Contingencies and Other Matters	9 Months Ended
Contingencies and Other Matters	Sep. 30, 2020
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Contingencies and Other Matters	Contingencies and Other Matters The Company, through its subsidiaries, is contingently liable for various guarantees provided in the ordinary course of business. A.Financial Guarantees: Retiree and Life Insurance Benefits The Company guarantees that separate account assets will be sufficient to pay certain life insurance or retiree benefits. For the majority of these benefits, the sponsoring employers are primarily responsible for ensuring that assets are sufficient to pay these benefits and are required to maintain assets that exceed a certain percentage of benefit obligations. If employers fail to do so, the Company or an affiliate of the buyer of the retirement benefits business has the right to redirect the management of the related assets to provide for benefit payments. As of September 30, 2020, employers maintained assets that generally exceeded the benefit obligations under these arrangements of approximately $455 million. An additional liability is established if management believes that the Company will be required to make payments under the guarantees; there were no additional liabilities required for these guarantees, net of reinsurance, as of September 30, 2020. Separate account assets supporting these guarantees are classified in Levels 1 and 2 of the GAAP fair value hierarchy. The Company does not expect that these financial guarantees will have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, liquidity or financial condition. B.Certain Other Guarantees The Company had indemnification obligations as of September 30, 2020 in connection with acquisition and disposition transactions. These indemnification obligations are triggered by the breach of representations or covenants provided by the Company, such as representations for the presentation of financial statements, filing of tax returns, compliance with law or identification of outstanding litigation. These obligations are typically subject to various time limitations, defined by the contract or by operation of law, such as statutes of limitation. In some cases, the maximum potential amount due is subject to contractual limitations based on a percentage of the transaction purchase price, while in other cases limitations are not specified or applicable. The Company does not believe that it is possible to determine the maximum potential amount due under these obligations because not all amounts due under these indemnification obligations are subject to limitation. There were no liabilities for these indemnification obligations as of September 30, 2020. C.Guaranty Fund Assessments The Company operates in a regulatory environment that may require its participation in assessments under state insurance guaranty association laws. The Company’s exposure to assessments for certain obligations of insolvent insurance companies to policyholders and claimants is based on its share of business written in the relevant jurisdictions. There were no material effects for existing or new guaranty fund assessments for the nine months ended September 30, 2020. D.Legal and Regulatory Matters The Company is routinely involved in numerous claims, lawsuits, regulatory inquiries and audits, government investigations, including under the federal False Claims Act and state false claims acts initiated by a government investigating body or by a qui tam relator’s filing of a complaint under court seal, and other legal matters arising, for the most part, in the ordinary course of managing a global health service business. Additionally, the Company has received and is cooperating with subpoenas or similar processes from various governmental agencies requesting information, all arising in the normal course of its business. Disputed tax matters arising from audits by the Internal Revenue Service or other state and foreign jurisdictions, including those resulting in litigation, are accounted for under GAAP guidance for uncertain tax positions. Pending litigation and legal or regulatory matters that the Company has identified with a reasonably possible material loss and certain other material litigation matters are described below. For those matters that the Company has identified with a reasonably possible material loss, the Company provides disclosure in the aggregate of accruals and range of loss, or a statement that such information cannot be estimated. The Company’s accruals for the matters discussed below under “Litigation Matters” and “Regulatory Matters” are not material. Due to numerous uncertain factors presented in these cases, it is not possible to estimate an aggregate range of loss (if any) for these matters at this time. In light of the uncertainties involved in these matters, there is no assurance that their ultimate resolution will not exceed the amounts currently accrued by the Company. An adverse outcome in one or more of these matters could be material to the Company’s results of operations, financial condition or liquidity for any particular period. The outcomes of lawsuits are inherently unpredictable and we may be unsuccessful in these ongoing litigation matters or any future claims or litigation. Litigation Matters Risk Corridors and CSR Litigation with the Federal Government. As a result of a Supreme Court decision in April 2020, the Company filed suit in early May against the United States in the U.S. Court of Federal Claims seeking to recover two types of payments the Federal Government owes Cigna under the risk corridors and cost-sharing reduction (“CSR”) programs of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”). In aggregate, the complaint seeks to recover more than $315 million: $120 million in risk corridors payments and more than $195 million in CSR payments. We received $120 million in payments in September 2020, which resolved our risk corridors claim. Our claim seeking recovery for CSR payments is stayed pending resolution of a consolidated set of appeals currently before the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Cigna Litigation with Anthem. In February 2017, the Company delivered a notice to Anthem terminating the 2015 merger agreement and notifying Anthem that it must pay the Company the $1.85 billion reverse termination fee pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement. Also in February 2017, the Company filed suit against Anthem in the Delaware Court of Chancery (the “Chancery Court”) seeking declaratory judgments that the Company’s termination of the merger agreement was valid and that Anthem was not permitted to extend the termination date. The complaint also sought payment of the reverse termination fee and additional damages in an amount exceeding $13 billion, including the lost premium value to the Company’s shareholders caused by Anthem’s willful breaches of the merger agreement. Anthem countersued, alleging its own claims for damages. On February 15, 2017, the Chancery Court granted Anthem’s motion for a temporary restraining order and temporarily enjoined the Company from terminating the merger agreement. In May 2017, the Chancery Court denied Anthem’s motion for a preliminary injunction to enjoin Cigna from terminating the merger agreement but stayed its ruling pending Anthem’s determination as to whether to seek an appeal. Anthem subsequently notified Cigna and the Chancery Court that it did not intend to appeal the Chancery Court’s decision. As a result, the merger agreement was terminated. The litigation continued over the next three years. A trial was held during the first quarter of 2019, oral arguments on post-trial briefs were held on November 26, 2019, and in early 2020, supplemental post-trial briefing was completed. In August 2020, the Chancery Court issued an opinion finding that, although Cigna breached its contractual obligation to use reasonable best efforts to support the Anthem/Cigna merger agreement, its actions did not cause the merger to fail. The Court denied claims by both parties for damages and further denied Cigna’s claim for a reverse termination fee. The Company filed a Notice of Appeal with the Delaware Supreme Court on October 30, 2020. The Company's opening brief is due on or before December 15, 2020 with Anthem's answering brief due thirty days following the Company's brief filing. We believe in the merits of our case and intend to vigorously pursue our positions. Express Scripts Litigation with Anthem. In March 2016, Anthem filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York alleging various breach of contract claims against Express Scripts relating to the parties’ rights and obligations under the periodic pricing review section of the pharmacy benefit management agreement between the parties including allegations that Express Scripts failed to negotiate new pricing concessions in good faith, as well as various alleged service issues. Anthem also requested that the court enter declaratory judgment that Express Scripts is required to provide Anthem competitive benchmark pricing, that Anthem can terminate the agreement, and that Express Scripts is required to provide Anthem with post-termination services at competitive benchmark pricing for one year following any termination by Anthem. Anthem claims it is entitled to $13 billion in additional pricing concessions over the remaining term of the agreement, as well as $1.8 billion for one year following any contract termination by Anthem and $150 million damages for service issues (“Anthem’s Allegations”). On April 19, 2016, in response to Anthem’s complaint, Express Scripts filed its answer denying Anthem’s Allegations in their entirety and asserting affirmative defenses and counterclaims against Anthem. The court subsequently granted Anthem’s motion to dismiss two of six counts of Express Scripts’ amended counterclaims. The current scheduling order runs through the completion of summary judgment briefing in April 2021. There is no tentative trial date. We believe in the merits of our claims and dispute Anthem’s claims, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves and pursue our claims. Regulatory Matters Civil Investigative Demand. The U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) is conducting an industry-wide investigation of Medicare Advantage organizations’ risk adjustment practices under Medicare Parts C and D including medical chart reviews and health exams. For certain other Medicare Advantage organizations, the investigation has resulted in litigation. The Company is currently responding to information requests (civil investigative demands) received from the DOJ (U.S. Attorney’s Offices for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania and the Southern District of New York ("SDNY")). Additionally, in relation to the SDNY’s pending investigation, a qui tam action that was filed by a relator in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York in 2017 was unsealed on August 6, 2020. The action asserts claims related to risk adjustment practices arising from certain home health assessments conducted as part of Cigna’s Medicare Advantage business. The DOJ has not intervened in the case at this time. We intend to vigorously defend ourselves against relator’s claims and will continue to cooperate with the DOJ’s investigations.