and related reserves are calculated as the present value of future expected benefits to be paid reduced by the present value of future expected net premiums. Such reserves are established based upon methods and underlying assumptions in accordance with GAAP and applicable actuarial standards. Principal assumptions used in the establishment of policy reserves are mortality, lapses, expenses, and investment yields. Mortality assumptions are based upon tables typically used in the industry, modified to reflect actual experience and to include a provision for the risk of adverse deviation where appropriate. Lapse, expense, and investment yield assumptions are based upon actual company experience and may include a provision for the risk of adverse deviation. Assumptions on these policies are locked in at the time of issue and are not subject to change unless a premium deficiency exists. A premium deficiency exists if, based upon revised assumptions, the existing contract liabilities together with the present value of future gross premiums are not sufficient
34
to cover the present value of future expected benefits and maintenance costs and to recover unamortized acquisition costs. Historically, our reserves plus expected gross premiums have been demonstrated to be sufficient. There were no premium deficiencies in 2014, 2013 or 2012.
Reserves for income-paying annuity future policy benefits are computed as the present value of future expected benefits. Principal assumptions used in the establishment of policy reserves are mortality and investment yields. Interest rates used to discount future expected benefits are set at the policy level and range from 1.50% to 9.0%. The equivalent aggregate interest rate is 5.7%. If the aggregate interest rate was reduced by 100 basis points, the present value of future expected benefits would increase by $16 million at December 31, 2014.
Reserves for universal life and deferred annuity plans are primarily based upon the contract account balance without reduction for surrender charges.
Investment Valuation
Available-for-sale and trading securities
We make estimates concerning the valuation of all investments. Valuation techniques are used to derive the fair value of the available-for-sale and trading securities we hold. Fair value is the price that would be received to sell an asset in an orderly transaction between willing market participants at the measurement date.
Fair value measurements are based upon observable and unobservable inputs. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect our view of market assumptions in the absence of observable market information. We utilize valuation techniques that maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs.
For purposes of determining whether the market is active or inactive, the classification of a financial instrument was based upon the following definitions:
• | An active market is one in which transactions for the assets being valued occur with sufficient frequency and volume to provide reliable pricing information. |
• | An inactive (illiquid) market is one in which there are few and infrequent transactions, where the prices are not current, price quotations vary substantially, and/or there is little information publicly available for the asset being valued. |
We continually assess whether or not an active market exists for all of our investments and as of each reporting date re-evaluate the classification in the fair value hierarchy. All assets carried at fair value are classified and disclosed in one of the following three categories:
• | Level 1 – Quoted prices (unadjusted) in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity can access at the measurement date. |
• | Level 2 – Inputs other than quoted prices included within Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. |
• | Level 3 – Unobservable inputs for the asset or liability. |
Level 1 primarily consists of publicly traded common stock, nonredeemable preferred stock, and exchange traded funds and reflects market data obtained from independent sources, such as prices obtained from an exchange or a nationally recognized pricing service for identical instruments in active markets.
Level 2 includes those financial instruments that are valued using industry-standard models that consider various inputs, such as the interest rate and credit spread for the underlying financial instruments. All significant inputs are observable, or derived from observable information in the marketplace, or are supported by observable levels at which transactions are executed in the marketplace. Financial instruments in this category primarily include corporate bonds, municipal bonds, structured securities, redeemable preferred stock and certain nonredeemable preferred stock.
Level 3 securities are valued based upon unobservable inputs, reflecting our estimates of value based upon assumptions used by market participants. Securities are assigned to Level 3 in cases where non-binding broker quotes are significant to the valuation and there is a lack of transparency as to whether these quotes are based upon information that is observable in the
35
marketplace. Fair value estimates for securities valued using unobservable inputs require significant judgment due to the illiquid nature of the market for these securities and represent the best estimate of the fair value that would occur in an orderly transaction between willing market participants at the measurement date under current market conditions. Fair value for these securities are generally determined using comparable securities or non-binding broker quotes received from outside broker dealers based upon security type and market conditions. Remaining securities, where a price is not available, are valued using an estimate of fair value based upon indicative market prices that include significant unobservable inputs not based upon, nor corroborated by, market information, including the utilization of discounted cash flow analyses which have been risk-adjusted to take into account illiquidity and other market factors. This category primarily consists of corporate bonds priced using non-binding broker quotes as well as certain private securities.
As of each reporting period, financial instruments recorded at fair value are classified based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The presence of at least one unobservable input would result in classification as a Level 3 instrument. Our assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the asset, such as the relative impact on the fair value as a result of including a particular input and market conditions. We did not make any other significant judgments except as described above.
Estimates of fair values for our investment portfolio are obtained primarily from a nationally recognized pricing service. Our Level 1 category includes those securities valued using an exchange traded price provided by the pricing service. The methodologies used by the pricing service that support a Level 2 classification of a financial instrument include multiple verifiable, observable inputs including benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, and reference data. Pricing service valuations for Level 3 securities are based upon proprietary models and are used when observable inputs are not available in illiquid markets. In limited circumstances we adjust the price received from the pricing service when, in our judgment, a better reflection of fair value is available based upon corroborating information and our knowledge and monitoring of market conditions such as a disparity in price of comparable securities and/or non-binding broker quotes. In other circumstances, certain securities are internally priced because prices are not provided by the pricing service.
We perform continuous reviews of the prices obtained from the pricing service. This includes evaluating the methodology and inputs used by the pricing service to ensure we determine the proper classification level of the financial instrument. Price variances, including large periodic changes, are investigated and corroborated by market data. We have reviewed the pricing methodologies of our pricing service as well as other observable inputs, such as benchmark yields, reported trades, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data, and transaction volumes, and believe that the prices adequately consider market activity in determining fair value. Our review process continues to evolve based upon accounting guidance and requirements.
When a price from the pricing service is not available, values are determined by obtaining non-binding broker quotes and/or market comparables. When available, we obtain multiple quotes for the same security. The ultimate value for these securities is determined based upon our best estimate of fair value using corroborating market information. Our evaluation includes the consideration of benchmark yields, reported trades, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, and reference data.
Other-than-temporary impairments
Investments are evaluated monthly for other-than-temporary impairment loss. Some factors considered in evaluating whether or not a decline in fair value is other-than-temporary include:
• | the extent and duration for which fair value is less than cost; |
• | historical operating performance and financial condition of the issuer; |
• | short- and long-term prospects of the issuer and its industry based upon analysts’ recommendations; |
• | specific events that occurred affecting the issuer, including rating downgrades; |
• | intent to sell or more likely than not be required to sell (debt securities); and |
• | ability and intent to retain the investment for a period of time sufficient to allow for a recovery in value (equity securities). |
For available-for-sale equity securities, a charge is recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations for positions that have experienced other-than-temporary impairments. For debt securities in which we do not expect full recovery of amortized cost, the security is deemed to be credit-impaired. Credit-related impairments and impairments on securities we intend to sell or more likely than not will be required to sell are recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Operations. It is our intention to sell all debt securities with credit impairments.
36
Limited partnerships
The primary basis for the valuation of limited partnership interests is financial statements prepared by the general partner. Because of the timing of the preparation and delivery of these financial statements, the use of the most recently available financial statements provided by the general partners generally result in a quarter delay in the inclusion of the limited partnership results in our Consolidated Statements of Operations. Due to this delay, these financial statements do not reflect the market conditions experienced in the fourth quarter of 2014.
The majority of our limited partnership holdings are considered investment companies where the general partners record assets at fair value. These limited partnerships are recorded using the equity method of accounting. We also own some real estate limited partnerships that do not meet the criteria of an investment company. These partnerships prepare audited financial statements on a cost basis. We have elected to report these limited partnerships under the fair value option, which is based on the net asset value (NAV) from our partner's capital statement reflecting the general partner's estimate of fair value for the fund's underlying assets. Fair value provides consistency in the evaluation and financial reporting for these limited partnerships and limited partnerships accounted for under the equity method.
We have three types of limited partnership investments: private equity, mezzanine debt, and real estate. Our private equity and mezzanine debt partnerships are diversified among numerous industries and geographies to minimize potential loss exposure. Nearly all of the underlying investments in our limited partnerships are valued using a source other than quoted prices in active markets. The fair value amounts for our private equity and mezzanine debt partnerships are based upon the financial statements prepared by the general partners, who use various methods to estimate fair value including the market approach, income approach, and the cost approach. The market approach uses prices and other pertinent information from market-generated transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities. Such valuation techniques often use market multiples derived from a set of comparables. The income approach uses valuation techniques to convert future cash flows or earnings to a single discounted present value amount. The measurement is based upon the value indicated by current market expectations about those future amounts. The cost approach is derived from the amount that is currently required to replace the service capacity of an asset. If information becomes available that would impair the cost of investments owned by the partnerships, then the general partner would adjust the investments to the net realizable value.
The fair value of investments in real estate limited partnerships is determined by the general partner based upon independent appraisals and/or internal valuations. Real estate projects under development are generally valued at cost and impairment tested by the general partner. We minimize the risk of market decline by avoiding concentration in a particular geographic area and are diversified across residential, commercial, industrial, and retail real estate investments.
While we perform various procedures in review of the general partners’ valuations, we rely on the general partners’ financial statements as the best available information to record our share of the partnership unrealized gains and losses resulting from valuation changes. Due to the limited market for these investments, there is the greatest potential for variability. We survey each of the general partners quarterly about expected significant changes (plus or minus 10% compared to previous quarter) to valuations prior to the release of the fund’s quarterly and annual financial statements. Based upon that information from the general partner, we consider whether additional disclosure is warranted. We analyze limited partnerships measured at fair value based upon NAV to determine if the most recently available NAV reflects fair value at the balance sheet date, with an adjustment being made where appropriate (change of plus or minus 5% compared to most recent NAV.)
Deferred Acquisition Costs Related to Life Insurance and Investment-Type Contracts
Acquisition costs that vary with and relate to the production of life insurance and investment-type contracts are deferred. Deferred acquisition costs (“DAC”) are incremental direct costs of contract acquisition. These costs are limited to the successful acquisition of new and renewal contracts. Such costs consist principally of commissions and policy issuance expenses.
DAC on life insurance and investment-type contracts are amortized in proportion to gross premiums or gross profits, depending on the type of contract. DAC related to traditional life insurance products is amortized in proportion to premium revenues over the premium-paying period of related policies using assumptions consistent with those used in computing policy liability reserves. These assumptions are not revised after policy issuance unless the DAC balance is deemed to be unrecoverable from future expected profits. In any period where the actual policy terminations are higher (lower) than anticipated policy terminations, DAC amortization will be accelerated (decelerated) in that period.
DAC related to universal life products and deferred annuities is amortized over the estimated lives of the contracts in proportion to actual and expected future gross profits, which include investment, mortality, and expense margins and surrender charges. Both historical and anticipated investment returns, including realized gains and losses, are considered in determining the amortization of DAC. When the actual gross profits change from previously estimated gross profits, the cumulative DAC
37
amortization is re-estimated and adjusted by a cumulative charge or credit to current operations. When actual gross profits exceed those previously estimated, DAC amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the actual gross profits are below the previously estimated gross profits. DAC is also adjusted for the impact of unrealized gains or losses on investments as if these gains or losses had been realized, with corresponding credits or charges, net of income taxes, included in EFL’s accumulated other comprehensive income, which is presented in the “Noncontrolling interest in consolidated entity – Exchange,” amount in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position.
The actuarial assumptions used to determine investment, mortality, and expense margins and surrender charges for universal life products and deferred annuities are reviewed periodically, are based upon best estimates and do not include any provision for the risk of adverse deviation. If actuarial analysis indicates that expectations have changed, the actuarial assumptions are updated and the investment, mortality, and expense margins and surrender charges are unlocked. If this unlocking results in a decrease in the present value of future expected gross profits, DAC amortization for the period will increase. If this unlocking results in an increase in the present value of future expected gross profits, DAC amortization for the current period will decrease.
DAC is periodically reviewed for recoverability. For traditional life products, if the benefit reserves plus anticipated future premiums and interest earnings for a line of business are less than the current estimate of future benefits and expenses (including any unamortized DAC), a charge to income is recorded for additional DAC amortization or for increased benefit reserves. For universal life products and deferred annuities, if the current present value of future expected gross profits is less than the unamortized DAC, a charge to income is recorded for additional DAC amortization. There were no impairments to DAC in 2014, 2013 or 2012.
Deferred Taxes
Deferred tax assets represent the tax benefit of future deductible temporary differences and operating loss and tax credit carry-forwards. Deferred tax assets are measured using the enacted tax rates expected to be in effect when such benefits are realized. We perform an analysis of our deferred tax assets to determine recoverability on a quarterly basis for each legal entity, by character of the income (ordinary or capital). Deferred tax assets are reduced by a valuation allowance, if based upon the weight of available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion, or all, of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In determining the need for a valuation allowance, we consider carry-back capacity, reversal of existing temporary differences, future taxable income and tax planning strategies. The determination of the valuation allowance for our deferred tax assets requires us to make certain judgments and assumptions regarding future operations that are based upon our historical experience and our expectations of future performance. Our judgments and assumptions are subject to change given the inherent uncertainty in predicting future performance, which is impacted by such things as financial market conditions, policyholder behavior, competitor pricing, new product introductions, and specific industry and economic conditions.
Indemnity had a net deferred tax asset of $37 million and $2 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively. There was no valuation allowance recorded on Indemnity at December 31, 2014 or 2013. The Exchange had a net deferred tax liability of $490 million and $450 million at December 31, 2014 and 2013, respectively.
Retirement Benefit Plans for Employees
Our pension plans consist of a noncontributory defined benefit pension plan covering substantially all employees and an unfunded supplemental employee retirement plan ("SERP") for certain members of executive and senior management of the Erie Insurance Group. Although Indemnity is the sponsor of these postretirement plans and records the funded status of these plans, the Exchange and EFL reimburse Indemnity for approximately 56% of the annual benefit expense of these plans, which represents pension benefits for Indemnity employees performing claims and EFL functions.
Our pension obligation is developed from actuarial estimates. Several statistical and other factors, which attempt to anticipate future events, are used in calculating the expense and liability related to the plans. Key factors include assumptions about the discount rates and expected rates of return on plan assets. We review these assumptions annually and modify them considering historical experience, current market conditions, including changes in investment returns and interest rates and expected future trends.
Accumulated and projected benefit obligations are expressed as the present value of future cash payments. We discount those cash payments based upon a yield curve developed from corporate bond yield information with maturities that correspond to the payment of benefits. Lower discount rates increase present values and subsequent year pension expense, while higher discount rates decrease present values and subsequent year pension expense. The construction of the yield curve is based upon yields of corporate bonds rated Aa quality. Target yields are developed from bonds at various maturity points and a curve is fitted to those targets. Spot rates (zero coupon bond yields) are developed from the yield curve and used to discount benefit payment amounts associated with each future year. The present value of plan benefits is calculated by applying the spot/
38
discount rates to projected benefit cash flows. A single discount rate is then developed to produce the same present value. The cash flows from the yield curve were matched against our projected benefit payments in the pension plan, which have a duration of about 20 years. This yield curve supported the selection of a 4.17% discount rate for the projected benefit obligation at December 31, 2014 and for the 2015 pension expense. The same methodology was used to develop the 5.11% and 4.19% discount rates used to determine the projected benefit obligation for 2013 and 2012, respectively, and the pension expense for 2014 and 2013, respectively. A 25 basis point decrease in the discount rate assumption, with other assumptions held constant, would increase pension cost in the following year by $4 million and would increase the pension benefit obligation by $34 million.
Unrecognized actuarial gains and losses arise from several factors, including experience and assumption changes in the obligations and from the difference between expected returns and actual returns on plan assets. These unrecognized gains and losses are recorded in the pension plan obligation and accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) on the Consolidated Statements of Financial Position. These amounts are systematically recognized to net periodic pension expense in future periods, with gains decreasing and losses increasing future pension expense. If actuarial net gains or losses exceed 5% of the greater of the projected benefit obligation and the market-related value of plan assets, the excess is recognized through the net periodic pension expense equally over the estimated service period of the employee group, which is currently 14 years.
The expected long-term rate of return for the pension plan represents the average rate of return to be earned on plan assets over the period the benefits included in the benefit obligation are to be paid. The expected long-term rate of return is less susceptible to annual revisions, as there are typically no significant changes in the asset mix. To determine the expected long-term rate of return assumption, we utilized models based upon rigorous historical analysis and forward-looking views of the financial markets based upon key factors such as historical returns for the asset class' applicable indices, the correlations of the asset classes under various market conditions and consensus views on future real economic growth and inflation. The expected future return for each asset class is then combined by considering correlations between asset classes and the volatilities of each asset class to produce a reasonable range of asset return results within which our expected long-term rate of return assumption falls. A change of 25 basis points in the expected long-term rate of return assumption, with other assumptions held constant, would have an estimated $1.3 million impact on net pension benefit cost in the following year, of which Indemnity’s share would be approximately $0.6 million.
We use a four year averaging method to determine the market-related value of plan assets, which is used to determine the expected return component of pension expense. Under this methodology, asset gains or losses that result from returns that differ from our long-term rate of return assumption are recognized in the market-related value of assets on a level basis over a four year period. The market-related asset experience during 2014 that related to the actual investment return being different from that assumed during the prior year was a gain of $42 million. Recognition of this gain will be deferred and recognized over a four year period, consistent with the market-related asset value methodology. Once factored into the market-related asset value, these experience gains and losses will be amortized over a period of 14 years, which is the remaining service period of the employee group.
Estimates of fair values of the pension plan assets are obtained primarily from our trustee and custodian of our pension plan. Our Level 1 category includes a money market fund that is a mutual fund for which the fair value is determined using an exchange traded price provided by the trustee and custodian. Our Level 2 category includes commingled pools. Estimates of fair values for securities held by our commingled pools are obtained primarily from the trustee and custodian. The methodologies used by the trustee and custodian that support a financial instrument Level 2 classification include multiple verifiable, observable inputs including benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuers spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, and reference data. There were no Level 3 investments in 2014 or 2013.
We expect our net pension benefit costs to increase from $26 million in 2014 to $39 million in 2015. This increase is due to both the lower discount rate and the adoption of the newly issued mortality tables, partially offset by a change in other plan assumptions that were updated to reflect our most recent actual experience. Indemnity’s share of the net pension benefit costs after reimbursements will increase from $12 million in 2014 to approximately $17 million in 2015.
The actuarial assumptions we used in determining our pension obligation may differ materially from actual results due to changing market and economic conditions, higher or lower withdrawal rates, or longer or shorter life spans of participants. While we believe that the assumptions used are appropriate, differences in actual experience or changes in assumptions may materially affect our financial position, results of operations, or cash flows. See Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data - Note 15, Postretirement Benefits, of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” contained within this report for additional details on the pension plans.
39
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
The information that follows is presented on a segment basis prior to eliminations.
Management Operations
Indemnity earns management fee revenue from providing services relating to the sales, underwriting, and issuance of policies on behalf of the Exchange as a result of its attorney-in-fact relationship, which is eliminated upon consolidation. A summary of the results of our management operations is as follows:
Indemnity Shareholder Interest | ||||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | 2014 | % Change | 2013 | % Change | 2012 | |||||||||||||
Management fee revenue, net | $ | 1,376 | 8.7 | % | $ | 1,266 | 9.4 | % | $ | 1,157 | ||||||||
Service agreement revenue | 31 | NM | 31 | NM | 31 | |||||||||||||
Total revenue from management operations | 1,407 | 8.5 | 1,297 | 9.2 | 1,188 | |||||||||||||
Cost of management operations | 1,184 | 8.8 | 1,088 | 10.6 | 983 | |||||||||||||
Income from management operations – Indemnity(1) | $ | 223 | 6.5 | % | $ | 209 | 2.1 | % | $ | 205 | ||||||||
Gross margin | 15.8 | % | (0.3 | ) | pts. | 16.1 | % | (1.2 | ) | pts. | 17.3 | % | ||||||
NM = not meaningful
(1) The Indemnity shareholder interest retains 100% of the income from management operations.
Management fee revenue
Management fee revenue is based upon all premiums written or assumed by the Exchange and the management fee rate, which is determined by our Board of Directors at least annually. Management fee revenue is calculated by multiplying the management fee rate by the direct premiums written by the Exchange and the other members of the Property and Casualty Group, which are assumed by the Exchange under an intercompany pooling agreement. The following table presents the calculation of management fee revenue:
Indemnity Shareholder Interest | ||||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||
(dollars in millions) | 2014 | % Change | 2013 | % Change | 2012 | |||||||||||||
Property and Casualty Group direct written premium | $ | 5,514 | 8.6 | % | $ | 5,076 | 9.6 | % | $ | 4,631 | ||||||||
Management fee rate | 25 | % | 25 | % | 25 | % | ||||||||||||
Management fee revenue, gross | 1,379 | 8.6 | 1,269 | 9.6 | 1,157 | |||||||||||||
Change in allowance for management fee returned on cancelled policies(1) | (3 | ) | NM | (3 | ) | NM | 0 | |||||||||||
Management fee revenue, net of allowance | $ | 1,376 | 8.7 | % | $ | 1,266 | 9.4 | % | $ | 1,157 | ||||||||
NM = not meaningful
(1) Management fees are returned to the Exchange when policies are cancelled mid-term and unearned premiums are refunded. We record an estimated allowance for management fees returned on mid-term policy cancellations.
Management fee revenue increased $110 million, or 8.7%, in 2014, compared to 2013. Direct written premium of the Property and Casualty Group increased 8.6% in 2014, compared to 2013, due to a 4.3% increase in policies in force and a 4.2% increase in the year-over-year average premium per policy for all lines of business. The year-over-year policy retention ratio was 90.3% at December 31, 2014, 90.6% at December 31, 2013, and 90.9% at December 31, 2012. See the “Property and Casualty Insurance Operations” segment that follows for a complete discussion of property and casualty direct written premium, which has a direct bearing on Indemnity’s management fee. The management fee rate was set at 25%, the maximum rate, for 2014, 2013 and 2012. The management fee rate for 2015 was set at 25% by our Board of Directors. Changes in the management fee rate can affect the Indemnity shareholder interest's revenue and net income from this segment significantly. See also, the “Transactions/Agreements between Indemnity and Noncontrolling Interest (Exchange), Board Oversight” section within this report.
Service agreement revenue
Service agreement revenue includes service charges Indemnity collects from policyholders for providing extended payment terms on policies written by the Property and Casualty Group and late payment and policy reinstatement fees. The service
40
charges are fixed dollar amounts per billed installment. Service agreement revenue totaled $31 million in 2014, 2013 and 2012. The consistency in the service agreement revenue compared to the growth in policies in force reflects the continued shift in policies to the monthly direct debit payment plan, which does not incur service charges, and the no-fee single payment plan, which offers a premium discount. The shift to these plans is driven by the consumers’ desire to avoid paying service charges and to take advantage of the discount in pricing offered for paid-in-full policies.
Cost of management operations
Indemnity Shareholder Interest | ||||||||||||||||||
Years ended December 31, | ||||||||||||||||||
(in millions) | 2014 | % Change | 2013 | % Change | 2012 | |||||||||||||
Commissions: | ||||||||||||||||||
Total commissions | $ | 783 | 10.3 | % | $ | 710 | 11.7 | % | $ | 635 | ||||||||
Non-commission expense: | ||||||||||||||||||
Sales and advertising | $ | 60 | 2.1 | $ | 59 | 6.2 | $ | 55 | ||||||||||
Underwriting and policy processing | 127 | 5.8 | 120 | 8.0 | 111 | |||||||||||||
Information technology | 121 | 12.5 | 108 | 4.8 | 103 | |||||||||||||
Customer service | 26 | 18.4 | 22 | 19.1 | 19 | |||||||||||||
Administrative and other | 67 | (3.7 | ) | 69 | 15.4 | 60 | ||||||||||||
Total non-commission expense | 401 | 6.2 | 378 | 8.6 | 348 | |||||||||||||
Total cost of management operations | $ | 1,184 | 8.8 | % | $ | 1,088 | 10.6 | % | $ | 983 | ||||||||
Commissions – Commissions increased $73 million in 2014 compared to 2013, and increased $75 million in 2013 compared to 2012, primarily as a result of the 8.6% and 9.6% respective increases in direct written premiums of the Property and Casualty Group. Commission growth outpaced direct written premium growth in 2014 and 2013 primarily due to an increase in agent incentive costs related to profitable growth. Also impacting the increase in 2013 was an adjustment that reduced commission expense by $6 million in 2012. This amount represented the reimbursement by the North Carolina Reinsurance Facility (NCRF) for commissions Indemnity paid to agents on the surcharges collected on behalf of the NCRF which was incorrectly recorded as a benefit to the Exchange in prior periods.
Non-commission expense – Non-commission expense increased $23 million in 2014 compared to 2013. Information technology costs increased $13 million, which included $6 million of professional fees, $4 million of personnel costs, and
$3 million of hardware and software costs. Underwriting and policy processing costs increased $7 million due to the increased cost of underwriting reports, postage, and printing costs related to increased volume. Customer service costs increased
$4 million due to an increase of $2 million in credit card processing fees and $2 million in personnel costs. All other operating costs decreased $1 million.
In 2013, compared to 2012, non-commission expense increased $30 million. Sales and advertising costs increased $4 million due to personnel costs. Underwriting and policy processing costs increased $9 million due to increased personnel costs and the increased cost of underwriting reports and postage and printing costs. Information technology costs increased $5 million, which included $6 million of personnel costs, offset by a decrease of $1 million in software, hardware, and maintenance costs. Customer service costs increased $3 million due to an increase of $2 million in credit card processing fees and $1 million in personnel costs. Administrative and other costs increased $9 million driven by increases in professional fees and personnel costs of $5 million and $4 million, respectively. Personnel costs in all expense categories were impacted by higher staffing levels, increased pension and medical costs, and increased estimates for incentive plan compensation costs related to growth and underwriting performance.
Gross margin