Note 9 - Income Taxes	6 Months Ended
Jun. 30, 2016
Income Tax Disclosure [Abstract]
Income Taxes	Income Taxes As required under the accounting standard regarding accounting for income taxes, our deferred tax assets (“DTAs”) and deferred tax liabilities (“DTLs”) are recognized under the balance sheet method, which recognizes the future tax effect of temporary differences between the amounts recorded in our condensed consolidated financial statements and the tax bases of these amounts. DTAs and DTLs are measured using the enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the periods in which the DTA or DTL is expected to be realized or settled. Our provision for income taxes for interim financial periods is based on an estimate of our annual effective tax rate for continuing operations for the full year. When estimating our full year 2016 and 2015 annual effective tax rates, we accounted for the tax effects of gains and losses on our investments, changes as a result of the accounting standard regarding the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and certain other adjustments, as discrete items at the federal applicable tax rate. For federal income tax purposes, as of June 30, 2016, we had approximately $949 million of NOL carryforwards and no foreign tax credit carryforward. To the extent not utilized, the NOL carryforwards will expire during tax years 2030 through 2032. We are required to establish a valuation allowance against our DTAs when it is more likely than not that all or some portion of our DTAs will not be realized. At each balance sheet date, we assess our need for a valuation allowance. Our assessment is based on all available evidence, both positive and negative. This requires management to exercise judgment and make assumptions regarding whether our DTAs will be realized in future periods. In making this assessment as of June 30, 2016, we determined that certain state and local NOLs, relating to non-insurance entities within our consolidated group, may not be realized during their appropriate carryforward period. Therefore, we have recorded a valuation allowance of $39.2 million, primarily relating to the DTAs associated with these state and local NOLs as of June 30, 2016. Our 2016 purchases of Convertible Senior Notes due 2017 and 2019 resulted in a pretax charge of $57.7 million. This included $41.0 million of market premium related to the purchases, of which $29.2 million was non-deductible for tax purposes and impacted our annualized effective tax rate. Overall, we recorded an income tax benefit of $9.1 million related to these purchases as of June 30, 2016. We are contesting adjustments resulting from the examination by the IRS of our 2000 through 2007 consolidated federal income tax returns. The IRS opposes the recognition of certain tax losses and deductions that were generated through our investment in a portfolio of non-economic REMIC residual interests and has proposed denying the associated tax benefits of these items. We appealed these proposed adjustments to Appeals and made “qualified deposits” with the U.S. Treasury of $85 million in June 2008 relating to the 2000 through 2004 tax years and $4 million in May 2010 relating to the 2005 through 2007 tax years, in order to avoid the accrual of incremental above-market-rate interest with respect to the proposed adjustments. We attempted to reach a compromised settlement with Appeals, but in September 2014 we received Notices of Deficiency covering the 2000 through 2007 tax years that assert unpaid taxes and penalties of approximately $157 million. The Deficiency Amount has not been reduced to reflect our NOL carryback ability. As of June 30, 2016, there also would be interest of approximately $130 million related to these matters. Depending on the outcome, additional state income taxes, penalties and interest (estimated in the aggregate to be approximately $33 million as of June 30, 2016) also may become due when a final resolution is reached. The Notices of Deficiency also reflected additional amounts due of approximately $105 million, which are primarily associated with the disallowance of the previously filed carryback of our 2008 NOL to the 2006 and 2007 tax years. We currently believe that the disallowance of our 2008 NOL carryback is a precautionary position by the IRS and that we will ultimately maintain the benefit of this NOL carryback claim. On December 3, 2014, we petitioned the U.S. Tax Court to litigate the Deficiency Amount. On September 1, 2015, we received a notice that the case had been scheduled for trial. However, the parties have jointly filed, and the U.S. Tax Court has approved, motions for continuance in this matter to postpone the trial date. Also, in February 2016, the U.S. Tax Court approved a joint motion to consolidate for trial, briefing and opinion our case with a similar case involving MGIC Investment Corporation. The litigation could take several years to resolve and may result in substantial legal expenses. We can provide no assurance regarding the outcome of any such litigation or whether a compromised settlement with the IRS will ultimately be reached. We believe that an adequate provision for income taxes has been made for the potential liabilities that may result from this matter. However, if the ultimate resolution of this matter produces a result that differs materially from our current expectations, there could be a material impact on our effective tax rate, results of operations and cash flows.

Income Taxes

As required under the accounting standard regarding accounting for income taxes, our deferred tax assets (“DTAs”) and deferred tax liabilities (“DTLs”) are recognized under the balance sheet method, which recognizes the future tax effect of temporary differences between the amounts recorded in our condensed consolidated financial statements and the tax bases of these amounts. DTAs and DTLs are measured using the enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the periods in which the DTA or DTL is expected to be realized or settled.

Our provision for income taxes for interim financial periods is based on an estimate of our annual effective tax rate for continuing operations for the full year. When estimating our full year 2016 and 2015 annual effective tax rates, we accounted for the tax effects of gains and losses on our investments, changes as a result of the accounting standard regarding the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes and certain other adjustments, as discrete items at the federal applicable tax rate.

For federal income tax purposes, as of June 30, 2016, we had approximately $949 million of NOL carryforwards and no foreign tax credit carryforward. To the extent not utilized, the NOL carryforwards will expire during tax years 2030 through 2032.

We are required to establish a valuation allowance against our DTAs when it is more likely than not that all or some portion of our DTAs will not be realized. At each balance sheet date, we assess our need for a valuation allowance. Our assessment is based on all available evidence, both positive and negative. This requires management to exercise judgment and make assumptions regarding whether our DTAs will be realized in future periods. In making this assessment as of June 30, 2016, we determined that certain state and local NOLs, relating to non-insurance entities within our consolidated group, may not be realized during their appropriate carryforward period. Therefore, we have recorded a valuation allowance of $39.2 million, primarily relating to the DTAs associated with these state and local NOLs as of June 30, 2016.

Our 2016 purchases of Convertible Senior Notes due 2017 and 2019 resulted in a pretax charge of $57.7 million. This included $41.0 million of market premium related to the purchases, of which $29.2 million was non-deductible for tax purposes and impacted our annualized effective tax rate. Overall, we recorded an income tax benefit of $9.1 million related to these purchases as of June 30, 2016.

We are contesting adjustments resulting from the examination by the IRS of our 2000 through 2007 consolidated federal income tax returns. The IRS opposes the recognition of certain tax losses and deductions that were generated through our investment in a portfolio of non-economic REMIC residual interests and has proposed denying the associated tax benefits of these items. We appealed these proposed adjustments to Appeals and made “qualified deposits” with the U.S. Treasury of $85 million in June 2008 relating to the 2000 through 2004 tax years and $4 million in May 2010 relating to the 2005 through 2007 tax years, in order to avoid the accrual of incremental above-market-rate interest with respect to the proposed adjustments.

We attempted to reach a compromised settlement with Appeals, but in September 2014 we received Notices of Deficiency covering the 2000 through 2007 tax years that assert unpaid taxes and penalties of approximately $157 million. The Deficiency Amount has not been reduced to reflect our NOL carryback ability. As of June 30, 2016, there also would be interest of approximately $130 million related to these matters. Depending on the outcome, additional state income taxes, penalties and interest (estimated in the aggregate to be approximately $33 million as of June 30, 2016) also may become due when a final resolution is reached. The Notices of Deficiency also reflected additional amounts due of approximately $105 million, which are primarily associated with the disallowance of the previously filed carryback of our 2008 NOL to the 2006 and 2007 tax years. We currently believe that the disallowance of our 2008 NOL carryback is a precautionary position by the IRS and that we will ultimately maintain the benefit of this NOL carryback claim.

On December 3, 2014, we petitioned the U.S. Tax Court to litigate the Deficiency Amount. On September 1, 2015, we received a notice that the case had been scheduled for trial. However, the parties have jointly filed, and the U.S. Tax Court has approved, motions for continuance in this matter to postpone the trial date. Also, in February 2016, the U.S. Tax Court approved a joint motion to consolidate for trial, briefing and opinion our case with a similar case involving MGIC Investment Corporation. The litigation could take several years to resolve and may result in substantial legal expenses. We can provide no assurance regarding the outcome of any such litigation or whether a compromised settlement with the IRS will ultimately be reached. We believe that an adequate provision for income taxes has been made for the potential liabilities that may result from this matter. However, if the ultimate resolution of this matter produces a result that differs materially from our current expectations, there could be a material impact on our effective tax rate, results of operations and cash flows.