General (Policies)

6 Months Ended

Jun. 30, 2016

Adopted accounting standards

Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide That a Performance Target Could Be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period

In June 2014, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued guidance which clarifies that a performance target that affects vesting and could be achieved after the requisite service period should be treated as a performance condition and not reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation costs should reflect the amount attributable to the periods for which the requisite service has been rendered. Total compensation expense recognized during and after the requisite service period (which may differ from the vesting period) should reflect the number of awards that are expected to vest and should be adjusted to reflect the number of awards that ultimately vest. The Company’s existing accounting policy for performance targets that affect the vesting of share-based payment awards is consistent with the new guidance and as such, the adoption as of January 1, 2016 had no impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis

In February 2015, the FASB issued guidance affecting the consolidation evaluation for limited partnerships and similar entities, fees paid to a decision maker or service provider, and variable interests in a variable interest entity held by related parties of the reporting enterprise. The adoption of this guidance as of January 1, 2016 did not have a material impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Pending accounting standards

Revenue from Contracts with Customers

In May 2014, the FASB issued guidance which revises the criteria for revenue recognition. Insurance contracts are excluded from the scope of the new guidance. Under the guidance, the transaction price is attributed to underlying performance obligations in the contract and revenue is recognized as the entity satisfies the performance obligations and transfers control of a good or service to the customer. Incremental costs of obtaining a contract may be capitalized to the extent the entity expects to recover those costs. The guidance is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and is to be applied retrospectively. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption, which is not expected to be material to the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Disclosures about Short-Duration Contracts

In May 2015, the FASB issued guidance requiring expanded disclosures for insurance entities that issue short-duration contracts. The expanded disclosures are designed to provide additional insight into an insurance entity’s significant estimates made in measuring the liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses. The disclosures include information about incurred and paid claims development by accident year, on a net basis after reinsurance, for the number of years claims incurred typically remain outstanding, not to exceed ten years. Each period presented in the disclosure about claims development that precedes the current reporting period is considered required supplementary information. The expanded disclosures also include information about significant changes in methodologies and assumptions, a reconciliation of incurred and paid claims development to the carrying amount of the liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses, the total amount of incurred but not reported liabilities plus expected development, the incidence of claims including the methodology used to determine the incidence of claims, and claim duration. The guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015, and interim periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and is to be applied retrospectively. The new guidance affects disclosures only and will have no impact on the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities

In January 2016, the FASB issued guidance requiring equity investments, including equity securities and limited partnership interests, that are not accounted for under the equity method of accounting or result in consolidation to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income. Equity investments without readily determinable fair values may be measured at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer. When a qualitative assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values indicates that impairment exists, the carrying value is required to be adjusted to fair value, if lower. The guidance clarifies that an entity should evaluate the realizability of a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale fixed income securities in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. The guidance also changes certain disclosure requirements. The guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017, and is to be applied through a cumulative-effect adjustment to beginning retained income as of the beginning of the period of adoption. The new guidance related to equity investments without readily determinable fair values is to be applied prospectively as of the date of adoption. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption. The most significant impacts, using values as of June 30, 2016, are expected to be the change in accounting for equity securities where $341 million of pre-tax unrealized net capital gains would be reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained income and cost method limited partnership interests (excluding limited partnership interests accounted for on a cost recovery basis) where the carrying value would increase by approximately $202 million, pre-tax, with the adjustment recorded in retained income.

Accounting for Leases

In February 2016, the FASB issued guidance that revises the accounting for leases. Under the new guidance, lessees will be required to recognize a right-of-use asset and lease liability for all leases other than those that meet the definition of a short-term lease. The lease liability will be equal to the present value of lease payments. A right-of-use asset will be based on the lease liability adjusted for qualifying initial direct costs. The expense of operating leases under the new guidance will be recognized in the income statement on a straight-line basis after combining the lease expense components (interest expense on the lease liability and amortization of the right-of-use asset) over the term of the lease. For finance leases, the expense components will be computed separately thereby producing greater up-front expense as interest expense on the lease liability is higher in early years and the right-of-use asset is amortized on a straight-line basis. Lease classification will be based on criteria similar to those currently applied. The accounting model for lessors will be similar to the current model with modifications to reflect definition changes for components such as initial direct costs. Lessors will continue to classify leases as operating, direct financing, or sales-type. The guidance is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 using a modified retrospective approach applied at the beginning of the earliest period presented. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption, which is not expected to be material to the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Employee Share-Based Payment Accounting

In March 2016, the FASB issued guidance to amend the accounting for share-based payments. Under the new guidance, reporting entities will be required to recognize all tax effects related to share-based payments at settlement (or expiration) through the income statement and will no longer be permitted to recognize excess tax benefits and tax deficiencies in additional paid in capital. The change will be applied on a modified retrospective basis, with a cumulative effect adjustment to beginning retained income. In addition, all tax-related cash flows resulting from share-based payments will be reported as operating activities on the statement of cash flows, with either prospective or retrospective transition permitted. The new guidance will permit employers to withhold shares upon settlement of an award to satisfy the employer’s tax withholding requirement (up to the employee’s maximum individual statutory tax rate) without causing liability classification of the award. The new guidance clarifies that all cash payments made to taxing authorities on an employee’s behalf for withheld shares should be presented as financing activities on the statement of cash flows. Also under the new guidance, reporting entities are permitted to make an accounting policy election to estimate forfeitures or recognize them when they occur. If elected, the change to recognize forfeitures when they occur must be adopted using a modified retrospective approach, with a cumulative effect adjustment recorded to beginning retained income. The new guidance is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption, which is not expected to be material to the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Transition to Equity Method Accounting

In March 2016, the FASB issued guidance amending the accounting requirements for transitioning to the equity method of accounting (“EMA”), including a transition from the cost method. The guidance requires the cost of acquiring an additional interest in an investee to be added to the existing carrying value to establish the initial basis of the EMA investment. Under the new guidance, no retroactive adjustment is required when an investment initially qualifies for EMA treatment. The guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2016, and is to be applied prospectively. The guidance will principally affect the future accounting for investments that qualify for EMA after application of the cost method of accounting. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption, which is not expected to be material to the Company’s results of operations or financial position.

Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments

In June 2016, the FASB issued guidance which revises the credit loss recognition criteria for certain financial assets measured at amortized cost. The new guidance replaces the existing incurred loss recognition model with an expected loss recognition model. The objective of the expected credit loss model is for the reporting entity to recognize its estimate of expected credit losses for affected financial assets in a valuation allowance deducted from the amortized cost basis of the related financial assets that results in presenting the net carrying value of the financial assets at the amount expected to be collected. The reporting entity must consider all available relevant information when estimating expected credit losses, including details about past events, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts over the contractual life of an asset. Financial assets may be evaluated individually or on a pooled basis when they share similar risk characteristics. The measurement of credit losses for available-for-sale debt securities measured at fair value is not affected except that credit losses recognized are limited to the amount by which fair value is below amortized cost and the carrying value adjustment is recognized through an allowance and not as a direct write-down. The guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and for most affected instruments must be adopted using a modified retrospective approach, with a cumulative effect adjustment recorded to beginning retained income. The Company is in the process of evaluating the impact of adoption.

Fair Value Measurement

Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. The hierarchy for inputs used in determining fair value maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that observable inputs be used when available. Assets and liabilities recorded on the Condensed Consolidated Statements of Financial Position at fair value are categorized in the fair value hierarchy based on the observability of inputs to the valuation techniques as follows:

Level 1: Assets and liabilities whose values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in an active market that the Company can access.

Level 2: Assets and liabilities whose values are based on the following:


(a)	Quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets;


(b)	Quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; or


(c)	Valuation models whose inputs are observable, directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

Level 3: Assets and liabilities whose values are based on prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both unobservable and significant to the overall fair value measurement. Unobservable inputs reflect the Company’s estimates of the assumptions that market participants would use in valuing the assets and liabilities.

The availability of observable inputs varies by instrument. In situations where fair value is based on internally developed pricing models or inputs that are unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. The degree of judgment exercised by the Company in determining fair value is typically greatest for instruments categorized in Level 3. In many instances, valuation inputs used to measure fair value fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. The category level in the fair value hierarchy is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety. The Company uses prices and inputs that are current as of the measurement date, including during periods of market disruption. In periods of market disruption, the ability to observe prices and inputs may be reduced for many instruments.

The Company is responsible for the determination of fair value and the supporting assumptions and methodologies. The Company gains assurance that assets and liabilities are appropriately valued through the execution of various processes and controls designed to ensure the overall reasonableness and consistent application of valuation methodologies, including inputs and assumptions, and compliance with accounting standards. For fair values received from third parties or internally estimated, the Company’s processes and controls are designed to ensure that the valuation methodologies are appropriate and consistently applied, the inputs and assumptions are reasonable and consistent with the objective of determining fair value, and the fair values are accurately recorded. For example, on a continuing basis, the Company assesses the reasonableness of individual fair values that have stale security prices or that exceed certain thresholds as compared to previous fair values received from valuation service providers or brokers or derived from internal models. The Company performs procedures to understand and assess the methodologies, processes and controls of valuation service providers. In addition, the Company may validate the reasonableness of fair values by comparing information obtained from valuation service providers or brokers to other third party valuation sources for selected securities. The Company performs ongoing price validation procedures such as back-testing of actual sales, which corroborate the various inputs used in internal models to market observable data. When fair value determinations are expected to be more variable, the Company validates them through reviews by members of management who have relevant expertise and who are independent of those charged with executing investment transactions.

The Company has two types of situations where investments are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. The first is where specific inputs significant to the fair value estimation models are not market observable. This primarily occurs in the Company’s use of broker quotes to value certain securities where the inputs have not been corroborated to be market observable, and the use of valuation models that use significant non-market observable inputs.

The second situation where the Company classifies securities in Level 3 is where quotes continue to be received from independent third-party valuation service providers and all significant inputs are market observable; however, there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset when compared to normal market activity such that the degree of market observability has declined to a point where categorization as a Level 3 measurement is considered appropriate. The indicators considered in determining whether a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for a specific asset has occurred include the level of new issuances in the primary market, trading volume in the secondary market, the level of credit spreads over historical levels, applicable bid-ask spreads, and price consensus among market participants and other pricing sources.

Certain assets are not carried at fair value on a recurring basis, including investments such as mortgage loans, limited partnership interests, bank loans, agent loans and policy loans. Accordingly, such investments are only included in the fair value hierarchy disclosure when the investment is subject to remeasurement at fair value after initial recognition and the resulting remeasurement is reflected in the condensed consolidated financial statements. In addition, derivatives embedded in fixed income securities are not disclosed in the hierarchy as free-standing derivatives since they are presented with the host contracts in fixed income securities.

In determining fair value, the Company principally uses the market approach which generally utilizes market transaction data for the same or similar instruments. To a lesser extent, the Company uses the income approach which involves determining fair values from discounted cash flow methodologies. For the majority of Level 2 and Level 3 valuations, a combination of the market and income approaches is used.

Summary of significant valuation techniques for assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis

Level 1 measurements


•	Fixed income securities: Comprise certain U.S. Treasury fixed income securities. Valuation is based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the Company can access.


•	Equity securities: Comprise actively traded, exchange-listed equity securities. Valuation is based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the Company can access.


•	Short-term: Comprise U.S. Treasury bills valued based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets in active markets that the Company can access and actively traded money market funds that have daily quoted net asset values for identical assets that the Company can access.


•	Separate account assets: Comprise actively traded mutual funds that have daily quoted net asset values for identical assets that the Company can access. Net asset values for the actively traded mutual funds in which the separate account assets are invested are obtained daily from the fund managers.

Level 2 measurements


•	Fixed income securities:

U.S. government and agencies: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads.

Municipal: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads.

Corporate - public: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads.

Corporate - privately placed: Valued using a discounted cash flow model that is widely accepted in the financial services industry and uses market observable inputs and inputs derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. The primary inputs to the discounted cash flow model include an interest rate yield curve, as well as published credit spreads for similar assets in markets that are not active that incorporate the credit quality and industry sector of the issuer.

Foreign government: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads.

ABS - collateralized debt obligations (“CDO”) and ABS - consumer and other: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields, prepayment speeds, collateral performance and credit spreads. Certain ABS - CDO and ABS - consumer and other are valued based on non-binding broker quotes whose inputs have been corroborated to be market observable.

RMBS: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields, prepayment speeds, collateral performance and credit spreads.

CMBS: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields, collateral performance and credit spreads.

Redeemable preferred stock: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields, underlying stock prices and credit spreads.


•	Equity securities: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices or quoted net asset values for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active.


•	Short-term: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that are not active, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads. For certain short-term investments, amortized cost is used as the best estimate of fair value.


•	Other investments: Free-standing exchange listed derivatives that are not actively traded are valued based on quoted prices for identical instruments in markets that are not active.

OTC derivatives, including interest rate swaps, foreign currency swaps, foreign exchange forward contracts, certain options and certain credit default swaps, are valued using models that rely on inputs such as interest rate yield curves, currency rates, and counterparty credit spreads that are observable for substantially the full term of the contract. The valuation techniques underlying the models are widely accepted in the financial services industry and do not involve significant judgment.

Level 3 measurements


•	Fixed income securities:

Municipal: Comprise municipal bonds that are not rated by third party credit rating agencies but are rated by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”). The primary inputs to the valuation of these municipal bonds include quoted prices for identical or similar assets in markets that exhibit less liquidity relative to those markets supporting Level 2 fair value measurements, contractual cash flows, benchmark yields and credit spreads. Also included are municipal bonds valued based on non-binding broker quotes where the inputs have not been corroborated to be market observable and municipal bonds in default valued based on the present value of expected cash flows.

Corporate - public and Corporate - privately placed: Primarily valued based on non-binding broker quotes where the inputs have not been corroborated to be market observable. Other inputs include an interest rate yield curve, as well as published credit spreads for similar assets that incorporate the credit quality and industry sector of the issuer.

ABS - CDO, ABS - consumer and other, RMBS and CMBS: Valued based on non-binding broker quotes received from brokers who are familiar with the investments and where the inputs have not been corroborated to be market observable.


•	Equity securities: The primary inputs to the valuation include quoted prices or quoted net asset values for identical or similar assets in markets that exhibit less liquidity relative to those markets supporting Level 2 fair value measurements.

•

Other investments: Certain OTC derivatives, such as interest rate caps, certain credit default swaps and certain options (including swaptions), are valued using models that are widely accepted in the financial services industry. These are categorized as Level 3 as a result of the significance of non-market observable inputs such as volatility. Other primary inputs include interest rate yield curves and credit spreads.

•

Contractholder funds: Derivatives embedded in certain life and annuity contracts are valued internally using models widely accepted in the financial services industry that determine a single best estimate of fair value for the embedded derivatives within a block of contractholder liabilities. The models primarily use stochastically determined cash flows based on the contractual elements of embedded derivatives, projected option cost and applicable market data, such as interest rate yield curves and equity index volatility assumptions. These are categorized as Level 3 as a result of the significance of non-market observable inputs.

Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis

Mortgage loans written-down to fair value in connection with recognizing impairments are valued based on the fair value of the underlying collateral less costs to sell. Limited partnership interests written-down to fair value in connection with recognizing other-than-temporary impairments are generally valued using net asset values.