XML 30 R18.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT

Business, Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2019

The accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States ("U.S. GAAP") and are unaudited. The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities as of the date of the Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Those estimates are inherently subject to change and actual results could differ from those estimates.

The Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements include the accounts of VRIAC and its wholly owned subsidiary VFP. Intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated.

The accompanying Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements reflect adjustments (including normal, recurring adjustments) necessary to present fairly the financial position of the Company as of June 30, 2019, its results of operations, comprehensive income and changes in shareholder's equity for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, and its statements of cash flows for the six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018, in conformity with U.S. GAAP. Interim results are not necessarily indicative of full year performance.

The December 31, 2018 Consolidated Balance Sheet is from the audited Consolidated Financial Statements included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K, filed with the SEC. Therefore, these unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the audited Consolidated Financial Statements and related notes included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Adoption of New Pronouncements

The following table provides a description of the Company's adoption of new Accounting Standard Updates ("ASUs") issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") and the impact of the adoption on the Company's financial statements.



Standard	Description of Requirements	Effective date and Method of Adoption	Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
ASU 2018-02, Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income	This standard, issued in February 2018, permits a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income ("AOCI") to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 ("Tax Reform"). Stranded tax effects arise because U.S. GAAP requires that the impact of a change in tax laws or rates on deferred tax liabilities and assets be reported in net income, even if related to items recognized within accumulated other comprehensive income. The amount of the reclassification would be based on the difference between the historical corporate income tax rate and the newly enacted 21% corporate income tax rate, applied to deferred tax liabilities and assets reported within accumulated other comprehensive income.	January 1, 2019, with the change reported in the period of adoption.	The impact to the January 1, 2019 Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheet was an increase to AOCI of $137, with a corresponding decrease to Retained earnings. The ASU did not have a material impact on the Company's results of operations, cash flows, or disclosures.



Standard	Description of Requirements	Effective date and Method of Adoption	Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities	This standard, issued in August 2017, enables entities to better portray risk management activities in their financial statements, as follows: • Expands an entity's ability to hedge nonfinancial and financial risk components and reduces complexity in accounting for fair value hedges of interest rate risk, • Eliminates the requirement to separately measure and report hedge ineffectiveness and generally requires the entire change in the fair value of a hedging instrument to be presented in the same income statement line as the hedged item, and • Eases certain documentation and assessment requirements and modifies the accounting for components excluded from the assessment of hedge effectiveness, and modifies required disclosures. In October 2018, the FASB issued an amendment which expands the list of U.S. benchmark interest rates permitted in the application of hedge accounting.	January 1, 2019, using the modified retrospective method, with the exception of the presentation and disclosure requirements which were adopted prospectively.	The adoption had no effect on the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows. The adoption resulted in a change to the Company's significant accounting policy with respect to Derivatives, as follows: Fair Value Hedge: For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as a fair value hedge, the entire change in the fair value of the hedging instrument included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is recorded in the same line item in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations as impacted by the hedged item. Cash Flow Hedge: For derivative instruments that are designated and qualify as a cash flow hedge, the entire change in the fair value of the hedging instrument included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness is reported as a component of AOCI. Those amounts are subsequently reclassified to earnings when the hedged item affects earnings, and are reported in the same line item in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations as impacted by the hedged item. Other required disclosure changes have been included in Note 3, Derivative Financial Instruments.



Standard	Description of Requirements	Effective date and Method of Adoption	Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
ASU 2016-02, Leases	This standard, issued in February 2016, requires lessees to recognize a right-of-use asset and a lease liability for all leases with terms of more than 12 months. The lease liability will be measured as the present value of the lease payments, and the asset will be based on the liability. For income statement purposes, expense recognition will depend on the lessee's classification of the lease as either finance, with a front-loaded amortization expense pattern similar to current capital leases, or operating, with a straight-line expense pattern similar to current operating leases. Lessor accounting will be similar to the current model, and lessors will be required to classify leases as operating, direct financing, or sales-type. ASU 2016-02 also replaces the sale-leaseback guidance to align with the new revenue recognition standard, addresses statement of operation and statement of cash flow classification, and requires additional disclosures for all leases. In addition, the FASB issued various amendments during 2018 to clarify and simplify the provisions and implementation guidance of ASU 2016-02.	January 1, 2019 using the modified retrospective method.	The adoption did not have a material impact on the Company's financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

Future Adoption of Accounting Pronouncements

Long-Duration Contracts

In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-12, "Financial Services - Insurance (Topic 944) Targeted Improvements to the Accounting for Long-Duration Contracts" ("ASU 2018-12"), which changes the measurement and disclosures of insurance liabilities and deferred acquisition costs ("DAC") for long-duration contracts issued by insurers. The provisions of ASU 2018-12 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020, including interim periods, with early adoption permitted. On July 17, 2019, the FASB decided to issue an exposure draft proposing the extension of the effective date of ASU 2018-12 for public business entities that are required to file with the SEC by one year, to fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021. This exposure draft is expected to be issued during the third quarter of 2019 and will have a 30 day comment period. The Company is currently in the process of evaluating the provisions of ASU 2018-12. While it is not possible to estimate the expected impact of adoption at this time, the Company believes there is a reasonable possibility that implementation of ASU 2018-12 may result in a significant impact on Shareholders’ equity and future earnings patterns.

In addition to requiring significantly expanded interim and annual disclosures regarding long-duration insurance contract assets and liabilities, ASU 2018-12's provisions include modifications to the accounting for such contracts in the following areas:



ASU 2018-12 Subject Area	Description of Requirements	Transition Provisions	Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
Assumptions used to measure the liability for future policy benefits for nonparticipating traditional and limited payment insurance contracts	Requires insurers to review and, if necessary, update cash flow assumptions at least annually. The effect of updating cash flow assumptions will be measured on a retrospective catch-up basis and presented in the Statement of Operations in the period in which the update is made. The rate used to discount the liability for future policy benefits will be required to be updated quarterly, with related changes in the liability recorded in AOCI. The discount rate will be based on an upper-medium grade fixed-income corporate instrument yield reflecting the duration characteristics of the relevant liabilities.	Initial adoption is required to be reported using either a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach. Under either method, upon adoption the liability for future policy benefits will be remeasured using current discount rates as of the beginning of the earliest period presented with the impact recorded as a cumulative effect adjustment to AOCI.	The application of periodic assumption updates for nonparticipating traditional and limited payment insurance contracts is significantly different from the current accounting approach for such liabilities, which is based on assumptions that are locked in at contract inception unless a premium deficiency occurs. Under the current accounting guidance, the liability discount rate is based on expected yields on the underlying investment portfolio held by the insurer. The implications of these requirements, including transition options, and related potential financial statement impacts are currently being evaluated.
Measurement of market risk benefits	Creates a new category of benefit features called market risk benefits, defined as features that protect contract holders from capital market risk and expose the insurers to that risk. Market risk benefits will be required to be measured at fair value, with changes in fair value recognized in the Statement of Operations, except for changes in fair value attributable to changes in the instrument-specific credit risk, which will be recorded in AOCI.	Full retrospective application is required. Upon adoption, any difference between the fair value and pre-adoption carrying value of market risk benefits not currently measured at fair value will be recorded to retained earnings. In addition, the cumulative effect of changes in instrument-specific credit risk will be reclassified from retained earnings to AOCI.	Under the current accounting guidance, certain features that are expected to meet the definition of market risk benefits are accounted for as either insurance liabilities or embedded derivatives. The implications of these requirements and related potential financial statement impacts are currently being evaluated.



ASU 2018-12 Subject Area	Description of Requirements	Transition Provisions	Effect on the Financial Statements or Other Significant Matters
Amortization of DAC and other balances	Requires DAC (and other balances that refer to the DAC model, such as deferred sales inducement costs and unearned revenue liabilities) for all long-duration contracts to be measured on a constant level basis over the expected life of the contract.	Initial adoption is required to be reported using either a full retrospective or modified retrospective approach. The method of transition applied for DAC and other balances must be consistent with the transition method selected for future policy benefit liabilities, as described above.	This approach is intended to approximate straight-line amortization and cannot be based on revenue or profits as it is under the current accounting model. Related amounts in AOCI will be eliminated upon adoption. ASU 2018-12 did not change the existing accounting guidance related to value of business acquired ("VOBA") and net cost of reinsurance, which allows, but does not require, insurers to amortize such balances on a basis consistent with DAC. The implications of these requirements, including transition options, and related potential financial statement impacts are currently being evaluated.

The following table provides a description of future adoptions of other new accounting standards that may have an impact on the Company's financial statements when adopted:



Standard	Description of Requirements	Effective date and transition provisions	Effect on the financial statements or other significant matters
ASU 2019-04, Codification Improvements to Financial Instruments	This standard, issued in April 2019, represents changes to clarify, correct errors in, and improve the financial instruments guidance in the following areas: • Topic 326, Financial Instruments-Credit Losses, • Topic 815, Derivatives and Hedging, and • Topic 825, Financial Instruments.	Generally January 1, 2020, including interim periods, with early adoption permitted. The effective dates and transition methods vary by provision.	The Company is currently in the process of determining the impact of adoption of the provisions of ASU 2019-04.
ASU 2018-15, Customer's Accounting for Implementation Costs in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That is a Service Contract	This standard, issued in August 2018, requires a customer in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract to follow the guidance for internal-use software projects to determine which implementation costs to capitalize as an asset. Capitalized implementation costs are required to be expensed over the term of the hosting arrangement. In addition, a customer is required to apply the impairment and abandonment guidance for long-lived assets to the capitalized implementation costs. Balances related to capitalized implementation costs must be presented in the same financial statement line items as other hosting arrangement balances, and additional disclosures are required.	January 1, 2020 with early adoption permitted. Initial adoption of ASU 2018-15 may be reported either on a prospective or retrospective basis.	The Company is currently in the process of determining the impact of adoption of the provisions of ASU 2018-15.
ASU 2018-14, Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Defined Benefit Plans	This standard, issued in August 2018, eliminates certain disclosure requirements that are no longer considered cost beneficial and requires new disclosures that are considered relevant.	January 1, 2021 with early adoption permitted. Initial adoption of ASU 2018-14 is required to be reported on a retrospective basis for all periods presented.	The Company is currently in the process of determining the impact of adoption of the provisions of ASU 2018-14.
ASU 2018-13, Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement	This standard, issued in August 2018, simplifies certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurement.	January 1, 2020 with early adoption permitted. The transition method varies by provision.	The Company is currently in the process of determining the impact of adoption of the provisions of ASU 2018-13.
ASU 2016-13, Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments	This standard, issued in June 2016: • Introduces a new current expected credit loss ("CECL") model to measure impairment on certain types of financial instruments, • Requires an entity to estimate lifetime expected credit losses, under the new CECL model, based on relevant information about historical events, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts, • Modifies the impairment model for available for-sale debt securities, and • Provides a simplified accounting model for purchased financial assets with credit deterioration since their origination. In addition, the FASB issued various amendments during 2018 and 2019 to clarify the provisions of ASU 2016-13.	January 1, 2020, including interim periods, with early adoption permitted. Initial adoption of ASU 2016-13 is required to be reported on a modified retrospective basis, with a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the year of adoption, except for certain provisions that are required to be applied prospectively.	The Company is currently in the process of determining the impact of adoption of the provisions of ASU 2016-13.

Investment

The Company has elected the FVO for certain of its fixed maturities to better match the measurement of assets and liabilities in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations. Certain collateralized mortgage obligations ("CMOs"), primarily interest-only and principal-only strips, are accounted for as hybrid instruments and reported at fair value with changes in the fair value recorded in Other net realized capital gains (losses) in the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Operations.

The Company invests in various categories of Collateralized Mortgage Obligations ("CMOs"), including CMOs that are not agency-backed, that are subject to different degrees of risk from changes in interest rates and defaults. The principal risks inherent in holding CMOs are prepayment and extension risks related to significant decreases and increases in interest rates resulting in the prepayment of principal from the underlying mortgages, either earlier or later than originally anticipated. As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, approximately 49.2% and 52.5%, respectively, of the Company’s CMO holdings, were invested in the above mentioned types of CMOs such as interest-only or principal-only strips, that are subject to more prepayment and extension risk than traditional CMOs.

Public corporate fixed maturity securities are distinguished from private corporate fixed maturity securities based upon the manner in which they are transacted. Public corporate fixed maturity securities are issued initially through market intermediaries on a registered basis or pursuant to Rule 144A under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Securities Act") and are traded on the secondary market through brokers acting as principal. Private corporate fixed maturity securities are originally issued by borrowers directly to investors pursuant to Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act, and are traded in the secondary market directly with counterparties, either without the participation of a broker or in agency transactions.

Repurchase Agreements

As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the Company did not have any securities pledged in dollar rolls, repurchase agreement transactions or reverse repurchase agreements.

Securities Lending

The Company engages in securities lending whereby the initial collateral is required at a rate of 102% of the market value of the loaned securities. The lending agent retains the collateral and invests it in high quality liquid assets on behalf of the Company. The market value of the loaned securities is monitored on a daily basis with additional collateral obtained or refunded as the market value of the loaned securities fluctuates. The lending agent indemnifies the Company against losses resulting from the failure of a counterparty to return securities pledged where collateral is insufficient to cover the loss. As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the fair value of loaned securities was $865 and $759, respectively, and is included in Securities pledged on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

If cash is received as collateral, the lending agent retains the cash collateral and invests it in short-term liquid assets on behalf of the Company. As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, cash collateral retained by the lending agent and invested in short-term liquid assets on the Company's behalf was $769 and $719, respectively, and is recorded in Short-term investments under securities loan agreements, including collateral delivered on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, liabilities to return collateral of $769 and $719, respectively, are included in Payables under securities loan agreements, including collateral held, on the Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Company accepts non-cash collateral in the form of securities. The securities retained as collateral by the lending agent may not be sold or re-pledged, except in the event of default, and are not reflected on the Company’s Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. This collateral generally consists of U.S. Treasury, U.S. Government agency securities and MBS pools. As of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018, the fair value of securities retained as collateral by the lending agent on the Company’s behalf was $125 and $67, respectively.

Based on the Company's quarterly evaluation of its securities in a unrealized loss position, described below, the Company concluded that these securities were not other-than-temporarily impaired as of June 30, 2019. The Company does not intend to sell the investments and it is not more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the investments before recovery of their amortized cost bases.

On a quarterly basis, the Company evaluates its available-for-sale investment portfolio to determine whether there has been an other-than-temporary decline in fair value below the amortized cost basis. All available-for-sale securities with fair values less than amortized cost are included in the Company’s evaluation. Generally, for non-structured securities, management considers the estimated fair value as the recovery value when available information does not indicate that another value is more appropriate. When information is identified that indicates a recovery value other than estimated fair value, management considers in the determination of recovery value the same consideration utilized in its overall impairment evaluation process, which incorporates available information and the company’s best estimate of scenario based outcomes regarding the specific security and issuer. The Company also considers quality and amount of any credit enhancement; the security's position within the capital structure of the issuer; fundamentals of the industry and geographic area in which the security issuer operates; and the overall macroeconomic conditions. For structured securities, such as non-agency RMBS, CMBS, and ABS, the Company evaluates other-than-temporary impairments based on actual and projected cash flows, after considering the quality and updated loan-to-value ratios, reflecting current home prices of the underlying collateral, forecasted loss severity, the payment priority in the tranche and any credit enhancement within the structure. In assessing credit impairment, the Company performs discounted cash flow analysis comparing the current amortized cost of a security to the present value of the expected future cash flows, including estimated defaults, and prepayments. The discount rate is generally the effective interest rate of the fixed maturity prior to the impairment.

See the Business, Basis of Presentation and Significant Accounting Policies Note to our Consolidated Financial Statements in Part II, Item 8. in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the policy used to evaluate whether the investments are other-than-temporarily impaired.

Derivatives

Derivative Financial Instruments

The Company enters into the following types of derivatives:

Interest rate caps: The Company uses interest rate cap contracts to hedge the interest rate exposure arising from duration mismatches between assets and liabilities. Interest rate caps are also used to hedge interest rate exposure if rates rise above a specified level. Such increases in rates will require the Company to incur additional expenses. The future payout from the interest rate caps fund this increased exposure. The Company pays an upfront premium to purchase these caps. The Company utilizes these contracts in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Interest rate swaps: Interest rate swaps are used by the Company primarily to reduce market risks from changes in interest rates and to alter interest rate exposure arising from mismatches between assets and/or liabilities. Interest rate swaps are also used to hedge the interest rate risk associated with the value of assets it owns or in an anticipation of acquiring them. Using interest rate swaps, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed rate and floating rate interest payments, calculated by reference to an agreed upon notional principal amount. These transactions are entered into pursuant to master agreements that provide for a single net payment to be made to/from the counterparty at each due date. The Company utilizes these contracts in qualifying hedging relationships as well as non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Foreign exchange swaps: The Company uses foreign exchange or currency swaps to reduce the risk of change in the value, yield or cash flows associated with certain foreign denominated invested assets. Foreign exchange swaps represent contracts that require the exchange of foreign currency cash flows against U.S. dollar cash flows at regular periods, typically quarterly or semi-annually. The Company utilizes these contracts in qualifying hedging relationships as well as non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Credit default swaps: Credit default swaps are used to reduce credit loss exposure with respect to certain assets that the Company owns, or to assume credit exposure on certain assets that the Company does not own. Payments are made to, or received from, the counterparty at specified intervals. In the event of a default on the underlying credit exposure, the Company will either receive a payment (purchased credit protection) or will be required to make a payment (sold credit protection) equal to the par minus recovery value of the swap contract. The Company utilizes these contracts in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Currency forwards: The Company utilizes currency forward contracts to hedge currency exposure related to invested assets. The Company utilizes these contracts in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Forwards: The Company uses forward contracts to hedge certain invested assets against movement in interest rates, particularly mortgage rates. The Company uses To Be Announced mortgage-backed securities as an economic hedge against rate movements. The Company utilizes forward contracts in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Futures: The Company uses interest rate futures contracts to hedge its exposure to market risks due to changes in interest rates. The Company enters into exchange traded futures with regulated futures commissions that are members of the exchange. The Company also posts initial and variation margins, with the exchange, on a daily basis. The Company utilizes exchange-traded

futures in non-qualifying hedging relationships. The Company may also use futures contracts as a hedge against an increase in certain equity indices.

Swaptions: A swaption is an option to enter into a swap with a forward starting effective date. The Company uses swaptions to hedge the interest rate exposure associated with the minimum crediting rate and book value guarantees embedded in the retirement products that the Company offers. Increases in interest rates will generate losses on assets that are backing such liabilities. In certain instances, the Company locks in the economic impact of existing purchased swaptions by entering into offsetting written swaptions. The Company pays a premium when it purchases the swaption. The Company utilizes these contracts in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Options: The Company uses equity options to hedge against an increase in various equity indices. Such increases may result in increased payments to the holders of the FIA contracts. The Company pays an upfront premium to purchase these options. The Company utilizes these options in non-qualifying hedging relationships.

Managed custody guarantees ("MCGs"): The Company issues certain credited rate guarantees on variable fixed income portfolios that represent stand-alone derivatives. The market value is partially determined by, among other things, levels of or changes in interest rates, prepayment rates and credit ratings/spreads.

Embedded derivatives: The Company also invests in certain fixed maturity instruments and has issued certain products that contain embedded derivatives for which market value is at least partially determined by, among other things, levels of or changes in domestic and/or foreign interest rates (short-term or long-term), exchange rates, prepayment rates, equity rates, or credit ratings/spreads. In addition, the Company has entered into coinsurance with funds withheld arrangements, which contain embedded derivatives.

The Company's use of derivatives is limited mainly to economic hedging to reduce the Company's exposure to cash flow variability of assets and liabilities, interest rate risk, credit risk, exchange rate risk and equity market risk. It is the Company's policy not to offset amounts recognized for derivative instruments and amounts recognized for the right to reclaim cash collateral or the obligation to return cash collateral arising from derivative instruments executed with the same counterparty under a master netting arrangement, which provides the Company with the legal right of offset. However, in accordance with the Chicago Mercantile Exchange ("CME") rules related to the variation margin payments, the Company is required to adjust the derivative balances with the variation margin payments related to its cleared derivatives executed through CME.

Based on the notional amounts, a substantial portion of the Company’s derivative positions was not designated or did not qualify for hedge accounting as part of a hedging relationship as of June 30, 2019 and December 31, 2018. The Company utilizes derivative contracts mainly to hedge exposure to variability in cash flows, interest rate risk, credit risk, foreign exchange risk and equity market risk. The majority of derivatives used by the Company are designated as product hedges, which hedge the exposure arising from insurance liabilities or guarantees embedded in the contracts the Company offers through various product lines. These derivatives do not qualify for hedge accounting as they do not meet the criteria of being "highly effective" as outlined in ASC Topic 815, but do provide an economic hedge, which is in line with the Company’s risk management objectives. The Company also uses derivatives contracts to hedge its exposure to various risks associated with the investment portfolio. The Company does not seek hedge accounting treatment for certain of these derivatives as they generally do not qualify for hedge accounting due to the criteria required under the portfolio hedging rules outlined in ASC Topic 815. The Company also uses credit default swaps coupled with other investments in order to produce the investment characteristics of otherwise permissible investments that do not qualify as effective accounting hedges under ASC Topic 815.

Fair Value Measurement

Valuation of Financial Assets and Liabilities at Fair Value

Certain assets and liabilities are measured at estimated fair value on the Company's Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets. The Company defines fair value as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. The exit price and the transaction (or entry) price will be the same at initial recognition in many circumstances. However, in certain cases, the transaction price may not represent fair value. The fair value of a liability is based on the amount that would be paid to transfer a liability to a third-party with an equal credit standing. Fair value is required to be a market-based measurement that is determined based on a hypothetical transaction at the measurement date, from a market participant's perspective. The Company considers three broad valuation approaches when a quoted price is unavailable: (i) the market approach, (ii) the income approach and (iii) the cost approach. The Company determines the most appropriate valuation technique to use, given the instrument being measured and the availability of sufficient inputs. The Company prioritizes the inputs to fair valuation approaches and allows for the use of unobservable inputs to the extent that observable inputs are not available.

The Company utilizes a number of valuation methodologies to determine the fair values of its financial assets and liabilities in conformity with the concepts of exit price and the fair value hierarchy as prescribed in ASC Topic 820. Valuations are obtained from third-party commercial pricing services, brokers and industry-standard, vendor-provided software that models the value based on market observable inputs. The valuations obtained from third-party commercial pricing services are non-binding. The Company reviews the assumptions and inputs used by third-party commercial pricing services for each reporting period in order to determine an appropriate fair value hierarchy level. The documentation and analysis obtained from third-party commercial pricing services are reviewed by the Company, including in-depth validation procedures confirming the observability of inputs. The valuations are reviewed and validated monthly through the internal valuation committee price variance review, comparisons to internal pricing models, back testing to recent trades or monitoring of trading volumes.

The valuation approaches and key inputs for each category of assets or liabilities that are classified within Level 2 and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are presented below.

For fixed maturities classified as Level 2 assets, fair values are determined using a matrix-based market approach, based on prices obtained from third-party commercial pricing services and the Company’s matrix and analytics-based pricing models, which in each case incorporate a variety of market observable information as valuation inputs. The market observable inputs used for these fair value measurements, by fixed maturity asset class, are as follows:

U.S. Treasuries: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being stripped interest and principal U.S. Treasury yield curves that represent a U.S. Treasury zero-coupon curve.

U.S. government agencies and authorities, State, municipalities and political subdivisions: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being U.S. Treasury yield curves, trades of comparable securities, credit spreads off benchmark yields and issuer ratings.

U.S. corporate public securities, Foreign corporate public securities and foreign governments: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being benchmark yields, trades of comparable securities, issuer ratings, bids and credit spreads off benchmark yields.

U.S. corporate private securities and Foreign corporate private securities: Fair values are determined using a matrix and analytics-based pricing model. The model incorporates the current level of risk-free interest rates, current corporate credit spreads, credit quality of the issuer and cash flow characteristics of the security. The model also considers a liquidity spread, the value of any collateral, the capital structure of the issuer, the presence of guarantees, and prices and quotes for comparably rated publicly traded securities.

RMBS, CMBS and ABS: Fair value is determined using third-party commercial pricing services, with the primary inputs being credit spreads off benchmark yields, prepayment speed assumptions, current and forecasted loss severity, debt service coverage ratios, collateral type, payment priority within tranche and the vintage of the loans underlying the security.

Generally, the Company does not obtain more than one vendor price from pricing services per instrument. The Company uses a hierarchy process in which prices are obtained from a primary vendor and, if that vendor is unable to provide the price, the next vendor in the hierarchy is contacted until a price is obtained or it is determined that a price cannot be obtained from a commercial pricing service. When a price cannot be obtained from a commercial pricing service, independent broker quotes are solicited. Securities priced using independent broker quotes are classified as Level 3.

Broker quotes and prices obtained from pricing services are reviewed and validated through an internal valuation committee price variance review, comparisons to internal pricing models, back testing to recent trades or monitoring of trading volumes.

Fair values of privately placed bonds are determined primarily using a matrix-based pricing model and are generally classified as Level 2 assets. The model considers the current level of risk-free interest rates, current corporate spreads, the credit quality of the issuer and cash flow characteristics of the security. Also considered are factors such as the net worth of the borrower, the value of collateral, the capital structure of the borrower, the presence of guarantees and the Company's evaluation of the borrower's ability to compete in its relevant market. Using this data, the model generates estimated market values which the Company considers reflective of the fair value of each privately placed bond.

Equity securities: Level 2 and Level 3 equity securities, typically private equities or equity securities not traded on an exchange, are valued by other sources such as analytics or brokers.

Derivatives: Derivatives are carried at fair value, which is determined using the Company's derivative accounting system in conjunction with observable key financial data from third party sources, such as yield curves, exchange rates, S&P 500 Index prices, London Interbank Offered Rates ("LIBOR") and Overnight Index Swap ("OIS") rates. The Company uses OIS for valuations of collateralized interest rate derivatives, which are obtained from third-party sources. For those derivatives that are unable to be valued by the accounting system, the Company typically utilizes values established by third-party brokers. Counterparty credit risk is considered and incorporated in the Company's valuation process through counterparty credit rating requirements and monitoring of overall exposure. It is the Company's policy to transact only with investment grade counterparties with a credit rating of A- or better. The Company's nonperformance risk is also considered and incorporated in the Company's valuation process. The Company also has certain credit default swaps and options that are priced by third party vendors or by using models that primarily use market observable inputs, but contain inputs that are not observable to market participants, which have been classified as Level 3. The remaining derivative instruments are valued based on market observable inputs and are classified as Level 2.

Guaranteed benefit derivatives: The index-crediting feature in the Company's FIA contract is an embedded derivative that is required to be accounted for separately from the host contract. The fair value of the obligation is calculated based on actuarial and capital market assumptions related to the projected cash flows, including benefits and related contract charges, over the anticipated life of the related contracts. The cash flow estimates are produced by market implied assumptions. These derivatives are classified as Level 3 liabilities in the fair value hierarchy.

The Company records reserves for Stabilizer and MCG contracts containing guaranteed credited rates. The guarantee is treated as an embedded derivative or a stand-alone derivative (depending on the underlying product) and is required to be reported at fair value. The estimated fair value is determined based on the present value of projected future claims, minus the present value of future guaranteed premiums. At inception of the contract, the Company projects a guaranteed premium to be equal to the present value of the projected future claims. The income associated with the contracts is projected using relevant actuarial and capital market assumptions, including benefits and related contract charges, over the anticipated life of the related contracts. The cash flow estimates are produced by using stochastic techniques under a variety of risk neutral scenarios and other market implied assumptions. These derivatives are classified as Level 3 liabilities.

The discount rate used to determine the fair value of the embedded derivatives and stand-alone derivative includes an adjustment for nonperformance risk. The nonperformance risk adjustment incorporates a blend of observable, similarly rated peer holding company credit spreads, adjusted to reflect the credit quality of the Company, as well as an adjustment to reflect the non-default spreads and the priority and recovery rates of policyholder claims.

The Company's valuation actuaries are responsible for the policies and procedures for valuing the embedded derivatives, reflecting the capital markets and actuarial valuation inputs and nonperformance risk in the estimate of the fair value of the embedded derivatives. The actuarial and capital market assumptions for each liability are approved by each product's Chief Risk Officer

("CRO"), including an independent annual review by the CRO. Models used to value the embedded derivatives must comply with the Company's governance policies.

Quarterly, an attribution analysis is performed to quantify changes in fair value measurements and a sensitivity analysis is used to analyze the changes. The changes in fair value measurements are also compared to corresponding movements in the hedge target to assess the validity of the attributions. The results of the attribution analysis are reviewed by the valuation actuaries, responsible CFOs, Controllers, CROs and/or others as nominated by management.

Embedded derivatives on reinsurance: The carrying value of embedded derivatives is estimated based upon the change in the fair value of the assets supporting the funds withheld payable under reinsurance agreements. The fair value of the embedded derivatives is based on market observable inputs and is classified as Level 2.

Transfers in and out of Level 1 and 2

There were no securities transferred between Level 1 and Level 2 for the three and six months ended June 30, 2019 and 2018. The Company’s policy is to recognize transfers in and transfers out as of the beginning of the reporting period.

Level 3 Financial Instruments

The fair values of certain assets and liabilities are determined using prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement (i.e., Level 3 as defined by ASC Topic 820), including but not limited to liquidity spreads for investments within markets deemed not currently active. These valuations, whether derived internally or obtained from a third-party, use critical assumptions that are not widely available to estimate market participant expectations in valuing the asset or liability. In addition, the Company has determined, for certain financial instruments, an active market is such a significant input to determine fair value that the presence of an inactive market may lead to classification in Level 3. In light of the methodologies employed to obtain the fair values of financial assets and liabilities classified as Level 3, additional information is presented below.