10-K 1 ufcs-20131231x10k.htm 10-K UFCS-2013.12.31-10K

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

 FORM 10-K
R Annual Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013
OR

o Transition Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 for the transition period from ______ to ______
Commission File Number 001-34257

UNITED FIRE GROUP, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
Iowa
 
45-2302834
(State of Incorporation)
 
(IRS Employer Identification No.)
118 Second Avenue SE
Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)
Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (319) 399-5700
Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:
Title of each class
 
Name of each exchange on which registered
Common Stock, $0.001 par value
 
The NASDAQ Global Select Market
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 £ NO R

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 R

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 R NO £

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). YES R 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.
Large accelerated filer £
 
Accelerated filer R
 
Non-accelerated filer £
 
Smaller reporting company £

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). YES £ NO R

The aggregate market value of voting stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2013 was approximately $592.4 million. For purposes of this calculation, all directors and executive officers of the registrant are considered affiliates. As of February 27, 2014, 25,369,693 shares of common stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE
Part III of this Form 10-K incorporates by reference certain information from the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, for its annual shareholder meeting to be held on May 21, 2014.



FORM 10-K TABLE OF CONTENTS
 
Page
 
 
Forward-Looking Information
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Exhibit 12
 Exhibit 21
 Exhibit 23.1
 Exhibit 23.2
 Exhibit 23.3
 Exhibit 31.1
 Exhibit 31.2
 Exhibit 32.1
 Exhibit 32.2



FORWARD-LOOKING INFORMATION
This report may contain forward-looking statements about our operations, anticipated performance and other similar matters. The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995 provides a safe harbor under the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), for forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are not historical facts and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from those expected and/or projected. Such forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts and projections about United Fire Group, Inc., the industry in which we operate, and beliefs and assumptions made by management. Words such as “expect(s),” “anticipate(s),” “intend(s),” “plan(s),” “believe(s),” “continue(s),” “seek(s),” “estimate(s),” “goal(s),” “target(s),” “forecast(s),” “project(s),” “predict(s),” “should,” “could,” “may,” “will continue,” “might,” “hope,” “can” and other words and terms of similar meaning or expression in connection with a discussion of future operations, financial performance or financial condition, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. See Part I, Item 1A “Risk Factors” of this report for more information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements.
Risks and uncertainties that may affect the actual financial condition and results of United Fire Group, Inc. include, but are not limited to, the following:

The frequency and severity of claims, including those related to catastrophe losses and the impact those claims have on our loss reserve adequacy;
Occurrence of catastrophic events, occurrence of significant severe weather conditions, climate change, acts of terrorism, acts of war and pandemics;
Developments in the domestic and global financial markets and “other-than-temporary” impairment losses that could affect our investment portfolio;
The calculation and recovery of deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”);
The valuation of pension and other postretirement benefit obligations;
Our relationship with our agencies and agents;
Our relationship with our reinsurers;
The financial strength of our reinsurers;
Our exposure to international catastrophes through our assumed reinsurance program;
Lowering of one or more of the financial strength ratings of our operating subsidiaries or our issuer credit ratings and the adverse impact such action may have on our premium writings, policy retention, profitability and liquidity;
Changes in general economic conditions, interest rates, industry trends, increase in competition and significant industry developments;
Competitive, legal, regulatory or tax changes that affect the distribution cost or demand for our products;
Litigation or regulatory actions that could require us to pay significant damages or change the way we do business;
Governmental actions, policies and regulations, including, but not limited to, domestic health care reform, financial services regulatory reform, corporate governance, new laws or regulations or court decisions interpreting existing laws and regulations or policy provisions; and
The NASDAQ Global Select Market (“NASDAQ”) policies or regulations relating to corporate governance and the cost to comply.

These are representative of the risks, uncertainties, and assumptions that could cause actual outcomes and results to differ materially from what is expressed in forward-looking statements. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this report or as of the date they are made. Except as required under the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), we do not have any intention or obligation to update publicly any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events, or otherwise.


1


PART I.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS
 
GENERAL DESCRIPTION
United Fire Group, Inc. (“United Fire”, the “Registrant”, the “Company”, “we”, “us”, or “our”) and its consolidated subsidiaries and affiliates are engaged in the business of writing property and casualty insurance and life insurance and selling annuities through a network of independent agencies. Our insurance company subsidiaries are currently licensed as a property and casualty insurer in 43 states, plus the District of Columbia and as a life insurer in 37 states. United Fire & Casualty Company was incorporated in Iowa in January 1946. Our principal executive office is located at 118 Second Avenue SE, Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401; telephone: 319-399-5700.
Holding Company Reorganization
On February 1, 2012, we completed a holding company reorganization (the “Reorganization”) of United Fire Group, Inc., United Fire & Casualty Company, and UFC MergeCo, Inc., an Iowa corporation formed for the purpose of facilitating the Reorganization. The Reorganization agreement was approved and adopted by United Fire & Casualty Company shareholders at a special meeting of shareholders held on January 24, 2012.
The Reorganization agreement provided for the merger of United Fire & Casualty Company with UFC MergeCo, Inc., with United Fire & Casualty Company surviving the merger as a wholly owned subsidiary of United Fire Group, Inc. Each share of common stock, par value $3.33 1/3 per share, of United Fire & Casualty Company issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the merger, converted into one duly issued, fully paid and nonassessable share of common stock, par value $0.001 per share, of United Fire Group, Inc. In addition, each outstanding option to purchase or other right to acquire shares of United Fire & Casualty Company common stock was automatically converted into an option to purchase or right to acquire, upon the same terms and conditions, an identical number of shares of United Fire Group, Inc. common stock.
Upon completion of the Reorganization, United Fire Group, Inc., an Iowa corporation, replaced United Fire & Casualty Company, an Iowa corporation, as the publicly held corporation, and the holders of United Fire & Casualty Company common stock now hold the same number of shares at the same ownership percentage of United Fire Group, Inc. as they held of United Fire & Casualty Company immediately prior to the Reorganization. On February 2, 2012, shares of United Fire Group, Inc. common stock commenced trading on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol “UFCS.”
The directors and executive officers of United Fire Group, Inc. immediately following the Reorganization were the same individuals who were directors and executive officers, respectively, of United Fire & Casualty Company immediately prior to the Reorganization.
Immediately following the Reorganization, United Fire Group, Inc. owns 100 percent of one subsidiary, United Fire & Casualty Company. United Fire & Casualty Company owns 100 percent of seven subsidiaries: United Life Insurance Company, Addison Insurance Company, Mercer Insurance Group, Inc., Lafayette Insurance Company, United Fire & Indemnity Company, American Indemnity Financial Corporation and United Real Estate Holdings Company, LLC.
In addition, Mercer Insurance Group, Inc. owns 100 percent of two subsidiaries: Mercer Insurance Company and Financial Pacific Insurance Group, Inc. Mercer Insurance Company owns 100 percent of three subsidiaries: Mercer Insurance Company of New Jersey, Inc., Franklin Insurance Company and BICUS Services Corporation. Financial Pacific Insurance Group, Inc. owns 100% of one subsidiary: Financial Pacific Insurance Company. United Fire & Indemnity Company has one affiliate: United Fire Lloyds. American Indemnity Financial Corporation owns 100% of one subsidiary: Texas General Indemnity Company.




2


Acquisition of Mercer Insurance Group, Inc.
On March 28, 2011, we acquired 100 percent of the outstanding common stock of Mercer Insurance Group for $191.5 million. The acquisition was funded through a combination of cash and $79.9 million of short-term debt. Accordingly, the results of operations for Mercer Insurance Group have been included in the accompanying Consolidated Financial Statements from that date forward. After the acquisition, we market our products primarily in the Midwest, West, East Coast and South. In addition, the acquisition allowed us to diversify our exposure to weather and other catastrophe risks across our geographic markets.
This transaction was accounted for under the acquisition method in accordance with Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 805 Business Combinations, using Mercer Insurance Group’s historical financial information and applying fair value estimates to the acquired assets, liabilities and commitments as of the acquisition date.
Employees
As of December 31, 2013, we employed 930 full-time employees and 13 part-time employees. We are not a party to any collective bargaining agreement.
Reportable Segments
We report our operations in two business segments: property and casualty insurance and life insurance. Our property and casualty insurance segment is comprised of commercial lines insurance, including surety bonds, personal lines insurance and assumed reinsurance. Our life insurance segment is comprised of deferred and immediate fixed annuities, universal life insurance products and traditional life insurance products. A table reflecting revenues, net income and assets attributable to our operating segments is included in Part II, Item 8, Note 10 “Segment Information.” All intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
All of our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries and our affiliate belong to an intercompany reinsurance pooling arrangement, with the exception of Texas General Indemnity Company. Pooling arrangements permit the participating companies to rely on the capacity of the entire pool’s capital and surplus, rather than being limited to policy exposures of a size commensurate with each participant’s own surplus level. Under such arrangements, the members share substantially all of the insurance business that is written and allocate the combined premiums, losses and expenses based on percentages defined in the arrangement.
Our life insurance segment consists solely of the operations of United Life Insurance Company.
Available Information
United Fire provides free and timely access to all Company reports filed with the SEC in the Investor Relations section of our website at www.unitedfiregroup.com. Select “Financial Information” and then “SEC Filings” to view the list of filings, which includes annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, beneficial ownership reports on Forms 3, 4 and 5 and amendments to reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a), 15(d) or 16(a) of the Exchange Act. Such reports are made available as soon as reasonably practicable after they are filed with or furnished to the SEC.
Our Code of Ethics and Business Conduct is also available at www.unitedfiregroup.com in the Investor Relations section. To view it, select “Corporate Governance” and then “Code of Ethics and Business Conduct.”
Free paper copies of any materials that we file with or furnish to the SEC can also be obtained by writing to Investor Relations, United Fire Group, Inc., 118 Second Avenue SE, Cedar Rapids, Iowa 52401.

MARKETING AND DISTRIBUTION
We market our products through our home office in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and four regional locations: Westminster, Colorado, a suburb of Denver; Webster, Texas; Pennington, New Jersey; and Rocklin, California. We are represented


3


through approximately 1,200 independent property and casualty agencies and by approximately 1,000 independent life agencies.
Property and Casualty Insurance Segment
In 2013, 2012 and 2011 the direct statutory premiums written by our property and casualty insurance operations were distributed as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
% of Total
(In Thousands)
2013
2012
2011
2013
2012
2011
Texas
$
104,775

$
88,046

$
74,845

13.9
%
12.9
%
12.9
%
Iowa
92,976

83,906

73,762

12.3

12.3

12.7

California
79,326

79,485

61,500

10.5

11.6

10.6

New Jersey
51,992

47,859

33,793

6.9

7.0

5.8

Missouri
47,787

44,736

42,202

6.3

6.6

7.3

Illinois
38,012

35,237

32,241

5.0

5.2

5.6

Louisiana
36,352

38,508

36,685

4.8

5.6

6.3

Colorado
36,014

31,790

29,250

4.8

4.7

5.0

All Other States
267,360

232,823

196,610

35.5

34.1

33.8

Direct Statutory Premiums Written
$
754,594

$
682,390

$
580,888

100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%

We staff our regional offices with underwriting, claims and marketing representatives and administrative technicians, all of whom provide support and assistance to the independent agencies. Also, home office staff technicians and specialists provide support to our subsidiaries, regional offices and independent agencies. We use management reports to monitor subsidiary and regional offices for overall results and conformity to our business policies.
Competition
The property and casualty insurance industry is highly competitive. We compete with numerous property and casualty insurance companies in the regional and national market, many of which are substantially larger and have considerably greater financial and other resources. Except for regulatory considerations, there are limited barriers to entry into the insurance industry. Our competitors may be domestic or foreign, as well as licensed or unlicensed. The exact number of competitors within the industry is not known. Insurers compete on the basis of reliability, financial strength and stability, ratings, underwriting consistency, service, business ethics, price, performance, capacity, policy terms and coverage conditions.
In addition, because our products are marketed exclusively through independent insurance agencies, most of which represent more than one company, we face competition within each agency and competition to retain qualified independent agents. Our competitors include companies that market their products through agents, as well as companies that sell insurance directly to their customers.
Because we rely solely on independent agencies, we offer a competitive commissions program and a rewarding profit-sharing plan as incentives for agents to place high-quality property and casualty insurance business with us. We estimate property and casualty insurance agencies will receive profit-sharing payments of $19.2 million in 2014, based on profitable business produced by the agencies in 2013. In 2013 for 2012 business, agencies received $16.9 million in profit-sharing payments and in 2012 for 2011 business, agencies received $9.7 million in payments.





4


Our competitive advantages include our commitment to:
Strong agency relationships —
A stable workforce, with an average tenure of approximately 11.6 years, allows our agents to work with the same, highly-experienced personnel each day.
Our organization is relatively flat, allowing our agents to be close to the highest levels of management and ensuring that our agents will receive answers quickly to their questions.
Exceptional service — our agents and policyholders always have the option to speak with a real person.
Fair and prompt claims handling — we view claims as an opportunity to prove to our customers that they have chosen the right insurance company.
Disciplined underwriting — we empower our underwriters with the knowledge and tools needed to make good decisions for the Company.
Superior loss control services — our loss control representatives make multiple visits to businesses and job sites each year to ensure safety.
Effective and efficient use of technology — we use technology to provide enhanced service to our agents and policyholders, not to replace our personal relationships, but to reinforce them.
Life Insurance Segment

Our life insurance subsidiary markets its products primarily in the Midwest, East Coast and West. In 2013, 2012 and 2011 the direct statutory premiums written by our life insurance operations were distributed as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
% of Total
(In Thousands)
2013
2012
2011
2013
2012
2011
Iowa
$
64,906

$
60,761

$
51,132

38.8
%
38.8
%
29.7
%
Illinois
19,375

16,312

17,643

11.6

10.4

10.2

Minnesota
16,074

16,987

20,409

9.6

10.8

11.9

Wisconsin
13,939

14,505

16,507

8.3

9.3

9.6

Nebraska
11,080

9,192

16,553

6.6

5.9

9.6

All Other States
41,923

38,800

49,915

25.1

24.8

29.0

Direct Statutory Premiums Written
$
167,297

$
156,557

$
172,159

100.0
%
100.0
%
100.0
%

Competition
We also encounter significant competition in all lines of our life and fixed annuity business from other life insurance companies and other providers of financial services. Since our products are marketed exclusively through independent life insurance agencies that typically represent more than one company, we face competition within our agencies. Competitors include companies that market their products through agents, as well as companies that sell directly to their customers. The exact number of competitors within the industry is not known.
To attract and maintain relationships with our independent life insurance agencies, we offer competitive commission rates and other sales incentives. Our life insurance segment achieves a competitive advantage by offering products that are simple and straightforward, by providing outstanding customer service, by being accessible to our agents and customers, and by using technology in a variety of ways to assist our agents and improve the delivery of service to our policyholders.



5


OPERATING SEGMENTS
Information specific to the reportable business segments in our operations, including products, pricing and seasonality of premiums written is incorporated by reference from Note 10 “Segment Information” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” Additionally, for a detailed discussion of our operating results by segment, refer to the “Results of Operations” section in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
REINSURANCE
Incorporated by reference from Note 4 “Reinsurance” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
RESERVES
Property and Casualty Insurance Segment
Property insurance indemnifies an insured with an interest in physical property for loss of, or damage to, such property or the loss of its income-producing abilities. Casualty insurance primarily covers liability for damage to property of, or injury to, a person or entity other than the insured. In most cases, casualty insurance also obligates the insurance company to provide a defense for the insured in litigation, arising out of events covered by the policy.

Liabilities for loss and loss settlement expenses reflect management’s best estimates at a given point in time of what we expect to pay for claims that have been reported and those that have been incurred but not reported (“IBNR”), based on known facts, circumstances, and historical trends.

The determination of reserves (particularly those relating to liability lines of insurance that have relatively longer delays for claim reporting) requires significant work to reasonably project expected future claim reporting and payment patterns. If, during the course of our regular monitoring of reserves, we determine that coverages previously written are incurring higher than expected losses, we will take action that may include, among other things, increasing the related reserves. Any adjustments we make to reserves are reflected in operating results in the year in which we make those adjustments. We engage an independent actuary, Regnier Consulting Group, Inc. (“Regnier”), to render an opinion as to the adequacy of our statutory reserves annually. The actuarial opinion is filed in those states where we are licensed.

On a quarterly basis, United Fire’s internal actuary performs a detailed actuarial review of IBNR reserves. This review includes a comparison of results from the most recent analysis of reserves completed by both our internal and external actuaries. Senior management meets with our internal actuary to review, on a quarterly basis, the adequacy of carried reserves based on results from these actuarial analyses. There are two fundamental types or sources of IBNR reserves. We record IBNR reserves for “normal” types of claims and also specific IBNR reserves related to unique circumstances or events. A major hurricane is an example of an event that might necessitate the recognition of specific IBNR reserves because an analysis of existing historical data would not provide an appropriate estimate.

We do not discount loss reserves based on the time value of money. There are no material differences between our reserves established under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) and our statutory reserves.

The following table illustrates the change in our estimate of loss reserves for our property and casualty insurance companies for the years 2003 through 2013. The first section shows the amount of the liability, as originally reported, at the end of each calendar year in our Consolidated Financial Statements. These reserves represent the estimated amount of losses and loss settlement expenses for losses arising in that year and all prior years that are unpaid at the end of each year, including an estimate for our IBNR losses, net of applicable ceded reinsurance. The second section displays the cumulative amount of net losses and loss settlement expenses paid for each year with respect to that liability. The third section shows the re-estimated amount of the previously recorded liability based on experience as of the end of each succeeding year. The estimate is increased or decreased as more information becomes known about the losses for individual years. The last section compares the latest re-estimated amount with


6


the original estimate. Conditions and trends that have affected development of loss reserves in the past may not necessarily exist in the future. Accordingly, it would not be appropriate to project future redundancies or deficiencies based on this table.
(In Thousands)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011 (1)
2012
2013
Gross liability for loss and loss
settlement expenses
$
427,049

$
464,889

$
620,100

$
518,886

$
496,083

$
586,109

$
606,045

$
603,090

$
945,051

$
971,911

$
960,651

Ceded loss and loss settlement
expenses
27,309

28,609

60,137

40,560

38,800

52,508

33,754

39,000

120,359

103,870

75,150

Net liability for loss and loss
settlement expenses
$
399,740

$
436,280

$
559,963

$
478,326

$
457,283

$
533,601

$
572,291

$
564,090

$
824,692

$
868,041

$
885,501

Cumulative net paid as of:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  One year later
$
100,895

$
110,016

$
230,455

$
148,593

$
140,149

$
195,524

$
165,046

$
146,653

$
194,156

$
216,026

 
  Two years later
167,384

166,592

321,110

235,975

265,361

304,622

260,872

230,800

317,623

 
 
  Three years later
203,861

213,144

380,294

332,768

345,092

373,765

312,451

283,837

 
 
 
  Four years later
231,278

242,579

456,919

390,763

392,676

406,773

347,682

 
 
 
 
  Five years later
250,787

264,015

502,455

422,669

416,656

429,477

 
 
 
 
 
  Six years later
263,631

276,214

527,136

441,202

434,437

 
 
 
 
 
 
  Seven years later
272,826

282,654

540,740

456,089

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Eight years later
277,645

287,825

553,035

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Nine years later
281,930

294,034

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Ten years later
287,233

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net liability re-estimated as of:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  End of year
$
399,740

$
436,280

$
559,963

$
478,326

$
457,283

$
533,601

$
572,291

$
564,090

$
824,692

$
868,041

$
885,501

  One year later
361,153

358,796

534,998

433,125

457,831

559,816

526,413

502,995

751,265

810,554

 
  Two years later
331,693

330,137

508,774

453,474

502,177

547,824

497,136

457,532

749,491

 
 
  Three years later
317,187

319,335

538,451

497,629

503,992

537,912

461,677

431,213

 
 
 
  Four years later
309,146

326,340

574,484

500,071

503,720

514,763

446,825

 
 
 
 
  Five years later
316,227

327,626

582,343

507,507

494,027

503,175

 
 
 
 
 
  Six years later
314,522

327,741

592,772

503,510

487,514

 
 
 
 
 
 
  Seven years later
316,705

322,875

589,661

498,735

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Eight years later
311,385

320,893

586,083

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Nine years later
309,465

317,822

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Ten years later
307,592

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net redundancy (deficiency)
$
92,148

$
118,458

$
(26,120
)
$
(20,409
)
$
(30,231
)
$
30,426

$
125,466

$
132,877

$
75,201

$
57,487

 
Net re-estimated liability
307,592

317,822

586,083

498,735

487,514

503,175

446,825

431,213

749,491

810,554

 
Re-estimated ceded loss and loss
settlement expenses
$
37,788

$
39,499

$
99,239

$
66,468

$
60,917

$
70,006

$
55,129

$
56,548

$
93,205

$
91,050

 
Gross re-estimated liability
$
345,380

$
357,321

$
685,322

$
565,203

$
548,431

$
573,181

$
501,954

$
487,761

$
842,696

$
901,604

 
Gross redundancy (deficiency)
$
81,669

$
107,568

$
(65,222
)
$
(46,317
)
$
(52,348
)
$
12,928

$
104,091

$
115,329

$
102,355

$
70,307

 
(1) Amounts shown in the 2011 column of the table include both 2011 and prior to 2011 accident year development for Mercer Insurance Group, which was acquired on March 28, 2011 and accounted for in accordance with ASC 805 Business Combinations.
For a more detailed discussion of our loss reserves, refer to the “Critical Accounting Policies” section in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Note 5 “Reserves for Loss and Loss Settlement Expenses” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
Life Insurance Segment
We calculate the policy reserves reported in our Consolidated Financial Statements in accordance with GAAP. For our fixed annuities and universal life policies, we establish a benefit reserve at the time of policy issuance in an amount equal to the deposits received. Subsequently, we adjust the benefit reserve for any additional deposits, interest credited and partial or complete withdrawals, as well as insurance and other expense charges. We base policy reserves for other life products on the projected contractual benefits and expenses and interest rates


7


appropriate to those products. We base reserves for accident and health products, which are a minor portion of our reserves, on appropriate morbidity tables.

We determine reserves for statutory purposes based upon mortality rates and interest rates specified by Iowa state law. Our life insurance subsidiary’s reserves meet or exceed the minimum statutory requirements. Griffith, Ballard & Company, an independent actuary, assists us in developing and analyzing our reserves on both a GAAP and statutory basis.
For further discussion of our life insurance segment’s reserves, refer to the “Critical Accounting Policies” section in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
INVESTMENTS
Incorporated by reference from Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” under the headings “Investments” and “Critical Accounting Policies”; Part II, Item 7A, “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk”; and Note 1 “Significant Accounting Policies” under the headings “Investments,” Note 2 “Summary of Investments,” and Note 3 “Fair Value of Financial Instruments,” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”
REGULATION
The insurance industry is subject to comprehensive and detailed regulation and supervision. Each jurisdiction in which we operate has established supervisory agencies with broad administrative powers. While we are not aware of any currently proposed or recently enacted state or federal regulation that would have a material impact on our operations, we cannot predict the effect that future regulatory changes might have on us.
State Regulation
We are subject to extensive regulation, primarily at the state level. The method, extent and substance of such regulation varies by state, but generally has its source in statutes that establish standards and requirements for conducting the business of insurance and that delegate regulatory authority to a state regulatory agency. In general, such regulation is intended for the protection of those who purchase or use our insurance products, and not our shareholders. These rules have a substantial effect on our business and relate to a wide variety of matters including: insurance company licensing and examination and the licensing of agents and adjusters; price setting or premium rates; trade practices; approval of policy forms; claims practices; restrictions on transactions between our subsidiaries and their affiliates, including payment of dividends; investments; underwriting standards; advertising and marketing practices; and the collection, remittance and reporting of certain taxes, licenses and fees.
The state laws and regulations that have the most significant effect on our insurance operations and financial reporting are discussed below.
Insurance Holding Company Regulation
We are regulated as an insurance holding company system in the states of domicile of our property and casualty insurance companies and life insurance subsidiary: Iowa (United Fire & Casualty Company, United Life Insurance Company, and Addison Insurance Company), California (Financial Pacific Insurance Company), Colorado (Texas General Indemnity Company), Louisiana (Lafayette Insurance Company), New Jersey (Mercer Insurance Company of New Jersey, Inc.), Pennsylvania (Mercer Insurance Company and Franklin Insurance Company), and Texas (United Fire & Indemnity Company and United Fire Lloyds). These regulations require that we annually furnish financial and other information about the operations of the individual companies within our holding company system. Generally, the insurance codes of these states provide that notice to the state insurance commissioner is required before finalizing any transaction affecting the ownership or control of an insurer and before finalizing certain material transactions between an insurer and any person or entity within its holding company system. In addition, some of those transactions cannot be finalized without the commissioner’s prior approval.


8


In December 2010, the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”) adopted amendments to the Model Insurance Holding Company System Regulation Act and Regulation (the “Amended Model Act”) to introduce the concept of “enterprise risk” within an insurance company holding system. Enterprise risk is defined as any activity, circumstance, event or series of events involving one or more affiliates of an insurer that, if not remedied promptly, is likely to have a material adverse effect upon the financial condition or the liquidity of the insurer or its insurance holding company system as a whole. Most states have already adopted a version of the Amended Model Act. As adopted by the states in which our insurance companies are domiciled, the Amended Model Act imposes more extensive informational requirements on us, including requiring us to prepare an annual enterprise risk report that identifies the material risks within our insurance company holding system that could pose enterprise risk to our licensed insurers. Compliance with new reporting requirements under the Amended Model Act will begin for us in 2014 for the 2013 fiscal year.
Restrictions on Shareholder Dividends
As an insurance holding company with no independent operations or source of revenue, our capacity to pay dividends to our shareholders is based on the ability of our insurance company subsidiaries to pay dividends to us. The ability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends to us is regulated by the laws of their state of domicile. Under these laws, insurance companies must provide advance informational notice to the domicile state insurance regulatory authority prior to payment of any dividend or distribution to its shareholders. Prior approval from the state insurance regulatory authority must be obtained before payment of an extraordinary dividend as defined under the state’s insurance code. The amount of ordinary dividends that may be paid to us is subject to certain limitations, the amounts of which change each year. In all cases, we may pay dividends only from our earned surplus. Refer to the “Market Information” section of Part II, Item 5, “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities,” and Note 6 “Statutory Reporting, Capital Requirements and Dividends and Retained Earnings Restrictions,” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” for additional information about the dividends we paid during 2013.
Price Regulation
Nearly all states have insurance laws requiring us to file rate schedules, policy or coverage forms, and other information with the state’s regulatory authority. In certain states, rate schedules, policy forms, or both, must be approved prior to use. While insurance laws vary from state to state, their objectives are generally the same: an insurance rate cannot be excessive, inadequate or unfairly discriminatory. The speed with which we can change our rates in response to competition or in response to increasing costs depends, in part, on the willingness of state regulators to allow adequate rates for the business we write.
Investment Regulation
We are subject to various state regulations requiring investment portfolio diversification and limiting the concentration of investments we may maintain in certain asset categories. Failure to comply with these regulations leads to the treatment of nonconforming investments as nonadmitted assets for purposes of measuring statutory surplus. Further, in some instances, state regulations require us to sell certain nonconforming investments.
Exiting Geographic Markets; Canceling and Nonrenewing Policies
Most states regulate our ability to exit a market. For example, states limit, to varying degrees, our ability to cancel and nonrenew insurance policies. Some states prohibit us from withdrawing one or more types of insurance business from the state, except upon prior regulatory approval. Regulations that limit policy cancellation and nonrenewal may restrict our ability to exit unprofitable markets.
Insurance Guaranty Associations
Each state has insurance guaranty association laws. Membership in a state’s insurance guaranty association is generally mandatory for insurers wishing to do business in that state. Under these laws, associations may assess their members for certain obligations that insolvent insurance companies have to their policyholders and claimants.


9


Typically, states assess each solvent association member with an amount related to that member’s proportionate share of business written by all association members within the state. Most state guaranty associations allow solvent insurers to recoup the assessments they are charged through future rate increases, surcharges or premium tax credits. However, there is no assurance that we will ultimately recover these assessments. We cannot predict the amount and timing of any future assessments or refunds under these laws.
Shared Market and Joint Underwriting Plans
State insurance regulations often require insurers to participate in assigned risk plans, reinsurance facilities and joint underwriting associations. These are mechanisms that generally provide applicants with various types of basic insurance coverage that may not otherwise be available to them through voluntary markets. Such mechanisms are most commonly instituted for automobile and workers’ compensation insurance, but many states also mandate participation in Fair Access to Insurance Requirements (“FAIR”) Plans or Windstorm Plans, which provide basic property coverage. Participation is based upon the amount of a company’s voluntary market share in a particular state for the classes of insurance involved. Policies written through these mechanisms may require different underwriting standards and may pose greater risk than those written through our voluntary application process.
Statutory Accounting Rules
For public reporting, insurance companies prepare financial statements in accordance with GAAP. However, state laws require us to calculate and report certain data according to statutory accounting rules as defined in the NAIC Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual. While not a substitute for any GAAP measure of performance, statutory data frequently is used by industry analysts and other recognized reporting sources to facilitate comparisons of the performance of insurance companies.
Insurance Reserves
State insurance laws require that insurance companies analyze the adequacy of their reserves annually. Our appointed actuaries must submit an opinion that our statutory reserves are adequate to meet policy claims-paying obligations and related expenses.
Financial Solvency Ratios
The NAIC annually calculates 13 financial ratios to assist state insurance regulators in monitoring the financial condition of insurance companies. A “usual range” of results for each of these ratios is used by insurance regulators as a benchmark. Departure from the usual range on four or more of the ratios could lead to inquiries from individual state insurance departments as to certain aspects of a company’s business. In addition to the financial ratios, states also require us to calculate a minimum capital requirement for each of our insurance companies based on individual company insurance risk factors. These “risk-based capital” results are used by state insurance regulators to identify companies that require regulatory attention or the initiation of regulatory action. At December 31, 2013, all of our insurance companies had capital well in excess of the required levels.
Federal Regulation
Although the federal government and its regulatory agencies generally do not directly regulate the business of insurance, federal initiatives and legislation often have an impact on our business. These initiatives and legislation include tort reform proposals, proposals addressing natural catastrophe exposures, terrorism risk mechanisms, federal financial services reforms, various tax proposals affecting insurance companies, and possible regulatory limitations, impositions and restrictions arising from the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), and the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act.
Various legislative and regulatory efforts to reform the tort liability system have, and will continue to, impact our industry. Although there has been some tort reform with positive impact to the insurance industry, new causes of action and theories of damages continue to be proposed in state court actions or by federal or state legislatures that continue to expand liability for insurers and their policyholders. For example, some state legislatures have from time to time considered legislation addressing direct actions against insurers related to bad faith claims. As a result of this


10


unpredictability in the law, insurance underwriting is expected to continue to be difficult in commercial lines, professional liability and other specialty coverages.
Dodd-Frank expanded the federal presence in insurance oversight and may increase regulatory requirements that are applicable to us. Dodd-Frank’s requirements include streamlining the state-based regulation of reinsurance and non-admitted insurance (property or casualty insurance placed from insurers that are eligible to accept insurance, but are not licensed to write insurance in a particular state). Dodd-Frank also established a new Federal Insurance Office within the U.S. Department of the Treasury that is authorized to, among other things, gather data and information to monitor aspects of the insurance industry, identify issues in the regulation of insurers about insurance matters, and preempt state insurance measures under certain circumstances.
Dodd-Frank also contains a number of provisions related to corporate governance and disclosure matters. In response to Dodd-Frank, the SEC has issued, or is expected to propose, rules regarding director independence, director and officer hedging activities, executive compensation clawback policies, compensation advisor independence, pay versus performance disclosures, internal pay equity disclosures, and shareholder proxy access. We will closely monitor future developments under Dodd-Frank for their impact on us, insurers of similar size and the insurance industry as a whole.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the related amendments in the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act may increase our operating costs and underwriting losses. This landmark legislation may lead to numerous changes in the health care industry that could create additional operating costs for us, particularly with respect to our workers’ compensation products.
FINANCIAL STRENGTH AND ISSUER CREDIT RATING
Our financial strength, as measured by statutory accounting principles, is regularly reviewed by an independent rating agency that assigns a rating based upon criteria such as results of operations, capital resources and minimum policyholders’ surplus requirements. An insurer’s financial strength rating is one of the primary factors evaluated by those in the market to purchase insurance. A poor rating indicates that there is an increased likelihood that the insurer could become insolvent and therefore not able to fulfill its obligations under the insurance policies it issues. This rating can also affect an insurer’s level of premium writings, the lines of business it can write and, for insurers like us that are also public registrants, the market value of its securities.
Except for one non-pooled insurance subsidiary that is in run-off status, our property and casualty insurers are rated by A.M. Best Company (“A.M. Best”) on a group basis. Our pooled property and casualty insurers have all received an “A” (Excellent) rating from A.M. Best. A.M. Best has designated our non-pooled insurance subsidiary in run-off as NR-3 (Rating Procedure Inapplicable). Our life insurance subsidiary has received an “A-” (Excellent) rating from A.M. Best. According to A.M. Best, companies rated “A” and “A-” have “an excellent ability to meet their ongoing obligations to policyholders.”
A.M. Best also assigns issuer credit ratings based on a company’s ability to repay its debts. All of our property and casualty insurers have received an issuer credit rating of “a” from A.M. Best, except for our non-pooled subsidiary which is in run-off status, and therefore not rated. Our life insurance subsidiary has received an issuer credit rating of “a-” from A.M. Best. Beginning in 2012, our holding company parent was also rated by A.M. Best, receiving an issuer credit rating of “bbb.”






11


ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
We provide readers with the following discussion of risks and uncertainties relevant to our business. These are factors that we believe could cause our actual results to differ materially from our historic or anticipated results. We could also be adversely affected by other factors, in addition to those listed here. Additional information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements is set forth in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
Risks Relating to Our Business
The occurrence, frequency and severity of catastrophe losses are unpredictable and may adversely affect our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition.
Our property and casualty insurance operations expose us to claims arising from catastrophic events affecting multiple policyholders. Such catastrophic events consist of various natural disasters, including, but not limited to, hurricanes, tornadoes, windstorms, hailstorms, fires and wildfires, earthquakes, severe winter weather, tropical storms, volcanic eruptions and man-made disasters such as terrorist acts (including biological, chemical or radiological events), explosions, infrastructure failures and results from political instability. We have exposure to tropical storms and hurricanes along the Gulf Coast, Eastern and Southeastern coasts of the United States. We have exposure to tornadoes, windstorms and hail storms throughout the United States. We have exposure to earthquakes along the West Coast and the New Madrid Fault area. Our automobile and inland marine business also exposes us to losses arising from floods and other perils.
Property damage resulting from catastrophes is the greatest risk of loss we face in the ordinary course of our business. We have exposure to catastrophe losses under both our commercial insurance policies and our personal insurance policies. The losses from such a catastrophic event are a function of both the extent of our exposure, the frequency and severity of the events themselves and the level of reinsurance assumed and ceded. For example, the losses experienced from a tornado will vary on whether the location of the tornado was in a highly populated or unpopulated area, the concentration of insureds in that area and the severity of the tornado. Increases in the value and geographic concentration of insured property and the effects of inflation could increase the severity of claims from a catastrophic event.
Long-term weather trends may be changing and new types of catastrophe losses may be developing due to climate change; a phenomenon that has been associated with extreme weather events linked to rising temperatures, including effects on global weather patterns, greenhouse gases, sea, land and air temperature, sea levels, rain and snow. While the emerging science regarding climate change and its connection to extreme weather events is far from conclusive, in recent years there has been an increase in frequency and severity of tornadoes and hailstorms, and hurricanes are now impacting areas further inland than experienced in the recent past. Such changes in climate conditions could cause our underlying modeling data to be less accurate, limiting our ability to evaluate and manage our risk.
In addition, as with catastrophe losses generally, it can take a long time for us to determine our ultimate losses associated with a particular catastrophic event. Additionally the inability to access portions of the impacted area, the complexity of the losses, legal and regulatory uncertainty and the nature of the information available for certain catastrophic events may affect our ability to estimate the claims and claim adjustment expense reserves. Such complex factors include, but are not limited to: determining the cause of the damage, evaluating general liability exposures, estimating additional living expenses, the impact of demand surge, infrastructure disruption, fraud, business interruption costs and reinsurance collectability.
The timing of a catastrophic occurrence at the end or near the end of a reporting period may also affect the information available to us when estimating claims and claim adjustment expense reserves for the reporting period. As our claims experience for a particular catastrophe develops, we may be required to adjust our reserves to reflect our revised estimates of the total cost of claims. However, because the occurrence and severity of catastrophes are


12


inherently unpredictable and may vary significantly from year to year and region to region, historical results of operations may not be indicative of future results of operations.
Catastrophes may reduce our net income, cause substantial volatility in our financial results for any fiscal quarter or year or otherwise adversely affect our financial condition, liquidity or results of operations. Catastrophes may also negatively affect our ability to write new business.
Following catastrophes there are also sometimes legislative, administrative and judicial decisions that seek to expand insurance coverage for claims beyond the original intent of the policies or seek to prevent the application of deductibles. Our ability to manage catastrophic exposure may be limited by public policy considerations, the political environment, changes in the general economic climate and/or social responsibilities.
Our reserves for property and casualty insurance losses and loss settlement expenses and our life insurance reserves for future policy benefits are based on estimates and may be inadequate, adversely impacting our financial results.
We maintain insurance reserves to cover our estimated ultimate unpaid liability for claim and claim adjustment expenses, including the estimated cost of the claims adjustment process, for reported and unreported claims and for future policy benefits. Our reserves may prove to be inadequate, which may result in future charges to earnings and/or a downgrade of our financial strength rating or the financial strength ratings of our insurance company subsidiaries.
Insurance reserves represent our best estimate at a given point in time. They are not an exact calculation of liability but instead are complex estimates, which are a product of actuarial expertise and projection techniques from a number of assumptions and expectations about future events, many of which are highly uncertain.
The process of estimating claims and claims adjustment expense reserves involves a high degree of judgment. These estimates are based on historical data and the impact of various factors such as:
actuarial and statistical projections of the cost of settlement and administration of claims reflecting facts and circumstances then known;
historical claims information and loss emergence patterns;
assessments of currently available data;
estimates of future trends in claims severity and frequency;
judicial theories of liability;
economic factors such as inflation;
estimates and assumptions regarding social, judicial and legislative trends, and actions such as class action lawsuits and judicial interpretation of coverages or policy exclusions; and
the level of insurance fraud.
Many of these factors are not quantifiable. The inherent uncertainties of estimating reserves are greater for certain types of liabilities, particularly those in which the various considerations affecting the type of claim are subject to change and in which long periods of time may elapse before a definitive determination of liability is made. Reserve estimates are continually refined in a regular and ongoing process as experience develops and further claims are reported and settled.
Along with other insurers, we use models in assessing our exposure to catastrophe losses that assume various conditions and probability scenarios; however, these models do not necessarily accurately predict future losses or accurately measure losses currently incurred. Models for catastrophes use historical information about various catastrophes and details about our in-force business. While we use this information in our pricing and risk managements, there are limitations with respect to their usefulness in predicting losses in any reporting period. Such limitations lead to questionable predictive capability and post-event measurements that have not been well understood or proven to be sufficiently reliable. In addition, the models are not necessarily reflective of our state-


13


specific policy language, demand surge for labor and materials or loss settlement expenses, all of which are subject to wide variation.
For our life insurance business, we calculate life insurance product reserves based on our assumptions, including estimated premiums we will receive over the assumed life of the policy, the timing of the event covered by the insurance policy and the amount of benefits or claims to be paid. The premiums that we charge and the liabilities that we hold for future policy benefits are based on assumptions reflecting a number of factors, including the amount of premiums that we will receive in the future, rate of return on assets we purchase with premiums received, expected claims, mortality, morbidity, expenses and persistency, which is the measurement of the percentage of insurance policies remaining in force from year to year. However, due to the nature of the underlying risks and the high degree of uncertainty associated with the determination of the liabilities for unpaid policy benefits and claims, we cannot determine precisely the amounts we will ultimately pay to settle these liabilities. To the extent that actual experience is less favorable than our underlying assumptions, we could be required to increase our liabilities, which may harm our financial strength and reduce our profitability.
For example, if mortality rates are higher than our pricing assumptions, we will be required to make greater claims payments on our life insurance policies than we had projected. Our results of operations may also be adversely impacted by an increase in morbidity rates.
Actual losses and loss settlement expenses paid might exceed our reserves. If our loss reserves are insufficient, or if we believe our loss reserves are insufficient to cover our actual loss and loss settlement expenses, we will have to increase our loss reserves and incur charges to our earnings, which could indicate that premium levels were insufficient. As such, deviations from one or more of these assumptions could result in a material adverse impact on our Consolidated Financial Statements and our financial strength rating or the financial strength ratings of our insurance company subsidiaries could be downgraded.
For a detailed discussion of our reserving process and the factors we consider in estimating reserves, refer to the “Critical Accounting Policies” section in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”
Our geographic concentration in both our property and casualty insurance and life insurance segments ties our performance to the business, economic and regulatory conditions of certain states.
The following states provided 49.9 percent of the direct statutory premium written for the property and casualty insurance segment in 2013: Texas (13.9 percent), Iowa (12.3 percent), California (10.5 percent), New Jersey (6.9 percent) and Missouri (6.3 percent). The following states provided 74.9 percent of the direct statutory premium written for the life insurance segment in 2013: Iowa (38.8 percent), Illinois (11.6 percent), Minnesota (9.6 percent), Wisconsin (8.3 percent), and Nebraska (6.6 percent).
Our revenues and profitability are subject to the prevailing regulatory, legal, economic, political, demographic, competitive, weather and other conditions in the principal states in which we do business. With respect to regulatory conditions, the NAIC and state legislators continually reexamine existing laws and regulations, specifically focusing on modifications to holding company regulations, interpretations of existing laws and the development of new laws and regulations. In a time of financial uncertainty or a prolonged economic downturn, regulators may choose to adopt more restrictive insurance laws and regulations. Changes in regulatory or any other of these conditions could make it less attractive for us to do business in such states and would have a more pronounced effect on us compared to companies that are more geographically diversified. In addition, our exposure to severe losses from localized natural perils, such as hurricanes or hailstorms, is increased in those areas where we have written a significant amount of property insurance policies.




14


Unauthorized data access, cyber-attacks and other security breaches could have an adverse impact on our business and reputation.
We rely on computer systems to conduct our business for our customer service, marketing and sales activities, customer relationship management and producing financial statements. Our business and operations rely on secure and efficient processing, storage and transmission of customer and Company data, including personally identifiable information. Our ability to effectively operate our business depends upon our ability, and the ability of certain third party vendors and business partners, to access our computer systems to perform necessary business functions, such as providing quotes and product pricing, billing and processing premiums, administering claims, and reporting our financial results.
We retain confidential information on our computer systems, including customer information and proprietary business information belonging to us and our policyholders. Our business and operations depend upon our ability to safeguard this personally identifiable information. Our systems may be vulnerable to unauthorized access and hackers, computer viruses, and other scenarios in which our data may be compromised.
Cyber-security risks in particular include malicious software, unauthorized access to data and other electronic security breaches of our facilities, networks or databases, or those of our vendors. Any compromise of the security of our data could expose us to liability and harm our reputation, which could affect our business and results of operations. We continually enhance our operating procedures and internal controls to effectively support our business and comply with our regulatory and financial reporting requirements, but there can be no assurances that we will be able to implement security measures adequate to prevent every security breach.
Conditions in the global capital markets and the economy generally may weaken materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Our results of operations, financial position and liquidity are materially affected by conditions in the global capital markets and the economy generally, both in the U.S. and elsewhere around the world. Recently, concerns over the depth and breadth of the economic recovery, overall level of U.S. national debt, extraordinary monetary accommodation by central banks, energy costs and geopolitical issues have contributed to increased uncertainty. These factors, combined with a lack of fiscal policy leadership, reduced business and consumer confidence and continued high unemployment, have negatively impacted the U.S. economy. Although conditions have gradually improved since the financial crisis of 2008-2009, a meaningful deterioration in economic activity and/or capital market liquidity could have an adverse impact on our results of operations.
Factors such as consumer spending, business investment, government spending, the volatility and strength of the capital markets, investor and consumer confidence and inflation levels all affect the business and economic environment and, ultimately, the amount and profitability of our business. In an economic downturn characterized by higher unemployment, lower family income, lower corporate earnings, lower business investment, negative investor sentiment and lower consumer spending, the demand for our insurance products could be adversely affected. Our policyholders may choose to defer paying insurance premiums or stop paying insurance premiums altogether. In addition, we may experience an elevated incidence of claims and lapses or surrenders of policies causing a change in our exposure.
We are subject to certain risks related to our investment portfolio that could negatively affect our profitability.
Investment income is an important component of our net income and overall profitability. We invest premiums received from policyholders and other available cash to generate investment income and capital appreciation, while also maintaining sufficient liquidity to pay covered claims, operating expenses and dividends. As discussed in detail below, general economic conditions, changes in financial markets and many other factors beyond our control can adversely affect the value of our investments and the realization of investment income.
We primarily manage our investment portfolio internally under required statutory guidelines and investment guidelines approved by our board of directors and the boards of directors of our subsidiaries. Although these guidelines stress diversification and capital preservation, our investments are subject to a variety of risks, including:


15



Credit Risk - The value of our investment in marketable securities is subject to impairment as a result of deterioration in the creditworthiness of the issuer. Such impairments could reduce our net investment income and result in realized investment losses. The vast majority of our investments (97.5 percent at December 31, 2013) are made in investment-grade securities. Although we try to manage this risk by diversifying our portfolio and emphasizing credit quality, our investments are subject to losses as a result of a general downturn in the economy.
Interest Rate Risk - A significant portion of our investment portfolio (90.6 percent at December 31, 2013) consists of fixed income securities, primarily corporate and municipal bonds (63.1 percent at December 31, 2013). These securities are sensitive to changes in interest rates. An increase in interest rates typically reduces the fair market value of fixed income securities, while a decline in interest rates reduces the investment income earned from future investments in fixed income securities. In recent periods, interest rates have been at or near historic lows. It is possible that this trend may continue for a prolonged period of time. We generally hold our fixed income securities to maturity, so our interest rate exposure does not usually result in realized losses. However, rising interest rates could result in a significant reduction of our book value. Low interest rates, and low investable yields, could adversely impact our net earnings as reinvested funds produce lower investment income.
Fluctuations in interest rates may cause increased surrenders and withdrawals from our life insurance and annuity products. In periods of rising interest rates, or if long-term interest rates rise dramatically within a very short time period, certain segments of our life insurance and annuities businesses may be exposed to disintermediation risk, which refers to the risk that surrenders and withdrawals of life insurance policies and annuity contracts, along with policy loans, may increase as policyholders seek to buy products with perceived higher rates of return. This may require us to liquidate assets in an unrealized loss position. Due to the long-term nature of the liabilities associated with certain segments of our life insurance business, sustained declines in long-term interest rates may subject us to reinvestment risks and increased hedging costs. In other situations, a sudden change in interest rates may result in an unexpected change in the duration of certain life insurance liabilities, creating asset and liability duration mismatches.
Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors beyond our control including general economic conditions, changes in governmental regulations and monetary policy, and national and international political conditions.

Liquidity Risk - We seek to match the maturities of our investment portfolio with the estimated payment date of our loss and loss adjustment expense reserves to ensure strong liquidity and avoid having to liquidate securities to fund claims. Risk such as inadequate loss and loss adjustment reserves or unfavorable trends in litigation could potentially result in the need to sell investments to fund these liabilities. This could result in significant realized losses depending on the conditions of the general market, interest rates and credit profile of individual securities.
Further, our investment portfolio is subject to increased valuation uncertainties when investment markets are illiquid. The valuation of investments is more subjective when markets are illiquid, thereby increasing the risk that the estimated fair value (i.e., the carrying amount) of the portion of the investment portfolio that is carried at fair value as reflected in our financial statements is not reflective of prices at which actual transactions could occur.

Market Risk - Our investments are subject to risks inherent in the global financial system and capital markets. The value and risks of our investments may be adversely affected if the functioning of those markets is disrupted or otherwise affected by local, national or international events, such as: changes in regulation or tax policy; changes in legislation relating to bankruptcy or other proceedings; infrastructure failures; wars or terrorist attacks; the overall health of global economies; a significant change in inflation expectations; a significant devaluation of government or private sector credit and/or currency values; and


16


other factors or events not specifically attributable to changes in interest rates, credit losses, and liquidity needs.

Credit Spread Risk - Our exposure to credit spreads primarily relates to market price variability and reinvestment risk associated with changes in credit spreads. Valuations may include assumptions or estimates that may have significant period-to-period changes from market volatility, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
Our fixed maturity investment portfolio is invested substantially in state, municipal and political subdivision bonds. Our fixed maturity investment portfolio could be subject to default or impairment, in particular:

Due to the impact of the financial crisis that occurred in 2008 and 2009, many states and local governments have been operating under deficits or projected deficits which may have an impact on the valuation of our municipal bond portfolio.

There is a risk of widespread defaults which may increase if some issuers chose to voluntarily default instead of implementing fiscal measures such as increasing tax rates or reducing spending. Such risk may also increase if there are changes in legislation permitting states, municipalities and political subdivisions to file for bankruptcy protection where they were not permitted to before. Judicial interpretations in such bankruptcy proceedings may also adversely affect the collectability of principal and interest, and/or valuation of our bonds. Changes in tax laws impacting marginal tax rates, exemptions, deductions, credits and/or the preferred tax treatment of municipal obligations could also adversely affect the market value of municipal obligations. Since a large portion of our investment portfolio (23.0 percent at December 31, 2013) is invested in tax-exempt municipal obligations, any such changes in tax law could adversely affect the value of our investment portfolio.
We exercise prudence and significant judgment in analyzing and validating fair values, which are primarily provided by third parties, for securities in our investment portfolio, including those that are not regularly traded in active markets. We also exercise prudence and significant judgment in determining whether the impairment of particular investments is temporary or other-than-temporary. Due to the inherent uncertainties involved in these judgments, we may incur unrealized losses and subsequently conclude that other-than-temporary write downs of our investments are required.
Our success depends primarily on our ability to underwrite risks effectively and adequately price the risks we underwrite.
The results of our operations and our financial condition depend on our ability to underwrite and set premium rates accurately for a wide variety of risks. Adequate rates are necessary to generate premiums sufficient to pay losses, loss settlement expenses and underwriting expenses and to earn a profit. To price our products accurately, we must collect and properly analyze a substantial amount of data; develop, test and apply appropriate pricing techniques; closely monitor and timely recognize changes in trends; and project both severity and frequency of losses with reasonable accuracy. We could underprice risks which would adversely affect our profit margins. Conversely, we could overprice risks which could reduce our sales volume and competitiveness. Our ability to undertake these efforts successfully, and to price our products accurately, is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including but not limited to:

the availability of sufficient reliable data and our ability to properly analyze available data;

market and competitive conditions;

changes in medical care expenses and restoration costs;

our selection and application of appropriate pricing techniques; and



17


changes in the regulatory market, applicable legal liability standards and in the civil litigation system generally.
The cyclical nature of the property and casualty insurance industry may affect our financial performance.
The property and casualty insurance industry is cyclical in nature and has historically been characterized by soft markets (periods of relatively high levels of price competition, less restrictive underwriting standards and generally low premium rates) followed by hard markets (periods of capital shortages resulting in a lack of insurance availability, relatively low levels of price competition, more selective underwriting of risks and relatively high premium rates). During soft markets, we may lose business to competitors offering competitive insurance at lower prices. We may reduce our premiums or limit premium increases leading to a reduction in our profit margins and revenues. We expect these cycles to continue.
The demand for property and casualty insurance can also vary significantly, rising as the overall level of economic activity increases and falling as that activity decreases. Fluctuations in demand and competition could produce underwriting results that would have a negative impact on the results of our operations and financial condition.
The effects of emerging claim and coverage issues and class action litigation on our business are uncertain.
We are subject to certain effects of emerging or potential claims and coverage issues that arise as industry practices and legal, judicial, social, economic and other environmental conditions change, unexpected and unintended issues related to claims and coverage may emerge. These issues may adversely affect our business by either extending coverage beyond our underwriting intent or by increasing the number and/or size of claims, resulting in further increases in our reserves. The effects of these and other unforeseen emerging claim and coverage issues are extremely hard to predict. Examples of these issues include:
judicial expansion of policy coverage and the impact of new theories of liability;

an increase of plaintiffs targeting property and casualty insurers, including us, in purported class action litigation regarding claims handling and other practices;

medical developments that link health issues to particular causes, resulting in liability or workers’ compensation (for example, cumulative trauma);

claims relating to unanticipated consequences of current or new technologies;

an increase in the variety, number and size of claims relating to liability losses, which often present complex coverage and damage valuation questions;

claims relating to potentially changing climate conditions, including higher frequency and severity of weather-related events; and

adverse changes in loss cost trends, including inflationary pressure in medical cost and auto and home repair costs.


18


A downgrade or a potential downgrade in our financial strength or issuer credit ratings could result in a loss of business and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Ratings are an important factor in establishing the competitive position of insurance companies. Third-party rating agencies assess and rate the claims-paying ability and creditworthiness of insurers and reinsurers based on criteria established by the agencies. A.M. Best rates our property and casualty insurance companies on a group basis. Our life insurance subsidiary receives a separate rating. Since 2012, A.M. Best has also given an issuer credit rating to our parent holding company. The table below shows the current ratings assigned to our companies by A.M. Best.
 
Financial Strength Rating
Issuer Credit Rating
Rating Held Since
Property and Casualty Insurers*
A
a
1994
Life Insurer
A-
a-
1998
United Fire Group, Inc.
N/A
bbb
2012
* Except for one insurance subsidiary that is in run-off and designated NR-3 (Rating Procedure Inapplicable) by A.M. Best.
Financial strength and issuer credit ratings are used by policyholders, insurers, reinsurers and insurance and reinsurance intermediaries as an important means of assessing the financial strength, creditworthiness and quality of insurers and reinsurers. These ratings are not evaluations directed to potential purchasers of our common stock and are not recommendations to buy, sell or hold our common stock. These ratings are subject to change at any time and could be revised downward or revoked at the sole discretion of the rating agency. Downgrades in our financial strength ratings could adversely affect our ability to access the capital markets or could lead to increased borrowing costs in the future. Perceptions of the Company by investors, producers, other businesses and consumers could also be significantly impaired.
We believe that the ratings assigned by A.M. Best are an important factor in marketing our products. Our ability to retain our existing business and to attract new business in our insurance operations depends on our ratings by this agency. Our failure to maintain our ratings, or any other adverse development with respect to our ratings, could cause our current and future independent agents and policyholders to choose to transact their business with more highly rated competitors. If A.M. Best downgrades our ratings or publicly indicates that our ratings are under review, it is likely that we will not be able to compete as effectively with our competitors and our ability to sell insurance policies could decline, leading to a decrease in our premium revenue and earnings. For example, many of our agencies and policyholders have guidelines that require us to have an A.M. Best financial strength rating of “A-” or higher. A reduction of our A.M. Best ratings below “A-” would prevent us from issuing policies to a portion of our current policyholders or other potential policyholders with ratings requirements. Additionally, a ratings downgrade could materially increase the number of surrenders for all or a portion of the net cash values by the owners of policies and contracts we have issued, and materially increase the number of withdrawals by policyholders of cash values from their policies.
A reduction in our issuer credit rating could limit our ability to access capital markets or significantly increase the cost to us of raising capital. The failure of our insurance company subsidiaries to maintain their current ratings could dissuade a lender or reinsurance company from conducting business with us. A ratings downgrade could also cause some of our existing liabilities to be subject to acceleration, additional collateral support, changes in terms, or creation of additional financial obligations. It might also increase our interest or reinsurance costs.
We are exposed to credit risk in certain areas of our operations.
In addition to exposure to credit risk related to our investment portfolio, we are exposed to credit risk in several other areas of our business operations, including from:
our reinsurers, who are obligated to us under our reinsurance agreements. See the risk factor titled “Market conditions may affect our access to and the cost of reinsurance and our reinsurers may not pay losses in a timely manner, or at all,” for a discussion of the credit risk associated with our reinsurance program;



19


some of our independent agents, who collect premiums from policyholders on our behalf and are required to remit the collected premiums to us;

some of our policyholders, which may be significant; and

our surety insurance operations, where we guarantee to a third party that our bonded principal will satisfy certain performance obligations (for example, as in a construction contract) or certain financial obligations. If our policyholder defaults, we may suffer losses and be unable to be reimbursed by our policyholder.
To a large degree, the credit risk we face is a function of the economy; accordingly, we face a greater risk during periods of economic downturn. While we attempt to manage these risks through underwriting and investment guidelines, collateral requirements and other oversight mechanisms, our efforts may not be successful. For example, collateral obtained may subsequently have little or no value. As a result, our exposure to credit risk could materially and adversely affect our results of operation and financial condition.
We are subject to comprehensive laws and regulations, changes to which may have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Insurance is a highly regulated industry. We are subject to extensive supervision and regulation by the states in which we operate. As a public company, we are also subject to increased regulation at the federal level. Our ability to comply with these laws and regulations and obtain necessary and timely regulatory action is, and will continue to be, critical to our success and ability to earn profits.
Examples of regulations that pose particular risks to our ability to earn profits include the following:
Required licensing. Our insurance company subsidiaries operate under licenses issued by various state insurance departments. If a regulatory authority were to revoke an existing license or deny or delay granting a new license, our ability to continue to sell insurance or to enter or offer new insurance products in that market would be substantially impaired.

Regulation of insurance rates, fees and approval of policy forms. The insurance laws of most states in which we operate require insurance companies to file insurance premium rate schedules and policy forms for review and approval. When our loss ratio compares favorably to that of the industry, state regulatory authorities may resist or delay our efforts to raise premium rates, even if the property and casualty industry generally is not experiencing regulatory resistance to premium rate increases. If premium rate increases we deem necessary are not approved, we may not be able to respond to market developments and increased costs in that state. State regulatory authorities may even impose premium rate rollbacks or require us to pay premium refunds to policyholders, affecting our profitability. If insurance policy forms we seek to use are not approved by a state insurance departments, our ability to offer new products and grow our business in that state could be substantially impaired.

Restrictions on cancellation, nonrenewal or withdrawal. Many states have laws and regulations restricting an insurance company’s ability to cease or significantly reduce its sales of certain types of insurance in that state, except pursuant to a plan that is approved by the state insurance departments. These laws and regulations could limit our ability to exit or reduce our business in unprofitable markets or discontinue unprofitable products. For example, the State of Louisiana has a law prohibiting the nonrenewal of homeowners policies written for longer than three years except under certain circumstances, such as for nonpayment of premium or fraud committed by the insured. Additionally, our ability to adjust terms or increase pricing requires approval of regulatory authorities in certain states.

Risk-based capital and capital adequacy requirements. Our insurance company subsidiaries and affiliate, are subject to risk-based capital requirements that require us to report our results of risk-based capital calculations to state insurance departments and the NAIC. These standards apply specified risk factors to various asset, premium and reserve components of statutory capital and surplus reported in our statutory


20


basis of accounting financial statements. Any failure to meet applicable risk based capital requirements or minimum statutory capital requirements could subject us or our subsidiaries and affiliate to further examination or corrective action by state regulators, including limitations on our writing of additional business, state supervision or liquidation.

Transactions between insurance companies and their affiliates. Transactions between us, our insurance company subsidiaries and our affiliates generally must be disclosed to, and in some cases approved by, state insurance departments. State insurance departments may refuse to approve or delay their approval of a transaction, which may impact our ability to innovate or operate efficiently.

Required participation in guaranty funds and assigned risk pools. Certain states have enacted laws that require a property and casualty insurer conducting business in that state to participate in assigned risk plans, reinsurance facilities, and joint underwriting associations where participating insurers are required to provide coverage for assigned risks. The number of risks assigned to us by these plans is based on our share of total premiums written in the voluntary insurance market for that state. Pricing is controlled by the plan, often restricting our ability to charge the premium rate we might otherwise charge. Wherever possible, we utilize a designated servicing carrier to fulfill our obligations under these plans. Designated servicing carriers charge us fees to issue policies, adjust and settle claims and handle administrative reporting on our behalf. In these markets, we may be compelled to underwrite significant amounts of business at lower than desired premium rates, possibly leading to an unacceptable return on equity. While these facilities are generally designed so that the ultimate cost is borne by policyholders, the exposure to assessments and our ability to recoup these assessments through adequate premium rate increases may not offset each other in our financial statements. Moreover, even if they do offset each other, they may not offset each other in our financial statements for the same fiscal period, due to the ultimate timing of the assessments and recoupments or premium rate increases. Additionally, certain states require insurers to participate in guaranty funds to bear a portion of the unfunded obligations of impaired or insolvent insurance companies. These state funds periodically assess losses against all insurance companies doing business in the state. Our operating results and financial condition could be adversely affected by any of these factors.

Restrictions on the amount, type, nature, quality and concentration of investments. The various states in which we are domiciled have certain restrictions on the amount, type, nature, quality and concentration of our investments. Generally speaking, these regulations require us to be conservative in the nature and quality of our investments and restrict our ability to invest in riskier, but often higher yield investments. These restrictions may make it more difficult for us to obtain our desired investment results.

State and federal tax laws. Current federal income tax laws generally permit the tax-deferred accumulation of earnings on the premiums paid by the holders of annuities and life insurance products. Taxes, if any, are payable on income attributable to a distribution under the contract for the year in which the distribution is made. The U.S. Congress has, from time to time, considered legislation that would reduce or eliminate the benefit of such deferral of taxation on the accretion of value within life insurance and nonqualified annuity contracts. Enactment of this legislation, including a simplified “flat tax” income structure with an exemption from taxation for investment income, could result in fewer sales of our insurance, annuity and investment products.

In addition, changes in the federal estate tax laws could negatively affect the demand for the types of life insurance used in estate planning. In addition, we benefit from certain tax items, including but not limited to, tax-exempt bond interest, dividends-received deductions, tax credits (such as foreign tax credits) and insurance reserve deductions. From time to time, the U.S. Congress, as well as foreign, state and local governments, considers legislation that could reduce or eliminate the benefits associated with these tax items. If such legislation is adopted, our profitability could be negatively impacted. We continue to evaluate the impact that potential tax reform, which lacks sufficient detail and is relatively uncertain, may have on our future results of operations and financial condition.



21


Terrorism Risk Insurance. The Terrorism Risk Insurance Program Reauthorization Act of 2007 (“TRIPRA”) requires the federal government and the insurance industry to share in insured losses up to $100 billion per year resulting from future terrorist attacks within the U.S. For further information about TRIPRA and its effect on our operations, refer to the information in the “Results of Operations” section in Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

Accounting standards. Our Consolidated Financial Statements are subject to the application of GAAP accounting guidance, which is periodically revised and/or expanded by recognized authoritative bodies, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”). During the last several years, the SEC has been evaluating whether, when and how International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) should be incorporated into the U.S. financial reporting system. The FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) are working on a long-term project to converge GAAP and IFRS. As part of this project, the FASB and IASB have been working to create a global insurance standard related to the recording of insurance contract liabilities. The boards both proposed models in June 2013, but there were significant differences in methodology. The U.S. has had guidance in place for several decades whereas there is currently no comprehensive IFRS standard for insurance contract liabilities. The boards both received comments on their proposed models and are re-deliberating accounting for insurance contracts. There is uncertainty as to what changes will be required under GAAP as a result of this project, and we are not able to predict at this time what impact the final adopted standard will have on our consolidated financial statements. There is also uncertainty whether we will be required to adopt IFRS or how the adoption of IFRS (or the convergence of GAAP and IFRS, including the project for valuing insurance contract liabilities) may impact our consolidated financial statements in the future. Changes in accounting standards may have an impact on the content and presentation of our financial results and could have adverse consequences on our financial results, including lower reported results of operations and shareholders’ equity and increased volatility and decreased comparability of our reported results with our historic results and with the results of other insurers.

Corporate Governance and Public Disclosure Regulation. Changing laws, regulations and standards relating to corporate governance and public disclosure, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank”), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related SEC regulations, as well as the listing standards of the NASDAQ Stock Market, have created and are continuing to create uncertainty for public companies. While the federal government has not historically regulated the insurance business, in 2010 Dodd-Frank established a Federal Insurance Office within the U.S. Department of the Treasury. The Federal Insurance Office has limited regulatory authority and is empowered to gather data and information regarding the insurance industry and insurers, monitor aspects of the insurance industry, identify issues with regulation of insurers that could contribute to a systemic crisis in the insurance industry or the overall financial system, coordinate federal policy on international insurance matters and preempt state insurance measures under certain circumstances. While certain details and much of the impact of Dodd-Frank will not be known for some time, Dodd-Frank and other federal regulation adopted in the future may impose burdens on us, including impacting the ways we conduct our business, increasing compliance costs and duplicating state regulation. Additional regulation under these laws in the area of compensation disclosure, particularly regarding internal pay equity, officer and director hedging activities and compensation clawback policies is still expected.

U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File. We have received regulatory inquiries from certain state insurance regulators relating to compliance with unclaimed property laws and the use of data available on the U.S. Social Security Administration’s Death Master File (or a similar database) to identify instances where benefits under life insurance policies, annuities and retained asset accounts are payable. It is possible that other jurisdictions may pursue similar inquiries and that such inquiries may result in payments to beneficiaries, escheatment of funds deemed abandoned under state laws and changes to procedures for the identification and escheatment of abandoned property.
Compliance with these laws and regulations requires us to incur administrative costs that decrease our profits. These laws and regulations may also prevent or limit our ability to underwrite and price risks accurately, obtain timely


22


premium rate increases necessary to cover increased costs, discontinue unprofitable relationships or exit unprofitable markets and otherwise continue to operate our business profitably. In addition, our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could result in actions by state or federal regulators, including the imposition of fines and penalties or, in an extreme case, revocation of our ability to do business in one or more states. Finally, we could face individual, group and class action lawsuits by our policyholders and others for alleged violations of certain state laws and regulations. Each of these regulatory risks could have a negative effect on our profitability.
Market conditions may affect our access to and the cost of reinsurance and our reinsurers may not pay losses in a timely manner, or at all.
As part of our overall risk and capacity management strategy, we purchase reinsurance for significant amounts of the risk that we and our insurance company subsidiaries and affiliates underwrite, by transferring (or ceding) part of the risk we have assumed to a reinsurance company in exchange for part of the premium we receive in connection with the risk. These reinsurance arrangements diversify our business and reduce our exposure to large losses or from hazards of an unusual nature. As of December 31, 2013, we ceded premium written of $50.7 million to our reinsurers.
Although reinsurance makes the reinsurer liable to us to the extent the risk is transferred, it does not eliminate our liability to our policyholders because we remain liable as the direct insurer on all of the reinsured risks. As a result we are subject to credit risk relating to our ability to recover amounts due from our reinsurers.
Our ability to collect reinsurance recoverable may be subject to uncertainty. Our losses must meet the qualifying conditions of the reinsurance agreement. Our reinsurance agreements are subject to specified limits and we would not have reinsurance coverage to the extent that it exceeds those limits. We are also subject to the risk that reinsurers may dispute their obligations to pay our claims. Reinsurers must have the financial capacity and willingness to make payments under the terms of a reinsurance agreement or program. Reinsurers may dispute amounts we believe are due to us. Particularly, following a major catastrophic event, our inability to collect a material recovery from a reinsurer on a timely basis, or at all, could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity, operating results and financial condition.
Market conditions determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance protection we purchase, which affects the level of our business profitability, as well as the level and types of risk we retain. Although we purposely work with several reinsurance intermediaries and reinsurers, we may be unable to maintain our current reinsurance facilities or obtain other reinsurance facilities in adequate amounts and at favorable premium rates. Moreover, there may be a situation in which we have more than two catastrophic events within one policy year. Because our current catastrophe reinsurance program only allows for one automatic reinstatement at an additional reinstatement premium, we would be required to obtain a new catastrophe reinsurance policy to maintain our current level of catastrophe reinsurance coverage. Such coverage may be difficult to obtain, particularly if it is necessary to do so during hurricane season following the second catastrophe. If we are unable to renew our expiring facilities or to obtain new reinsurance facilities, either our net exposure to risk will increase or, if we are unwilling to bear an increase in net risk exposures, we will have to reduce the amount of risk we underwrite.
We face significant competitive pressures in our business that could cause demand for our products to fall or hinder our ability to introduce new products or services and keep pace with advances in technology, reducing our revenue and profitability.
The insurance industry is highly competitive and will likely remain that way for the foreseeable future. In our property and casualty insurance business and in our life insurance business we compete, and will continue to compete, with many major U.S. and non-U.S. insurers and smaller regional companies, as well as mutual companies, specialty insurance companies, underwriting agencies, and diversified financial services companies, including banks, mutual funds, broker-dealers and asset-managers. Except for regulatory considerations, there are few barriers to entry in the insurance market. National banks, with their large existing customer bases, may increasingly compete with insurers as a result of court rulings allowing national banks to sell annuity products in some circumstances, and as a result of new legislation removing restrictions on bank affiliations with insurers. These


23


developments may increase competition, by increasing the number, size and financial strength of competitors who may be able to offer, due to economies of scale, more competitive pricing than we can.
Our competitors may attempt to increase their market share by lowering rates. In that case, we could experience reductions in our underwriting margins or sales of insurance policies. Losing business to competitors offering similar products at lower prices or who have a competitive advantage may adversely affect the results of our operations. Additionally, economic conditions may reduce the total volume of business available to us and our competitors.
We price our insurance products based on estimated profit margins, and we may not be able to react in a timely manner to reprice our insurance products to respond to changes in the market. Some of our competitors may be larger and have far greater financial, technology and marketing resources than we do. If new or existing competitors decide to target our policyholder base by offering similar or enhanced product offerings or technologies at lower prices than we are able to offer, our premium revenue and our profitability could decline.
Our products are marketed exclusively through independent insurance agencies, most of which represent more than one company. We face competition within each agency and competition to retain qualified independent agents. Our competitors include companies that market their products through agents, as well as companies that sell insurance directly to their customers. In personal insurance, the use of comparative rating technologies has impacted our business and may continue to impact the entire industry. This has resulted in an increase in the total level of quote activity but a lower percentage of quotes have resulted in new business from customers. There is also the potential for similar technology to be used to compare rates for small business.
The successful implementation of our business model depends on our ability to adapt to evolving technologies and industry standards and introduce new products and services. There is no guarantee we will be able to introduce new or improved products, or that our products will achieve market acceptance. We may also not be successful in using new technologies effectively or adapting our proprietary technology to evolving customer requirements, causing our products or services to become obsolete.
Technology may be increasingly playing a role in our ability to be competitive. Innovations such as telematics and other usage-based methods of determining premiums may impact product design and pricing and may be an increasingly important factor in our ability to be competitive. Our competitive position may also be impacted by our ability to institute technology that collects and analyzes a wide variety of data points to make underwriting or other decisions.
Our business depends on the uninterrupted operations of our facilities, systems and business functions.
Our business depends on our employees’ or vendors’ ability to perform necessary business functions, such as processing new and renewal policies, providing customer service, making claims payments, facilitating collections and cancellations and performing actuarial functions necessary for pricing and product development. We increasingly rely on technology and systems to accomplish these business functions in an efficient and uninterrupted fashion. Our inability to access our facilities or a failure of technology, telecommunications or other systems could significantly impair our ability to perform such functions on a timely basis or affect the accuracy of transactions. If sustained or repeated, such a business interruption or system failure could result in a deterioration of our ability to write and process new and renewal business, serve our agents and policyholders or perform other necessary business functions as discussed above.
If a natural disaster or a terrorist act occurs, our company and employees could be directly adversely affected, depending on the nature of the event. We have an emergency preparedness plan that consists of the information and procedures required to enable rapid recovery from an occurrence, such as natural disaster or business disruption, which could potentially disable us for an extended period of time. This plan was successfully tested during 2008; both by the Midwest flooding that affected our corporate headquarters in Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and by Hurricane Ike that affected our Gulf Coast regional office in Galveston, Texas. It was also tested, to a lesser extent by Super Storm Sandy in 2012 that affected our East Coast regional office in Pennington, New Jersey.


24


Adverse capital and credit market conditions may significantly affect our ability to meet liquidity needs, as well as our access to and the cost of capital.
Although capital market conditions have improved, our results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and statutory capital position could be materially adversely affected by continued volatility, uncertainty and disruptions in the capital and credit markets.
We maintain a level of cash and securities which, combined with expected cash inflows from investments and operations, is believed adequate to meet anticipated short-term and long-term benefit and expense payment obligations. However, withdrawal and surrender levels may differ from anticipated levels for a variety of reasons, such as changes in economic conditions or changes in our claims paying ability and financial strength ratings. In the event our current internal sources of liquidity do not satisfy our needs, we have entered into a $100.0 million revolving unsecured credit facility that we can access. The availability of additional financing will depend on a variety of factors such as market conditions, the general availability of credit, the volume of trading activities, the overall availability of credit to the financial services industry, our credit ratings and credit capacity as well as customers’ or lenders’ perception of our long- or short-term financial prospects. Similarly, our access to funds may be impaired if regulatory authorities or rating agencies take negative actions against us.
Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the capital and credit markets may limit our access to capital required to operate our business. Such market conditions may limit our ability to replace, in a timely manner, maturing liabilities; satisfy statutory capital requirements; and access the capital necessary to grow our business. As such, we may be forced to delay raising capital, issue shorter term securities than we prefer, utilize available internal resources or bear an unattractive cost of capital, which could decrease our profitability and significantly reduce our financial flexibility and liquidity.
We may experience difficulty in integrating acquisitions to our operations.
The successful integration of any newly acquired businesses into our operations will require, among other things:
the timely receipt of any required regulatory approvals;
the retention and assimilation of their key management, sales and other personnel;
the coordination of their lines of insurance products and services;
the adaptation of their technology, information systems and other processes; and
the retention and transition of their customers.
Unexpected difficulties in integrating any acquisition could result in increased expenses and the diversion of management time and resources. If we do not successfully integrate any acquired business into our operations, we may not realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisition, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations. Further, any potential acquisitions may require significant capital outlays and, if we issue equity or convertible debt securities to pay for an acquisition, the issuance may be dilutive to our existing shareholders.
The exclusions and limitations in our policies may not be enforceable.
Many of the policies we issue include exclusions and other conditions that define and limit coverage, which exclusions and conditions are designed to manage our exposure to certain types of risks and expanding theories of legal liability. In addition, many of our policies limit the period during which a policyholder may bring a claim under the policy, which period in many cases is shorter than the statutory period under which these claims can be brought by our policyholders. While these exclusions and limitations help us assess and control our loss exposure, it is possible that a court or regulatory authority could nullify or void an exclusion or limitation, or legislation could be enacted which modifies or bars the use of these exclusions and limitations. This could result in higher than anticipated losses by extending coverage beyond the intent of our underwriting. In some instances, these changes may not become apparent until sometime after we have issued the insurance policies that are affected by these changes. As a result, the full extent of liability under our insurance contracts may not be known for many years after a policy is issued.


25


Our internal controls are not fail-safe.
As a result of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no system of controls can provide absolute assurance that all control objectives have been or will be met, and that every instance of error or fraud has been or will be detected. A control system, no matter how well conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system will be met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of a simple error or mistake.
The determination of the amount of allowances and impairments taken on our investments requires estimates and assumptions which are subject to differing interpretations and could materially impact our results of operations or financial position.
The determination of the amount of allowances and impairments vary by investment type and is based upon our periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with the respective asset class. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available. There can be no assurance that our management has accurately assessed the level of impairments taken and allowances reflected in our financial statements. Furthermore, additional impairments may need to be taken or allowances provided for in the future. Historical trends may not be indicative of future impairments or allowances.
Additionally, our management considers a wide range of factors about the instrument issuer and uses its best judgment in evaluating the cause of the decline in the estimated fair value of the instrument and in assessing the prospects for recovery. Inherent in management’s evaluation of the security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential.
Risks Relating to Our Common Stock
The ability of our subsidiaries to pay dividends may affect our liquidity and ability to meet our obligations.
As a holding company, we have no significant independent operations of our own. Our principal source of funds are dividends and other payments received from our subsidiaries. We rely on those dividends for our liquidity and to meet our obligations to pay dividends to shareholders and make share repurchases. Dividends from those subsidiaries depend on their statutory surplus, earnings and regulatory restrictions.
State insurance laws limit the ability of insurance subsidiaries to pay dividends and require our insurance subsidiaries to maintain specified minimum levels of statutory capital and surplus. The actual ability to pay dividends may further be constrained by business and regulatory considerations, such as the impact of dividends on surplus, by our competitive position and by the amount of premiums that we can write. Ordinary dividend payments, or dividends that do not require prior approval by the insurance subsidiaries’ domiciliary state insurance regulator are generally limited to amounts determined by a formula which varies by jurisdiction. Extraordinary dividends on the other hand require prior regulatory approval by the insurance subsidiaries’ domiciliary state insurance regulator before they can be made.
In addition, competitive pressures generally require insurance companies to maintain insurance financial strength ratings. These restrictions and other regulatory requirements affect the ability of our insurance subsidiaries to make dividend payments to us. At times we may not be able to pay dividends on our common stock, or we may be required to seek prior approval from the applicable regulatory authority before we can pay any such dividends. In addition, the payment of dividends by us is within the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on numerous factors, including our financial condition, our capital requirements and other factors that our Board of Directors considers relevant.
The price of our common stock may be volatile.
The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate substantially due to a variety of factors, some of which are beyond our control and may not be related to our operating performance. These fluctuations could be significant and


26


could cause a loss in the amount invested in our shares of common stock. Factors that could cause fluctuations include, but are not limited to, the following:
variations in our actual or anticipated operating results or changes in the expectations of financial market analysts with respect to our results;

investor perceptions of the insurance industry in general and the Company in particular;

market conditions in the insurance industry and any significant volatility in the market;

major catastrophic events; and

departure of key personnel.
Certain provisions of our organizational documents, as well as applicable insurance laws, could impede an attempt to replace or remove our management, prevent the sale of the Company or prevent or frustrate any attempt by shareholders to change the direction of the Company, each of which could diminish the value of our common stock.
Our articles of incorporation and bylaws, as well as applicable laws governing corporations and insurance companies, contain provisions that could impede an attempt to replace or remove our management or prevent the sale of the Company that, in either case, shareholders might consider being in their best interests. For example:
our Board of Directors is divided into three classes. At any annual meeting of our shareholders, our shareholders have the right to appoint approximately one-third of the directors on our Board of Directors. Consequently, it will take at least two annual shareholder meetings to effect a change in control of our Board of Directors;

our articles of incorporation limit the rights of shareholders to call special shareholder meetings;

our articles of incorporation set the minimum number of directors constituting the entire Board of Directors at nine and the maximum at 15, and they require approval of holders of 60.0 percent of all outstanding shares to amend these provisions. Within the range, the Board of Directors may increase by one each year the number of directors serving on the Board of Directors;

our articles of incorporation require the affirmative vote of 60.0 percent of all outstanding shares to approve any plan of merger, consolidation, or sale or exchange of all, or substantially all, of our assets;

our Board of Directors may fill vacancies on the Board of Directors;

our Board of Directors has the authority, without further approval of our shareholders, to issue shares of preferred stock having such rights, preferences and privileges as the Board of Directors may determine;
 
Section 490.1110 of the Iowa Business Corporation Act imposes restrictions on mergers and other business combinations between us and any holder of 10.0 percent or more of our common stock; and

Section 490.624A of the Iowa Business Corporation Act authorizes the terms and conditions of stock rights or options issued by us to include restrictions or conditions that preclude or limit the exercise, transfer, or receipt of such rights or options by a person, or group of persons, owning or offering to acquire a specified number or percentage of the outstanding common shares or other securities of the corporation.
Further, the insurance laws of Iowa and the states in which our insurance company subsidiaries are domiciled prohibit any person from acquiring direct or indirect control of us or our insurance company subsidiaries, generally


27


defined as owning or having the power to vote 10.0 percent or more of our outstanding voting stock, without the prior written approval of state regulators.
These provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws, and these state laws governing corporations and insurance companies, may discourage potential acquisition proposals. These provisions and state laws may also delay, deter or prevent a change of control of the Company, in particular through unsolicited transactions that some or all of our shareholders might consider to be desirable. As a result, efforts by our shareholders to change the direction or the Company’s management may be unsuccessful, and the existence of such provisions may adversely affect market prices for our common stock if they are viewed as discouraging takeover attempts.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
We own six buildings and related parking facilities in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Three buildings are used as our corporate headquarters, and three buildings are available to commercial tenants as leased office space. Our corporate headquarters includes: a five-story office building, a two-story office building and an eight-story office building in which a portion of the first floor (approximately 6.0 percent of the building’s square footage) is leased to tenants. In December 2013, we acquired a three-building commercial real estate complex immediately adjacent to our corporate headquarters. This complex includes a three-story office building, a ten-story office building and a one-story office building which are available for lease to commercial tenants (approximately 41.0 percent of the complex’s square footage is leased). All six buildings are connected by a skywalk system. We also own a 250-space parking ramp for use by our employees. The parking ramp is located adjacent to our corporate headquarters upon one parcel of real estate that we own and another parcel that we lease with an option to purchase.
In addition, three of our regional office locations in Lock Haven, Pennsylvania, Pennington, New Jersey, and Rocklin, California, conduct operations in office space that we own. A portion of the Lock Haven (approximately 18.0 percent) and Pennington (approximately 5.0 percent) office space is currently leased to commercial tenants. We also own a tract of land adjacent to the Pennington office.
Our other two regional office locations in Westminster, Colorado, and Webster, Texas, and our claims office in Metairie, Louisiana, conduct operations in leased office space.
The following table shows a brief description of our owned and leased office space as of December 31, 2013. We believe our current facilities are adequate to meet our needs with additional space available for future expansion, if necessary, at each of our owned and leased facilities:


28


Location
Utilized by
Owned or Leased
Lease Expiration Date
Corporate Headquarters – Cedar Rapids, Iowa
 
 
 
118 Second Avenue SE
Corporate Administration,
Property and Casualty Segment
Owned
N/A
119 Second Avenue SE
Corporate Administration,
Life Insurance Segment
Owned
N/A
109 Second Street SE
Property and Casualty Segment
Owned
N/A
Commercial Office Complex – Cedar Rapids, Iowa
 
 
 
101 Second Street SE
Commercial Tenants
Owned
N/A
107 Second Street SE
Commercial Tenants
Owned
N/A
119 First Avenue SE
Currently Unoccupied
Owned
N/A
Denver Regional Office – Westminster, Colorado
Property and Casualty Segment
Leased
June 30, 2015
East Coast Regional Office –
 
 
 
Lock Haven Office – Lock Haven, Pennsylvania
Property and Casualty Segment
Owned
N/A
Pennington Office – Pennington, New Jersey
Property and Casualty Segment
Owned
N/A
Gulf Coast Regional Office – Galveston, Texas
Property and Casualty Segment
Leased
November 30, 2014
Gulf Coast Regional Office – Webster, Texas (1)
Property and Casualty Segment
Leased
January 15, 2021
New Orleans Claims Office – Metairie, Louisiana
Property and Casualty Segment
Leased
September 30, 2015
West Coast Regional Office – Rocklin, California
Property and Casualty Segment
Owned
N/A
(1) Our Gulf Coast Regional office relocated from Galveston, Texas to Webster, Texas in January 2014.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
We are not party to any material legal proceedings.

ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not Applicable.




29


PART II.

ITEM 5. MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED SHAREHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
Common Shareholders
United Fire Group, Inc.’s common stock is traded on NASDAQ under the symbol “UFCS.” On February 27, 2014, there were 844 holders of record of United Fire Group, Inc. common stock. The number of record holders does not reflect shareholders who beneficially own common stock in nominee or street name, but does include participants in our employee stock purchase plan.
See Part III, Item 12 “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Shareholders Matters” of this Form 10-K, which incorporates by reference our definitive Proxy Statement (the “2014 Proxy Statement”) for our annual meeting of shareholders to be held on May 21, 2014. The 2014 Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC within 120 days after the end of our 2013 fiscal year and is incorporated herein by reference.
Dividends
Our practice has been to pay quarterly cash dividends, which we have paid every quarter since March 1968.
As a holding company with no independent operations of its own, United Fire Group, Inc. relies on dividends received from its insurance company subsidiaries in order to pay dividends to its common shareholders. Dividends payable by our insurance subsidiaries are governed by the laws in the states in which they are domiciled. In all cases, these state laws permit the payment of dividends only from earned surplus arising from business operations. For example, under Iowa law, the maximum dividend or distribution that may be paid within a 12-month period without prior approval of the Iowa Insurance Commissioner is generally restricted to the greater of 10 percent of statutory surplus as of the preceding December 31, or net income of the preceding calendar year on a statutory basis, not greater than earned statutory surplus. Other states in which our insurance company subsidiaries are domiciled may impose similar restrictions on dividends and distributions. Based on these restrictions, at December 31, 2013, our insurance company subsidiary, United Fire & Casualty, is able to make a maximum of $53.7 million in dividend payments without prior regulatory approval.
The table in the following section shows the quarterly cash dividends declared in 2013 and 2012. Payments of any future dividends and the amounts of such dividends, however, will depend upon factors such as net income, financial condition, capital requirements, and general business conditions. We will only pay dividends if declared by our Board of Directors out of legally available funds.
Additional information about these restrictions is incorporated by reference from Note 6 “Statutory Reporting, Capital Requirements and Dividends and Retained Earnings Restrictions” contained in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”









30


Market Information
The following table sets forth the high and low trading price as reported on NASDAQ for our common stock for the calendar periods indicated. These quotations reflect interdealer prices without retail markups, markdowns, or commissions and may not necessarily represent actual transactions.
 
Share Price
 
Cash Dividends
Declared
 
High
Low
 
2013
 
 
 
 
Quarter Ended:
 
 
 
 
March 31
$
28.07

$
22.11

 
$
0.15

June 30
29.59

23.75

 
0.18

September 30
32.94

24.90

 
0.18

December 31
34.21

27.00

 
0.18

Year-end close: $28.66
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2012
 
 
 
 
Quarter Ended:
 
 
 
 
March 31
$
21.16

$
17.88

 
$
0.15

June 30
22.31

15.90

 
0.15

September 30
26.07

18.55

 
0.15

December 31
26.33

18.49

 
0.15

Year-end close: $21.84
 
 
 
 
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Under our share repurchase program, we may purchase our common stock from time to time on the open market or through privately negotiated transactions. The amount and timing of any purchases will be at our discretion and will depend upon a number of factors, including the share price, general economic and market conditions, and corporate and regulatory requirements. Our share repurchase program may be modified or discontinued at any time.





















31


The following table provides information with respect to purchases of shares of common stock made by or on our behalf or by any “affiliated purchaser,” as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Exchange Act, during the year ended December 31, 2013:
Period
Total
Number of
Shares Purchased (1)
 
Average Price
Paid per Share
 
Total Number of Shares
Purchased as a Part of
Publicly Announced
Plans or Programs
 
Maximum Number of
Shares that may be
Purchased Under the
Plans or Programs
1/1/13 - 1/31/13

 
$

 

 
1,129,720

2/1/13 - 2/28/13

 

 

 
1,129,720

3/1/13 - 3/31/13

 

 

 
1,129,720

4/1/13 - 4/30/13

 

 

 
1,129,720

5/1/13 - 5/31/13
3,577

 
27.56

 
3,577

 
1,126,143

6/1/13 - 6/30/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

7/1/13 - 7/31/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

8/1/13 - 8/31/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

9/1/13 - 9/30/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

10/1/13 - 10/31/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

11/1/13 - 11/30/13

 

 

 
1,126,143

12/1/13 - 12/31/13
56,026

 
27.58

 
56,026

 
1,070,117

Total
59,603

 
 
 
59,603

 
 
(1) Our share repurchase program was originally announced in August 2007. During 2012, our Board of Directors authorized us to purchase up to an additional 1,000,000 shares of common stock through August 2014.
United Fire Group, Inc. Common Stock Performance Graph
The following graph compares the performance of an investment in United Fire Group Inc.’s common stock from December 31, 2008 through December 31, 2013, with the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (“S&P 500 Index”), and the Standard & Poor’s 600 Property and Casualty Index (“S&P 600 Property & Casualty Index”). The graph assumes $100 was invested on December 31, 2008, in our common stock and each of the below listed indices and that all dividends were reinvested on the date of payment without payment of any commissions. Dollar amounts in the graph are rounded to the nearest whole dollar. The performance shown in the graph represents past performance and should not be considered an indication of future performance.


32


The following table shows the data used in the Total Return performance graph above.
 
Period Ended
Index
12/31/08
 
12/31/09
 
12/31/10
 
12/31/11
 
12/31/12
 
12/31/13
United Fire Group, Inc.
$
100.00

 
$
60.65

 
$
76.47

 
$
71.35

 
$
79.40

 
$
106.81

S&P 500 Index
100.00

 
126.46

 
145.51

 
148.59

 
172.37

 
228.19

S&P 600 P&C Index
100.00

 
86.22

 
105.13

 
115.00

 
124.57

 
158.77


ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
The following table sets forth certain selected financial data derived from the Consolidated Financial Statements of United Fire Group, Inc. and its subsidiaries and affiliates. The data should be read in conjunction with Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”


33


(In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Years Ended December 31
2013
 
2012
 
2011
 
2010
 
2009
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total cash and investments
$
3,142,330

 
$
3,151,829

 
$
3,052,535

 
$
2,662,955

 
$
2,542,693

Total assets
3,720,672

 
3,694,653

 
3,618,924

 
3,007,439

 
2,902,544

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits and losses, claims and loss settlement expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Property and casualty insurance
960,651

 
971,911

 
945,051

 
603,090

 
606,045

Life insurance
1,472,132

 
1,498,176

 
1,476,281

 
1,389,331

 
1,321,600

Unearned premiums
340,464

 
311,650

 
288,991

 
200,341

 
206,010

Total liabilities
2,937,839

 
2,965,476

 
2,922,783

 
2,291,015

 
2,229,809

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net unrealized investment gains, after tax
116,601

 
144,096

 
124,376

 
102,649

 
82,491

Repurchase of United Fire Group, Inc. common stock
(1,644
)
 
(7,301
)
 
(12,433
)
 
(6,280
)
 
(1,545
)
Total stockholders’ equity
782,833

 
729,177

 
696,141

 
716,424

 
672,735

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Book value per share
30.87

 
28.90

 
27.29

 
27.35

 
25.35

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Consolidated Income Statement Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net premiums written
$
783,463

 
$
720,881

 
$
604,867

 
$
463,892

 
$
467,427

Net premiums earned
754,846

 
694,994

 
586,783

 
469,473

 
478,498

Investment income, net of investment expenses
112,799

 
111,905

 
109,494

 
111,685

 
106,075

Net realized investment gains (losses)
8,695

 
5,453

 
6,440

 
8,489

 
(13,179
)
Other income
702

 
891

 
2,291

 
1,425

 
799

Consolidated revenues
$
877,042

 
$
813,243

 
$
705,008

 
$
591,072

 
$
572,193

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Losses and loss settlement expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Property and casualty insurance
437,354

 
439,137

 
407,831

 
289,437

 
365,721

Life insurance
21,461

 
20,569

 
22,558

 
20,359

 
16,773

Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs (1)
153,677

 
141,834

 
153,176

 
113,371

 
114,893

Other underwriting expenses (1)
89,861

 
81,125

 
58,757

 
39,321

 
39,298

Net income (loss)
76,140

 
40,212

 
11

 
47,513

 
(10,441
)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Property and Casualty Insurance Segment Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net premiums written
722,821

 
655,331

 
551,923

 
414,908

 
424,827

Net premiums earned
694,192

 
629,411

 
533,771

 
420,373

 
435,677

Net income (loss)
67,456

 
33,512

 
(7,639
)
 
34,726

 
(17,677
)
Combined ratio(2)
94.8
%
 
101.2
%
 
112.1
%
 
99.9
%
 
115.2
%
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life Insurance Segment Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net premiums earned
60,654

 
65,583

 
53,012

 
49,100

 
42,821

Net income
8,684

 
6,700

 
7,650

 
12,787

 
7,236

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Earnings Per Share Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Basic earnings (loss) per common share
3.01

 
1.58

 

 
1.81

 
(0.39
)
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share
2.98

 
1.58

 

 
1.80

 
(0.39
)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Other Supplemental Data:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Cash dividends declared per common share
0.69

 
0.60

 
0.60

 
0.60

 
0.60

(1)
In 2012, we adopted new deferred policy acquisition cost accounting guidance on a prospective basis. As a result of the adoption, the amount of underwriting expenses eligible for deferral has decreased. For further information on the impact of adopting the new accounting guidance, please refer to Part II, Item 8, Note 1.
(2)
The combined ratio is a commonly used financial measure of property and casualty underwriting performance. A combined ratio below 100.0 percent generally indicates a profitable book of business.




34


ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

The following Management’s Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Part II, Item 6, “Selected Financial Data” and Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” Amounts (except per share amounts) are presented in thousands, unless otherwise noted.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

It is important to note that our actual results could differ materially from those projected in forward-looking statements. Information concerning factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements is contained in “Forward-Looking Information” and Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” of this report.

BUSINESS OVERVIEW
Originally founded in 1946 as United Fire & Casualty Company, United Fire Group, Inc. (“United Fire”, the “Registrant”, the “Company”, “we”, “us”, “our”) and its consolidated insurance company subsidiaries provide insurance protection for individuals and businesses through several regional companies. Our property and casualty insurance company subsidiaries are licensed in 43 states plus the District of Columbia and are represented by approximately 1,200 independent agencies. Our life insurance subsidiary is licensed in 37 states and is represented by approximately 1,000 independent agencies.
Segments
We operate two business segments that are comprised of a wide range of products:
property and casualty insurance, which includes commercial insurance, personal insurance, surety bonds and assumed reinsurance; and
life insurance, which includes deferred and immediate annuities, universal life products and traditional life (primarily single premium whole life insurance) products.
We manage these business segments separately, as they generally do not share the same customer base, and they each have different products, pricing, and expense structures.
For 2013, property and casualty business accounted for approximately 92.0 percent of our net premiums earned, of which 90.5 percent was generated from commercial insurance. Life insurance business made up approximately 8.0 percent of our net premiums earned, of which over 67.7 percent was generated from traditional life insurance products.
Pooling Arrangement
All of our property and casualty insurance subsidiaries, with the exception of Texas General Indemnity Company, and our affiliate are members of an intercompany reinsurance pooling arrangement. Pooling arrangements permit the participating companies to rely on the capacity of the entire pool’s capital and surplus, rather than being limited to policy exposures of a size commensurate with each participant’s own surplus level.
Geographic Concentration
For 2013, approximately 50.0 percent of our property and casualty direct written premiums were written in Texas, Iowa, California, New Jersey, and Missouri; approximately 75.0 percent of our life insurance premiums were written in Iowa, Illinois, Minnesota, Wisconsin and Nebraska.




35


Sources of Revenue and Expense
We evaluate segment profit or loss based upon operating and investment results. Segment profit or loss described in the following sections of Management’s Discussion and Analysis is reported on a pre-tax basis. Additional segment information is presented in Part II, Item 8, Note 10 “Segment Information” to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Our primary sources of revenue are premiums and investment income. Major categories of expenses include losses and loss settlement expenses, future policy benefits, underwriting and other operating expenses and interest on policyholders’ accounts.
Profit Factors
Our profitability is influenced by many factors, including price, competition, economic conditions, investment returns, interest rates, catastrophic events and other natural disasters, man-made disasters, state regulations, court decisions, and changes in the law. To manage these risks and uncertainties, we seek to achieve consistent profitability through strong agency relationships, exceptional customer service, fair and prompt claims handling, disciplined underwriting, superior loss control services, prudent management of our investments, appropriate matching of assets and liabilities and effective and efficient use of technology.

MEASUREMENT OF RESULTS
Our consolidated financial statements are prepared on the basis of GAAP. We also prepare financial statements for each of our insurance company subsidiaries based on statutory accounting principles and file them with insurance regulatory authorities in the states where they do business.
Management evaluates our operations by monitoring key measures of growth and profitability. We believe that disclosure of certain non-GAAP financial measures enhances investor understanding of our financial performance. The following provides further explanation of the key measures management uses to evaluate our results:
Catastrophe losses is a commonly used non-GAAP financial measure, which utilizes the designations of the Insurance Services Office (ISO) and are reported with loss and loss settlement expense amounts net of reinsurance recoverables, unless specified otherwise. According to the ISO, a catastrophe loss is defined as a single unpredictable incident or series of closely related incidents that result in $25.0 million or more in U.S. industry-wide direct insured losses to property and that affect a significant number of insureds and insurers (“ISO catastrophe”). In addition to ISO catastrophes, we also include as catastrophes those events (“non-ISO catastrophes”), which may include U.S. or international losses, that we believe are, or will be, material to our operations, either in amount or in number of claims made. Management, at times, may determine for comparison purposes that it is more meaningful to exclude extraordinary catastrophe losses and resulting litigation. The frequency and severity of catastrophic losses we experience in any year affect our results of operations and financial position. In analyzing the underwriting performance of our property and casualty insurance segment, we evaluate performance both including and excluding catastrophe losses. Portions of our catastrophe losses may be recoverable under our catastrophe reinsurance agreements. We include a discussion of the impact of catastrophes because we believe it is meaningful for investors to understand the variability in our periodic earnings.
 
Years Ended December 31,
(In Thousands)
2013
 
2012
 
2011
ISO catastrophes
$
27,222

 
$
58,875

 
$
57,238

Non-ISO catastrophes (1)
2,994

 
5,847

 
23,555

Total catastrophes
$
30,216

 
$
64,722

 
$
80,793

(1) Includes international assumed losses.


36


CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
% Change
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
2013
 
2012
(In Thousands)
2013
 
2012
 
2011(1)
 
vs. 2012
 
vs. 2011
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net premiums earned
$
754,846

 
$
694,994

 
$
586,783

 
8.6
 %
 
18.4
 %
Investment income, net of investment expenses
112,799

 
111,905

 
109,494

 
0.8

 
2.2

Net realized investment gains (losses)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

 
 
Other-than-temporary impairment charges
(139
)
 
(4
)
 
(395
)
 
NM

 
99.0

All other net realized gains
8,834

 
5,457

 
6,835

 
61.9

 
(20.2
)
Total net realized investment gains
8,695

 
5,453

 
6,440

 
59.5

 
(15.3
)
Other income
702

 
891

 
2,291

 
(21.2
)
 
(61.1
)
Total revenues
$
877,042

 
$
813,243

 
$
705,008

 
7.8
 %
 
15.4
 %
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Benefits, losses and expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Losses and loss settlement expenses
$
458,814

 
$
459,706

 
$
430,389

 
(0.2
)%
 
6.8
 %
Increase in liability for future policy benefits
37,625

 
43,095

 
32,567

 
(12.7
)
 
32.3

Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs
153,677

 
141,834

 
153,176

 
8.3

 
(7.4
)
Other underwriting expenses
89,861

 
81,125

 
58,757

 
10.8

 
38.1

Interest on policyholders’ accounts
35,163

 
41,409

 
42,834

 
(15.1
)
 
(3.3
)
Total benefits, losses and expenses
$
775,140

 
$
767,169

 
$
717,723

 
1.0
 %
 
6.9
 %
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Income (loss) before income taxes
$
101,902

 
$
46,074

 
$
(12,715
)
 
121.2
 %
 
NM

Federal income tax expense (benefit)
25,762

 
5,862

 
(12,726
)
 
NM

 
146.1
 %
Net income
$
76,140

 
$
40,212

 
$
11

 
89.3
 %
 
NM

NM = not meaningful
(1) The information presented for 2011 and after includes Mercer Insurance Group’s results after the March 28, 2011 acquisition date.
Consolidated Results of Operations
During 2013, the increase in net income was driven by growth in property and casualty premium revenue and a reduction in the combined ratio. Net premiums earned increased to $754.8 million compared to $695.0 million in 2012. This increase represents organic growth and is the result of a combination of rate increases across most commercial and personal lines and new business writings. The reduction in the combined ratio resulted from lower catastrophe losses.
In 2013, we continued to expand the geographical footprint of our life insurance subsidiary by receiving approval to operate in Nevada, after receiving approval in 2012 to operate in California, Maryland and Delaware and approval in 2011 to operate in New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Virginia and West Virginia, further leveraging the Mercer Insurance Group acquisition. Our life management team continues to improve service to our agents by increasing marketing support and automating life product processes.
During 2012 the increase in net income was driven by growth in property and casualty premium revenue and a reduction in the combined ratio. The reduction in the combined ratio resulted from lower catastrophe losses as well as improvement in non-catastrophe loss experience. In addition, the combined ratio improved due to an improvement in the expense ratio.
Net premiums earned increased to $695.0 million, compared to $586.8 million for the same period of 2011 due in part to the acquisition of Mercer Insurance Group in March 2011, which accounted for $34.9 million of additional earned premium. Our organic growth was $73.3 million over the same period of 2011.


37


Effective January 1, 2012, we prospectively adopted the change in accounting guidance that limits the amount of underwriting expenses eligible for deferral. The adoption of the updated accounting guidance resulted in the recognition of approximately $10.3 million ($8.7 million for our property and casualty insurance segment; $1.6 million for our life insurance segment) of additional expense during 2012 that we would not have recognized had the accounting guidance remained unchanged. This represents a reduction to net income of $0.26 per share. Refer to the “Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs” section of Part II, Item 8, Note 1 “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” for further discussion of the impact of the updated accounting guidance on our reported results.
The year 2011 will be remembered for its devastating catastrophes, both domestic and abroad. According to various reports, 2011 was the costliest catastrophe year on record for the property and casualty insurance industry globally. We experienced losses in our direct and assumed books of business that negatively impacted our full-year results. However, premium rates increased across all lines of business, and there were some positive signs in the overall economy. Additionally, we took steps to improve and strengthen our underwriting guidelines in response to our catastrophe experiences. Internal analyses of our catastrophe exposures, utilizing various approaches including the results of the updated RMS Model Version 11, supported the underwriting changes.
We also focused on our capital management strategy through our stock repurchase program and by entering into a new banking relationship with KeyBank National Association that established a $100.0 million syndicated line of credit, allowing us to reduce our cash position.
During 2011, we began the process of integrating Mercer Insurance Group into our operations. The integration of the West Coast business of Mercer Insurance Group’s policy renewals into our processing systems was completed in 2012. We began the integration of the East Coast policy renewals into our processing systems which are on schedule to be completed at the end of 2015. In addition, effective January 1, 2012, we consolidated Mercer Insurance Group’s core and catastrophe reinsurance programs into our programs, resulting in increased coverage and reduction in Mercer Insurance Group’s historical costs.
At a special meeting held on January 24, 2012, our shareholders approved our reorganization into a new holding company structure. United Fire Group, Inc. has replaced United Fire & Casualty Company as the publicly held corporation, and United Fire & Casualty Company is now a wholly owned subsidiary of United Fire Group, Inc. In addition to creating a more streamlined corporate structure, the new holding company’s organizational documents enhanced our shareholders’ rights by reducing the percentage of shareholders required to amend our Articles of Incorporation, approve the merger or sale of substantially all Company assets, and call a special meeting. This new structure will potentially provide us with more flexibility to operate and finance our businesses, particularly if we should need to raise capital in the future.



38


RESULTS OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2013, 2012 AND 2011

Property and Casualty Insurance Segment
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
% Change
 
 
 
2013
 
2012
(In Thousands)
2013
 
2012
 
2011(1)
 
vs. 2012
 
vs. 2011
Net premiums written
$
722,821

 
$
655,331

 
$
551,923

 
10.3
 %
 
18.7
 %
Net premiums earned
$
694,192

 
$
629,411

 
$
533,771

 
10.3

 
17.9

Losses and loss settlement expenses
(437,353
)
 
(439,137
)
 
(407,831
)
 
(0.4
)
 
7.7

Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs
(147,175
)
 
(134,444
)
 
(143,952
)
 
9.5

 
(6.6
)
Other underwriting expenses
(73,626
)
 
(63,620
)
 
(46,404
)
 
15.7

 
37.1

Underwriting gain (loss)
$
36,038

 
$
(7,790
)
 
$
(64,416
)
 
NM

 
(87.9
)%
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Investment income, net of investment expenses
46,332

 
41,879

 
35,513

 
10.6
 %
 
17.9
 %
Net realized investment gains (losses)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Other-than-temporary impairment charges
(139
)
 

 

 
 %
 
 %
All other net realized gains
6,400

 
1,676

 
3,081

 
281.9

 
(45.6
)
Total net realized investment gains
6,261

 
1,676

 
3,081

 
273.6
 %
 
(45.6
)%
Other income
88

 
316

 
1,592

 
(72.2
)
 
(80.2
)%
Income (loss) before income taxes
$
88,719

 
$
36,081

 
$
(24,230
)
 
145.9
 %
 
NM

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
GAAP Ratios:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net loss ratio (without catastrophes)
58.6
%
 
59.5
%
 
61.3
%
 
(1.5
)%
 
(2.9
)%
Catastrophes - effect on net loss ratio
4.4

 
10.3

 
15.1

 
(57.3
)
 
(31.8
)
Net loss ratio(2)
63.0
%
 
69.8
%
 
76.4
%
 
(9.7
)%
 
(8.6
)%
Expense ratio (3)
31.8

 
31.4

 
35.7

 
1.3

 
(12.0
)
Combined ratio(4)
94.8
%
 
101.2
%
 
112.1
%
 
(6.3
)%
 
(9.7
)%
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Statutory Ratios:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net loss ratio (without catastrophes)
58.9
%
 
60.2
%
 
61.3
%
 
(2.2
)%
 
(1.8
)%
Catastrophes - effect on net loss ratio
4.4

 
10.3

 
15.1

 
(57.3
)
 
(31.8
)
Net loss ratio(2)
63.3
%
 
70.5
%
 
76.4
%
 
(10.2
)%
 
(7.7
)%
Expense ratio (3)
32.0

 
31.3

 
32.2

 
2.2

 
(2.8
)
Combined ratio(4)
95.3
%
 
101.8
%
 
108.6
%
 
(6.4
)%
 
(6.3
)%
NM = not meaningful
(1) The information presented for 2011 and after includes Mercer Insurance Group’s results after the March 28, 2011 acquisition date.
(2) The net loss ratio is calculated by dividing the sum of losses and loss settlement expenses by net premiums earned. We use the net loss ratio as a measure of the overall underwriting profitability of the insurance business we write and to assess the adequacy of our pricing. Our net loss ratio is meaningful in evaluating our financial results as reported in our Consolidated Financial Statements.
(3) The GAAP expense ratio is calculated by dividing nondeferred underwriting expenses and amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs by net premiums earned. The expense ratio measures a company’s operational efficiency in producing, underwriting and administering its insurance business. The statutory expense ratio is calculated in a similar fashion as GAAP but uses net premium written instead of net premium earned.
(4) The combined ratio is a commonly used financial measure of property and casualty underwriting performance. A combined ratio below 100.0 percent generally indicates a profitable book of business. The combined ratio is the sum of the net loss ratio and the underwriting expense ratio.

For the year ended December 31, 2013, our property and casualty insurance segment reported income before income taxes of $88.7 million compared to income before income taxes of $36.1 million in the same period in 2012. The increase in income before income taxes during 2013 as compared to 2012 is primarily a result of a 10.3 percent increase in net premiums earned and a decrease in catastrophe losses discussed in more detail throughout this section.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, our property and casualty insurance segment reported income before income taxes of $36.1 million compared to losses before income taxes of $24.2 million in the same period in 2011. The increase in income before income taxes during 2012 as compared to 2011 is primarily a result of a 17.9 percent


39


increase in net premiums earned, a decrease in catastrophe losses, and a decrease in amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs, partially offset by an increase in underwriting expenses, and an increase in loss and loss settlement expenses.

Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs decreased during 2012 as compared to 2011 due to a change in accounting guidance that limits the amount of underwriting expenses eligible for deferral. We prospectively adopted the new accounting guidance effective January 1, 2012. As a result, the amount of underwriting expenses eligible for deferral has decreased, which resulted in the recognition of $8.7 million of additional expense in 2012 in our property and casualty insurance segment than would have been recognized had the guidance remained the same.
Premiums
The following table shows our premiums written and earned for 2013, 2012 and 2011:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
% Change
(In Thousands)
 
 
 
 
 
 
2013
 
2012
Years ended December 31,
2013
 
2012
 
2011 (1)
 
vs. 2012
 
vs. 2011
Direct premiums written
$
754,594

 
$
682,390

 
$
580,890

 
10.6
%
 
17.5
%
Assumed premiums written
18,938

 
17,181

 
14,954

 
10.2

 
14.9

Ceded premiums written
(50,711
)
 
(44,240
)
 
(43,921
)
 
14.6

 
0.7

Net premiums written
$
722,821

 
$
655,331

 
$
551,923

 
10.3
%
 
18.7
%
Net premiums earned
694,192

 
629,411

 
533,771

 
10.3

 
17.9

(1) The information presented for 2011 and after includes Mercer Insurance Group’s results after the March 28, 2011 acquisition date.

Net Premiums Written
Net premiums written comprise direct and assumed premiums written, less ceded premiums written. Direct premiums written are the total policy premiums, net of cancellations, associated with policies issued and underwritten by our property and casualty insurance segment. Assumed premiums written are the total premiums associated with the insurance risk transferred to us by other insurance and reinsurance companies pursuant to reinsurance contracts. Ceded premiums written is the portion of direct premiums written that we cede to our reinsurers under our reinsurance contracts. Net premiums earned are recognized over the life of a policy and differ from net premiums written, which are recognized on the effective date of the policy.
Direct Premiums Written
Direct premiums written increased $72.2 million in 2013 as compared to 2012 primarily due to organic growth and is the result of a combination of rate increases across most commercial and personal lines and new business writings.
Direct premiums written increased $101.5 million in 2012 as compared to 2011, of which $37.2 million resulted from our acquisition of Mercer Insurance Group. The remaining $64.3 million is due to organic growth, primarily the result of rate increases and an increase in audit premiums.
Assumed Premiums Written
Assumed premiums written increased $1.8 million in 2013 as compared to 2012 due to pricing increases in recent years, the addition of two new assumed programs and the renewal of our participation levels in all but one of our active assumed programs. We added two new programs to replace the lost premium from the program not renewed and to take advantage of areas where we had exposure capacity.  One of the new programs has worldwide exposure and the other has exposure in the United Kingdom and Japan. 
Assumed premiums written increased $2.2 million in 2012 as compared to 2011 due to pricing increases in recent years and our renewal of our participation levels in all of our active assumed programs, with the exception of one contract for which we decreased our participation level after a review of the results of our catastrophe experience.


40


Ceded Premiums Written
Direct and assumed premiums written are reduced by the ceded premiums that we pay to reinsurers. For 2013, ceded premiums written increased slightly compared to 2012 due to premium rate increases.
We consolidated Mercer Insurance Group’s non-catastrophe reinsurance programs into our programs, effective August 1, 2011 and their catastrophe reinsurance program into our programs, effective January 1, 2012, resulting in increased coverage and retentions for Mercer Insurance Group. The change in programs increased Mercer Insurance Group’s catastrophe protection from $55.0 million to $200.0 million and increased their catastrophe retention from $5.0 million to $20.0 million. Mercer Insurance Group’s non-catastrophe retention was increased from $1.0 million to $2.0 million and the surety retention was increased from $0.5 million to $1.5 million. We had no other significant changes to coverage, limits, or retentions for our catastrophe or non-catastrophe programs.
Losses and Loss Settlement Expenses
Catastrophe Exposures
Catastrophe losses are inherent risks of the property and casualty insurance business. Catastrophic events include, without limitation, hurricanes, tornadoes, earthquakes, hailstorms, wildfires, high winds, winter storms and other natural disasters, along with man-made exposures to losses resulting from, without limitation, acts of war, acts of terrorism and political instability. Such events result in insured losses that can be, and may continue to be, a material factor in our results of operations and financial position, as the extent of losses from a catastrophe is a function of both the total amount of insured exposure in an area affected by the event and the severity of the event. Because the level of insured losses that may occur in any one year cannot be accurately predicted, these losses contribute to fluctuations in our year-to-year results of operations and financial position. Some types of catastrophes are more likely to occur at certain times within the year than others, which adds an element of seasonality to our property and casualty insurance claims. The frequency and severity of catastrophic events are difficult to accurately predict in any year. However, some geographic locations are more susceptible to these events than others.
We control our direct insurance exposures in regions that are prone to naturally occurring catastrophic events through a combination of geographic diversification, restrictions on the amount and location of new business production in such regions, and reinsurance. We regularly assess our concentration of risk exposures in natural catastrophe exposed areas. We have strategies and underwriting standards to manage these exposures through individual risk selection, subject to regulatory constraints, and through the purchase of catastrophe reinsurance coverage. We use catastrophe modeling and a risk concentration management tool to monitor and control our accumulations of potential losses in natural catastrophe exposed areas of the United States, such as the Gulf and East Coasts, as well as in areas of exposure in other countries where we are exposed to a portion of an insurer’s underwriting risk under our assumed reinsurance contracts.
A new version of a third-party catastrophe modeling tool that we and others in the insurance industry utilize for estimating potential losses from natural catastrophes was released in 2011. Overall, the model increased risk estimates for our exposure to hurricanes in the United States, but the impact of the new model on our book of business varies significantly among the regions that we model for hurricanes. Based on our analysis, and the indications of other catastrophe models, we have begun to implement more targeted underwriting and rate initiatives in some regions. We will continue to take underwriting actions and/or purchase additional reinsurance as necessary to reduce our exposure.
Catastrophe modeling generally relies on multiple inputs based on experience, science, engineering and history, and the selection of those inputs requires a significant amount of judgment. The modeling results may also fail to account for risks that are outside the range of normal probability or are otherwise unforeseen. Because of this, actual results may differ materially from those derived from our modeling assumptions.
Despite our efforts to manage our catastrophe exposure, the occurrence of one or more severe natural catastrophic events in heavily populated areas could have a material effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity.


41


The process of estimating and establishing reserves for losses incurred from catastrophic events is inherently uncertain and the actual ultimate cost of a claim, net of reinsurance recoveries, may vary materially from the estimated amount reserved. Although we reinsure a portion of our exposure, reinsurance may prove to be inadequate if a major catastrophic event exceeds our reinsurance limits or if we experience a number of small catastrophic events that individually fall below our reinsurance retention level.
Catastrophes Losses
In 2013, our pre-tax catastrophe losses were $30.2 million, a significant decrease as compared to $64.7 million and $80.8 million in 2012 and 2011, respectively. Our 2013 losses included 29 catastrophes, where our largest single pre-tax catastrophe loss totaled $4.0 million.
Our 2012 losses included Super Storm Sandy, which occurred in October 2012, which represented $25.0 million ($20.0 million direct and $5.0 million assumed) of incurred losses and 26 other catastrophes, where our largest single pre-tax catastrophe loss totaled $12.3 million.
Our 2011 losses were the result of several large natural disasters in both our direct business and assumed reinsurance business. The losses in our direct business totaled $59.7 million and resulted from a string of devastating tornadoes that tore through the southern United States in April 2011, followed by storms that included a multiple-vortex tornado that destroyed Joplin, Missouri in May 2011. In July 2011, a powerful, long-lasting straightline windstorm known as a derecho hit Iowa, and in August 2011, Hurricane Irene impacted our East Coast policyholders. Our assumed reinsurance business contributed $21.1 million of catastrophe losses from prior year development and current year losses as a result of natural disasters (i.e., earthquakes and tsunamis) in New Zealand and Japan.
Catastrophe Reinsurance
In 2013 and 2012, we did not exceed our catastrophe retention of $20.0 million. In 2011, only Mercer Insurance Group exceeded its $5.0 million catastrophe retention due to losses incurred from Hurricane Irene. Effective January 1, 2012, Mercer Insurance Group is included in our catastrophe reinsurance program.
Our planned exposure reduction in southern Louisiana that began after Hurricane Katrina was completed in 2011 and reduced our estimated 100-year maximum probable loss by over 60.0 percent. To maintain profitability of our remaining southern Louisiana business, we employed portfolio optimizing techniques (i.e., proximity to the coast, type of construction, the reduction of geographic risk concentration and higher deductibles) to reduce the impact of any one future catastrophe.
In 2011, we developed earthquake underwriting guidelines to significantly decrease our earthquake exposure in the New Madrid fault area of the Midwest. The guidelines were implemented with most agencies in the New Madrid fault area in July 2011. The reduction in exposure has occurred through business being non-renewed, moved by the agent, the use of sublimits rather than using full earthquake limits, and a waiver signed by the insured rejecting earthquake coverage.
We use many reinsurers, both domestic and foreign, which helps us to avoid concentrations of credit risk associated with our reinsurance. All reinsurers we do business with must meet the following minimum criteria: capital and surplus of at least $250.0 million and an A.M. Best rating or an S&P rating of at least “A-.” If a reinsurer is rated by both rating agencies, then both ratings must be at least an “A-.”






42


The following table represents the primary reinsurers we utilize and their financial strength ratings as of December 31, 2013:
Name of Reinsurer
A.M. Best
S&P Rating
Arch Reinsurance Company
A+
A+
FM Global
A+
N/A
Hannover Rueckversicherung AG (1) (2)
A+
AA-
Lloyd’s
A
A+
Partner Re
A+
A+
QBE Reinsurance Corporation (1)
A
A+
R&V Versicherung AG (2)
N/A
AA-
SCOR Reinsurance Company
A
A+
Tokio Millennium Re Ltd
A++
AA-
(1)
Primary reinsurers participating on the property and casualty excess of loss pr