10-K 1 mlic-12312016x10k.htm 10-K Document
 
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
__________________________
Form 10-K
(Mark One)
þ
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016
or
¨
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from                      to                     
Commission file number 000-55029
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

New York
 
13-5581829
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
 
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
 
 
200 Park Avenue, New York, N.Y.
 
10166-0188
(Address of principal
executive offices)
 
(Zip Code)
(212) 578-9500
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: None
Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:
Common Stock, par value $0.01
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.  Yes ¨ No þ
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act.  Yes ¨    No þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.  Yes þ    No ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  Yes þ    No ¨
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K (§ 229.405 of this chapter) is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. þ
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer ¨
 
Accelerated filer ¨
Non-accelerated filer  þ (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
 
Smaller reporting company ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  Yes ¨    No þ
At March 23, 2017, 494,466,664 shares of the registrant’s common stock, $0.01 par value per share, were outstanding, all of which were owned directly by MetLife, Inc.
REDUCED DISCLOSURE FORMAT
The registrant meets the conditions set forth in General Instruction I(1)(a) and (b) of Form 10-K and is therefore filing this Form with the reduced disclosure format.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: NONE
 



Table of Contents
 
 
 
 
Page
Part I
Item 1.
 
 
Item 1A.
 
 
Item 1B.
 
 
Item 2.
 
 
Item 3.
 
 
Item 4.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Part II
Item 5.
 
 
Item 6.
 
 
Item 7.
 
 
Item 7A.
 
 
Item 8.
 
 
Item 9.
 
 
Item 9A.
 
 
Item 9B.
 
 
 
Part III
Item 10.
 
 
Item 11.
 
 
Item 12.
 
 
Item 13.
 
 
Item 14.
 
 
 
Part IV
Item 15.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 


As used in this Form 10-K, “MLIC,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York corporation incorporated in 1868, and its subsidiaries. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (MetLife, Inc., together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “MetLife”).
Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This Annual Report on Form 10-K, including Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, may contain or incorporate by reference information that includes or is based upon forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements give expectations or forecasts of future events. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They use words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe” and other words and terms of similar meaning, or are tied to future periods, in connection with a discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these include statements relating to future actions, prospective services or products, future performance or results of current and anticipated services or products, sales efforts, expenses, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, trends in operations and financial results.
Any or all forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties. Many such factors will be important in determining the actual future results of MLIC. These statements are based on current expectations and the current economic environment. They involve a number of risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict. These statements are not guarantees of future performance. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. Risks, uncertainties, and other factors that might cause such differences include the risks, uncertainties and other factors identified in Metropolitan Life Insurance Company's filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. These factors include: (1) difficult conditions in the global capital markets; (2) increased volatility and disruption of the global capital and credit markets, which may affect our ability to meet liquidity needs and access capital, including through credit facilities, generate market-related revenue and finance statutory reserve requirements; (3) exposure to global financial and capital market risks; (4) regulatory, legislative or tax changes relating to our insurance or other operations that may affect the cost of, or demand for, our products or services; (5) adverse results or other consequences from litigation, arbitration or regulatory investigations; (6) impact on us of comprehensive financial services regulation reform, including potential regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank systemically important financial institution, or otherwise; (7) our ability to address difficulties, unforeseen liabilities, asset impairments, or rating agency actions arising from business acquisitions, dispositions of businesses, entry into joint ventures, or legal entity reorganizations; (8) potential liquidity and other risks resulting from our participation in a securities lending program and other transactions; (9) investment losses, and changes to investment valuations; (10) changes in assumptions related to deferred policy acquisition costs, deferred sales inducements, or value of business acquired; (11) the defaults or deteriorating credit of other financial institutions that could adversely affect us; (12) downgrades in our financial strength or credit ratings, or MetLife, Inc.’s credit ratings; (13) a deterioration in the experience of the closed block established in connection with the reorganization of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; (14) availability and effectiveness of reinsurance, hedging or indemnification arrangements, as well as any default or failure of counterparties to perform; (15) differences between actual claims experience and underwriting and reserving assumptions; (16) ineffectiveness of MetLife’s risk management policies and procedures; (17) exposure to losses related to variable annuity guarantee benefits, including from significant and sustained downturns or extreme volatility in equity markets, reduced interest rates, unanticipated policyholder behavior, mortality or longevity, and any adjustment for nonperformance risk; (18) changes in accounting standards, practices and/or policies; (19) the effects of business disruption or economic contraction due to disasters such as terrorist attacks, cyberattacks, other hostilities, or natural catastrophes, including any related impact on MetLife’s disaster recovery systems, cyber- or other information security systems and management continuity planning; (20) any failure to protect the confidentiality of client information; and (22) other risks and uncertainties described from time to time in Metropolitan Life Insurance Company's filings with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly correct or update any forward-looking statement if Metropolitan Life Insurance Company later becomes aware that such statement is not likely to be achieved. Please consult any further disclosures Metropolitan Life Insurance Company makes on related subjects in reports to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts
See “Exhibit Index — Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts” for information regarding agreements included as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

1

Part I
Item 1. Business
Index to Business

2

Business Overview
As used in this Form 10-K, “MLIC,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York corporation incorporated in 1868, and its subsidiaries. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (MetLife, Inc., together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “MetLife”).
The Company is a provider of life insurance, annuities, employee benefits and asset management to both individuals and groups.
We are also one of the largest institutional investors in the United States with a $265.2 billion general account portfolio invested primarily in investment grade corporate bonds, structured finance securities, mortgage loans and U.S. Treasury and agency securities, as well as real estate and corporate equity, at December 31, 2016.
Our well-recognized brand, competitive and innovative product offerings and financial strength and expertise should help drive future growth building on a long history of fairness, honesty and integrity. Over the course of the next several years, we will pursue our refreshed enterprise strategy, focusing on transforming the Company to become more digital, driving efficiencies and innovation to achieve competitive advantage, and simplified, decreasing the costs and risks associated with our highly complex industry to customers. One MetLife remains at the center of everything we do: collaborating, sharing best practices, and putting the enterprise first. Digital and simplified are the key enablers of our new strategic cornerstones, all of which satisfy the criteria of our Accelerating Value strategic initiative by offering customers truly differentiated value propositions that allow us to establish clear competitive advantages:
 
●
 
Optimize value and risk
 
–
 
Focus on in-force and new business opportunities using Accelerating Value analysis
 
–
 
Optimize cash and value
 
–
 
Balance risk across MetLife
 
●
 
Drive operational excellence
 
–
 
Become a more efficient, high performance organization
 
–
 
Focus on the customer with a disciplined approach to unit cost improvement
 
●
 
Strengthen distribution advantage
 
–
 
Transform our distribution channels to drive productivity and efficiency through digital enablement, improved customer persistency and deeper customer relationships
 
●
 
Deliver the right solutions for the right customers
 
–
 
Use customer insights to deliver differentiated value propositions - products, services and experiences to win the right customers and earn their loyalty
MLIC is organized into two segments: U.S. and MetLife Holdings. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. See “— Segments and Corporate & Other” and Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the Company’s segments and Corporate & Other. Management continues to evaluate the Company’s segment performance and allocated resources and may adjust related measurements in the future to better reflect segment profitability.

3

Revenues derived from an agreement with the U.S. Office of Personnel Management for the Federal Employees’ Group Life Insurance program were $2.8 billion, $2.7 billion and $2.8 billion for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, which represented 10%, 10% and 11%, respectively, of consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues. Revenues derived from any other customer did not exceed 10% of consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014. Substantially all of the Company’s consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues originated in the U.S. Financial information, including revenues, expenses, operating earnings, and total assets by segment, as well as premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues by major product groups, is provided in Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Operating revenues and operating earnings are performance measures that are not based on accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for definitions of such measures.
Other Key Information
In December 2016, MLIC distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a non-cash extraordinary dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of New England Life Insurance Company (“NELICO”) and General American Life Insurance Company (“GALIC”). See Note 3 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
On January 12, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced its plan to pursue the separation of a substantial portion of its former Retail segment, as well as certain portions of its former Corporate Benefit Funding segment and Corporate & Other (the “Separation”). MetLife, Inc. subsequently re-segmented the business to be separated and rebranded it “Brighthouse Financial.”
On October 5, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., a subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“Brighthouse”), filed a registration statement on Form 10 (the “Form 10”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). On December 6, 2016, Brighthouse filed an amendment to its registration statement on Form 10 with the SEC. The information statement filed as an exhibit to the Form 10 disclosed that MetLife, Inc. intends to include Brighthouse Life Insurance Company (formerly, MetLife Insurance Company USA) (“Brighthouse Insurance”), NELICO, a former wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (formerly, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company) (“Brighthouse NY”), MetLife Advisers, LLC and certain captive reinsurance companies in the proposed separated business and distribute at least 80.1% of the shares of Brighthouse’s common stock on a pro rata basis to the holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock.
The ultimate form and timing of the Separation will be influenced by a number of factors, including regulatory considerations and economic conditions. MetLife continues to evaluate and pursue structural alternatives for the proposed Separation. The life insurance closed block and the life and annuity business sold through Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is not expected to be a part of Brighthouse Financial. The Separation remains subject to certain conditions including, among others, obtaining final approval from the MetLife, Inc. Board of Directors, receipt of a favorable ruling from the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and an opinion from MetLife’s tax advisor regarding certain U.S. federal income tax matters, insurance and other regulatory approvals, and an SEC declaration of the effectiveness of the Form 10.
In July 2016, MetLife, Inc. completed the sale to Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“MassMutual”) of MetLife’s U.S. retail advisor force and certain assets associated with the MetLife Premier Client Group, including all of the issued and outstanding shares of MetLife’s affiliated broker-dealer, MetLife Securities, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (the “U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture”). MassMutual assumed all of the liabilities related to such assets that arise or occur at or after the closing of the sale. As part of the transactions, MetLife, Inc. and MassMutual entered into a product development agreement under which MetLife’s U.S. retail business will be the exclusive developer of certain annuity products to be issued by MassMutual. In the MassMutual purchase agreement, MetLife, Inc. agreed to indemnify MassMutual for certain claims, liabilities and breaches of representations and warranties up to limits described in the purchase agreement.
On December 18, 2014, the Financial Stability Oversight Council (“FSOC”) designated MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank systemically important financial institution (“non-bank SIFI”) subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”) and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (collectively with the Federal Reserve Board, the “Federal Reserve”) and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), as well as to enhanced supervision and prudential standards. On March 30, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia (the “D.C. District Court”) ordered that the designation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI by the FSOC be rescinded. On April 8, 2016, the FSOC appealed the D.C. District Court’s order to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and oral argument was heard on October 24, 2016. If the FSOC prevails on appeal or designates MetLife, Inc. as systemically important as part of its ongoing review of non-bank financial companies, MetLife, Inc. could once again be subject to regulation as a non-bank SIFI. See “— Regulation — Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI.”

4

In December 2014, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of its wholly-owned, broker-dealer subsidiary, New England Securities Corporation (“NES”). See Note 3 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information.
Segments and Corporate & Other
U.S.
Product Overview
Our businesses in the U.S. segment offer a broad range of protection products and services aimed at serving the financial needs of our customers throughout their lives. These products are sold to corporations and their respective employees, other institutions and their respective members, as well as individuals. Our U.S. segment is organized into two businesses: Group Benefits and Retirement and Income Solutions.
Group Benefits
We have built a leading position in the United States group insurance market through long-standing relationships with many of the largest corporate employers in the United States.
Our Group Benefits insurance products and services include life, dental, group short- and long-term disability, individual disability, accidental death and dismemberment, critical illness, vision and accident & health coverages, as well as prepaid legal plans. We also sell administrative services-only (“ASO”) arrangements to some employers. Under such ASO arrangements, the employer is at risk, as we have not issued an insurance policy. We pay claims funded by the employer and perform other administrative services on behalf of the employer.
The major products offered by our Group Benefits business are as follows:
Variable Life. Variable life products provide insurance coverage through a contract that gives the policyholder flexibility in investment choices and, depending on the product, in premium payments and coverage amounts, with certain guarantees. Most importantly, with variable life products, premiums and account balances can be directed by the policyholder into a variety of separate account investment options or directed to the Company’s general account. In the separate account investment options, the policyholder bears the entire risk of the investment results. We collect specified fees for the management of the investment options. The policyholder’s cash value reflects the investment return of the selected investment options, net of management fees and insurance-related and other charges. In some instances, third-party money management firms manage these investment options. With some products, by maintaining a certain premium level, policyholders may have the advantage of various guarantees that may protect the death benefit from adverse investment experience.
Universal Life. Universal life products provide insurance coverage on the same basis as variable life, except that premiums, and the resulting accumulated balances, are allocated only to the Company’s general account. We credit premiums to an account maintained for the policyholder. Premiums are credited net of specified expenses. Interest is credited to the policyholder’s account at interest rates we determine, subject to specified minimums. Specific charges are made against the policyholder’s account for the cost of insurance protection and for expenses. With some products, by maintaining a certain premium level, policyholders may have the advantage of various guarantees that may protect the death benefit from adverse investment experience.
Term Life. Term life products provide a guaranteed benefit upon the death of the insured for a specified time period in return for the periodic payment of premiums. Specified coverage periods range from one year to 30 years, but in no event are they longer than the period over which premiums are paid. Death benefits may be level over the period or decreasing. Premiums may be guaranteed at a level amount for the coverage period or may be non-level and non-guaranteed. Term insurance products are sometimes referred to as pure protection products, in that there are typically no savings or investment elements. Term contracts expire without value at the end of the coverage period when the insured party is still living.
Dental. Dental products provide insurance and ASO arrangements that assist employees, retirees and their families in maintaining oral health while reducing out-of-pocket expenses and providing superior customer service. Dental plans include the Preferred Dentist Program and the Dental Health Maintenance Organization.
Disability. Group and individual disability products provide a benefit in the event of the disability of the insured. In most instances, this benefit is in the form of monthly income paid until the insured reaches age 65. In addition to income replacement, the product may be used to provide for the payment of business overhead expenses for disabled business owners or mortgage payment protection.

5

Retirement and Income Solutions
The Retirement and Income Solutions business provides funding and financing solutions that help institutional customers mitigate and manage liabilities primarily associated with their qualified, nonqualified and welfare employee benefit programs using a spectrum of life and annuity-based insurance and investment products.
The major products offered by our Retirement and Income Solutions business are as follows:
Stable Value Products. We offer general account guaranteed interest contracts, separate account guaranteed interest contracts, and trust guaranteed interest contracts used to support the stable value option of defined contribution plans. We also offer private floating rate funding agreements that are used for money market funds, securities lending cash collateral portfolios and short-term investment funds.
General account guaranteed interest contracts are designed to provide stable value investment options within tax-qualified defined contribution plans. Traditional general account guaranteed interest contracts integrate a general account fixed maturity investment with a general account guarantee of liquidity at contract value for participant transactions.
Separate account guaranteed interest contracts are available to defined contribution plan sponsors. These contracts integrate market value returns on separate account investments with a general account guarantee of liquidity at contract value to the extent the separate account assets are not sufficient. The contracts do not have a fixed maturity date and are terminable by each party on notice.
Private floating rate funding agreements are generally privately-placed, unregistered investment contracts issued as general account obligations. Interest is credited based on an external index, generally the three-month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”). Contracts may contain put provisions (of 90 days or longer) that allow for the contractholder to receive the account balance prior to the stated maturity date.
Pension Risk Transfers. We offer general account and separate account annuity products, generally in connection with the termination of defined benefit pension plans. These risk transfer products include single premium buyouts that allow for full or partial transfers of pension liabilities.
General account annuity products include nonparticipating contracts. Under nonparticipating contracts, group annuity benefits may be purchased for retired and terminated employees or employees covered under terminating or ongoing pension plans. Both immediate and deferred annuities may be purchased by a single premium at issue. There are generally no cash surrender rights, with some exceptions including certain contracts that include liabilities for cash balance pension plans.
Separate account annuity products include both participating and non-participating contracts. Under participating contracts, group annuity benefits are purchased for retired, terminated, or active employees covered under active or terminated pension plans. Both immediate and deferred fixed annuities are purchased with a single premium. Under some contracts, additional annuities may be periodically purchased at then current purchase rates. The assets supporting the guaranteed benefits for each contract are held in a separate account. Some contracts require the contractholder to make periodic payments to cover investment and insurance expenses. The Company fully guarantees benefit payments and is ultimately responsible for all benefit payments. The non-participating contracts have economic features similar to our general account product, but offer the added protection of an insulated separate account. Under U.S. GAAP, these annuity contracts are treated as general account products.
Institutional Income Annuities. These general account contracts are available for purchasing guaranteed payout annuities for employees upon retirement or termination of employment. These annuities can be either life contingent or non-life contingent. These annuities are nonparticipating, do not provide for any loan or cash surrender value and, with few exceptions, do not permit future considerations.
Torts and Settlements. We offer innovative strategies for complex litigation settlements, primarily structured settlement annuities.
Structured settlement annuities are customized annuities designed to serve as an alternative to a lump sum payment in a lawsuit initiated because of personal injury, wrongful death, or a workers’ compensation claim or other claim for damages. Surrenders are generally not allowed, although commutations are permitted in certain circumstances. Guaranteed payments consist of life contingent annuities, term certain annuities and lump sums.
Capital Markets Investment Products. Products we offer include funding agreements, funding agreement-backed notes and funding agreement-backed commercial paper.

6

Funding agreement-backed notes are part of a medium term note program, under which funding agreements are issued to a special-purpose trust that issues marketable notes in U.S. dollars or foreign currencies. The proceeds of the issuance of a series of notes are used by the trust to acquire a funding agreement with matching interest and maturity payment terms from Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. The notes are underwritten and marketed by major investment banks’ broker-dealer operations and are sold to institutional investors.
Funding agreement-backed commercial paper is issued by a special purpose limited liability company which deposits the proceeds under a master funding agreement issued to it by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. The commercial paper receives the same short-term credit rating as Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and is marketed by major investment banks’ broker-dealer operations. The program allows for funding agreement-backed commercial paper to be issued in U.S. dollars or foreign currencies.
Through the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advance program, funding agreements have been issued by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former subsidiary, GALIC, to regional FHLB banks.
Through the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation (“Farmer Mac”) program, funding agreements have been issued by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to a subsidiary of Farmer Mac, as well as to certain special purpose entities (“SPEs”) that have issued debt securities for which payment of interest and principal is secured by such funding agreements, and such debt securities are also guaranteed as to payment of interest and principal by Farmer Mac.
Other Products and Services. We offer specialized life insurance products and funding agreements designed specifically to provide solutions for funding postretirement benefits and company-, bank- or trust- owned life insurance used to finance nonqualified benefit programs for executives.
Sales Distribution
Group Benefits Distribution
Group Benefits distributes its products and services through a sales force that is segmented by the size of the target customer. Marketing representatives sell either directly to corporate and other group customers or through an intermediary, such as a broker or consultant. In addition, voluntary products are sold by specialists. Employers have been emphasizing voluntary products and, as a result, we have increased our focus on communicating and marketing to employees in order to further foster sales of those products.
We have entered into several operating joint ventures and other arrangements with third parties to expand opportunities to market and distribute Group Benefits products and services. We also sell our Group Benefits products and services through sponsoring organizations and affinity groups and provide life and dental coverage to certain employees of the U.S. Government.
Retirement and Income Solutions Distribution
Retirement and Income Solutions distributes its products and services through dedicated sales teams and relationship managers. Products may be sold directly to benefit plan sponsors and advisors or through brokers, consultants or other intermediaries. In addition, these sales professionals work with individual and group distribution areas to better reach and service customers, brokers, consultants and other intermediaries.
MetLife Holdings
Product Overview
Our MetLife Holdings segment consists of operations relating to products and businesses that we no longer actively market in the United States. These products and businesses include variable, universal, term and whole life, as well as variable, fixed and index-linked annuities. Our MetLife Holdings segment also includes our discontinued long-term care business.
The major products within our MetLife Holdings segment are as follows:
Variable, Universal and Term Life. These life products are similar to those offered by our Group Benefits business, except that these products were marketed to individuals through various retail distribution channels. For a description of these products, see “— U.S. — Product Overview — Group Benefits.”

7

Whole Life. Whole life products provide a benefit upon the death of the insured in return for the periodic payment of a fixed premium over a predetermined period. Premium payments may be required for the entire life of the contract period, to a specified age or period, and may be level or change in accordance with a predetermined schedule. Whole life insurance includes policies that provide a participation feature in the form of dividends. Policyholders may receive dividends in cash, or apply them to increase death benefits, increase cash values available upon surrender or reduce the premiums required to maintain the contract in-force.
Variable Annuities. Variable annuities provide for both asset accumulation and asset distribution needs. Variable annuities allow the contractholder to allocate deposits into various investment options in a separate account, as determined by the contractholder. The risks associated with such investment options are borne entirely by the contractholder, except where guaranteed minimum benefits are involved. In certain variable annuity products, contractholders may also choose to allocate all or a portion of their account to the Company’s general account and are credited with interest at rates we determine, subject to specified minimums. In addition, contractholders may also elect certain minimum death benefit and minimum living benefit guarantees for which additional fees are charged and where asset allocation restrictions may apply.
Fixed and Indexed-Linked Annuities. Fixed annuities provide for both asset accumulation and asset distribution needs. Fixed annuities do not allow the same investment option flexibility provided by variable annuities, but provide guarantees related to the preservation of principal and interest credited. Deposits made into deferred annuity contracts are allocated to the Company’s general account and are credited with interest at rates we determine, subject to specified minimums. Credited interest rates may be guaranteed not to change for certain limited periods of time, ranging from one to 10 years. Fixed income annuities provide a guaranteed monthly income for a specified period of years and/or for the life of the annuitant. Additionally, the Company has issued indexed-linked annuities which allow the contractholder to participate in returns from equity indices.
Long-term Care. Long-term care products provide protection against the potentially high costs of long-term health care services. They generally pay benefits to insureds who need assistance with activities of daily living or have a cognitive impairment. Although we discontinued the sale of these products in 2010, we continue to service our existing inforce policyholders.
Corporate & Other
Overview
Corporate & Other contains the excess capital, as well as certain charges and activities, not allocated to the segments, including enterprise-wide strategic initiative restructuring charges and various start-up businesses (including our investment management business through which the Company offers fee-based investment management services to institutional clients, as well as the direct to consumer portion of the U.S. Direct business). Corporate & Other also includes the Company’s ancillary international operations, the businesses of the Company that MetLife, Inc. plans to separate and include in Brighthouse Financial and interest expense related to the majority of the Company’s outstanding debt, as well as expenses associated with certain legal proceedings and income tax audit issues. In addition, Corporate & Other includes the elimination of intersegment amounts, which generally relate to intersegment loans, which bear interest rates commensurate with related borrowings.
Policyholder Liabilities
We establish, and carry as liabilities, actuarially determined amounts that are calculated to meet policy obligations when a policy matures or is surrendered, an insured dies or becomes disabled or upon the occurrence of other covered events, or to provide for future annuity payments. Our liabilities for future policy benefits and claims are established based on estimates by actuaries of how much we will need to pay for future benefits and claims. For life insurance and annuity products, we calculate these liabilities based on assumptions and estimates, including estimated premiums to be received over the assumed life of the policy, the timing of the event covered by the insurance policy, the amount of benefits or claims to be paid and the investment returns on the investments we make with the premiums we receive. We establish liabilities for claims and benefits based on assumptions and estimates of losses and liabilities incurred. Amounts for actuarial liabilities are computed and reported on the consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP. For more details on policyholder liabilities see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Liability for Future Policy Benefits.”
Pursuant to applicable insurance laws and regulations, we, as well as a captive reinsurer subsidiary, establish statutory reserves, reported as liabilities, to meet their obligations on their respective policies. These statutory reserves are established in amounts sufficient to meet policy and contract obligations, when taken together with expected future premiums and interest at assumed rates. Statutory reserves and actuarial liabilities for future policy benefits generally differ based on accounting guidance.

8

State insurance laws and regulations, including New York Insurance Law and regulations, require certain MLIC entities to submit to superintendents of insurance, including the New York Superintendent of Financial Services, with each annual report, an opinion and memorandum of a “qualified actuary” that the statutory reserves and related actuarial amounts recorded in support of specified policies and contracts, and the assets supporting such statutory reserves and related actuarial amounts, make adequate provision for their statutory liabilities with respect to these obligations. See “— Regulation — Insurance Regulation — Policy and Contract Reserve Adequacy Analysis.”
Underwriting and Pricing
MetLife’s Global Risk Management Department (“GRM”) contains a dedicated unit, the primary responsibility of which is the development of product pricing standards and independent pricing and underwriting oversight for MetLife’s insurance businesses. Further important controls around management of underwriting and pricing processes include regular experience studies to monitor assumptions against expectations, formal new product approval processes, periodic updates to product profitability studies and the use of reinsurance to manage our exposures, as appropriate. See “— Reinsurance Activity.”
Underwriting
Underwriting generally involves an evaluation of applications by a professional staff of underwriters and actuaries, who determine the type and the amount of insurance risk that we are willing to accept. We employ detailed underwriting policies, guidelines and procedures designed to assist the underwriter to properly assess and quantify such risks before issuing policies to qualified applicants or groups.
Insurance underwriting considers not only an applicant’s medical history, but also other factors such as financial profile, foreign travel, vocations and alcohol, drug and tobacco use. Group underwriting generally evaluates the risk characteristics of each prospective insured group, although with certain voluntary products and for certain coverages, members of a group may be underwritten on an individual basis. We generally perform our own underwriting; however, certain policies are reviewed by intermediaries under guidelines established by us. Generally, we are not obligated to accept any risk or group of risks from, or to issue a policy or group of policies to, any employer or intermediary. Requests for coverage are reviewed on their merits and a policy is not issued unless the particular risk or group has been examined and approved in accordance with our underwriting guidelines.
The underwriting conducted by our remote underwriting offices and intermediaries, as well as our corporate underwriting office, is subject to periodic quality assurance reviews to maintain high standards of underwriting and consistency. Such offices are also subject to periodic external audits by reinsurers with whom we do business.
We have established oversight of the underwriting process that facilitates quality sales and serves the needs of our customers, while supporting our financial strength and business objectives. Our goal is to achieve the underwriting, mortality and morbidity levels reflected in the assumptions in our product pricing. This is accomplished by determining and establishing underwriting policies, guidelines, philosophies and strategies that are competitive and suitable for the customer, the agent and us.
We continually review our underwriting guidelines in light of applicable regulations and to ensure that our policies remain competitive and supportive of our marketing strategies and profitability goals.
Pricing
Product pricing reflects our pricing standards. GRM, as well as regional finance and product teams, are responsible for pricing and oversight for all of our insurance businesses. Product pricing is based on the expected payout of benefits calculated through the use of assumptions for mortality, morbidity, expenses, persistency and investment returns, as well as certain macroeconomic factors, such as inflation. Investment-oriented products are priced based on various factors, which may include investment return, expenses, persistency and optionality and possible variability of results. For certain products, pricing may include prospective and retrospective experience rating features. Prospective experience rating involves the evaluation of past experience for the purpose of determining future premium rates and we bear all prior year gains and losses. Retrospective experience rating also involves the evaluation of past experience for the purpose of determining the actual cost of providing insurance for the customer; however, the contract includes certain features that allow us to recoup certain losses or distribute certain gains back to the policyholder based on actual prior years’ experience.
Rates for group benefit products are based on anticipated earnings and expenses for the book of business being underwritten. Renewals are generally reevaluated annually or biannually and are re-priced to reflect actual experience on such products. Products offered by Retirement and Income Solutions are priced on demand. Pricing reflects expected investment returns, as well as mortality, longevity and expense assumptions appropriate for each product. This business is generally nonparticipating and illiquid, as policyholders have few or no options or contractual rights to cash values.

9

Rates for individual life insurance products are highly regulated and generally must be approved by the regulators of the jurisdictions in which the product is sold. Generally, such products are renewed annually and may include pricing terms that are guaranteed for a certain period of time. Individual disability income products are based on anticipated results for the occupation being underwritten. Fixed and variable annuity products are also highly regulated and approved by the respective regulators. Such products generally include penalties for early withdrawals and policyholder benefit elections to tailor the form of the product’s benefits to the needs of the opting policyholder. We periodically reevaluate the costs associated with such options and will periodically adjust pricing levels on our guarantees. Further, from time to time, we may also reevaluate the type and level of guarantee features currently being offered.
We continually review our pricing guidelines in light of applicable regulations and to ensure that our policies remain competitive and supportive of our marketing strategies and profitability goals.
Reinsurance Activity
We enter into reinsurance agreements primarily as a purchaser of reinsurance for our various insurance products and also as a provider of reinsurance for some insurance products issued by third parties and related parties. We participate in reinsurance activities in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to significant risks, and provide additional capacity for future growth. We enter into various agreements with reinsurers that cover individual risks, group risks or defined blocks of business, primarily on a coinsurance, yearly renewable term, excess or catastrophe excess basis. These reinsurance agreements spread risk and minimize the effect of losses. The extent of each risk retained by us depends on our evaluation of the specific risk, subject, in certain circumstances, to maximum retention limits based on the characteristics of coverages. We also cede first dollar mortality risk under certain contracts. In addition to reinsuring mortality risk, we reinsure other risks, as well as specific coverages. We obtain reinsurance for capital requirement purposes and also when the economic impact of the reinsurance agreement makes it appropriate to do so.
Under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, the reinsurer agrees to reimburse us for the ceded amount in the event a claim is paid. Cessions under reinsurance agreements do not discharge our obligations as the primary insurer. In the event that reinsurers do not meet their obligations under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, reinsurance recoverable balances could become uncollectible.
We reinsure our business through a diversified group of well-capitalized reinsurers. We analyze recent trends in arbitration and litigation outcomes in disputes, if any, with our reinsurers. We monitor ratings and evaluate the financial strength of our reinsurers by analyzing their financial statements. In addition, the reinsurance recoverable balance due from each reinsurer is evaluated as part of the overall monitoring process. Recoverability of reinsurance recoverable balances is evaluated based on these analyses. We generally secure large reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts, funds withheld accounts and irrevocable letters of credit. Additionally, we enter into reinsurance agreements for risk and capital management purposes with other affiliates and several affiliated captive reinsurers. Captive reinsurers are affiliated insurance companies licensed under specific provisions of insurance law of their respective jurisdictions, such as the Special Purpose Financial Captive law adopted by several states including Vermont and Delaware, and have a very narrow business plan that specifically restricts the majority or all of their activity to reinsuring business from their affiliates. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Affiliated Captive Reinsurance Transactions.”
U.S.
For certain policies within our Group Benefits business, we generally retain most of the risk and only cede particular risk on certain client arrangements. The majority of our reinsurance activity within this business relates to the following client agreements:
•
Employer sponsored captive programs: through these programs, employers buy a group life insurance policy with the condition that a portion of the risk is reinsured back to a captive insurer sponsored by the client.
•
Risk-sharing agreements: through these programs, clients require that we reinsure a portion of the risk back to third parties, such as minority-owned reinsurers.
•
Multinational pooling: through these agreements, employers buy many group insurance policies which are aggregated in a single insurer via reinsurance.

10

For our Retirement and Income Solutions business, we have periodically engaged in reinsurance activities on an opportunistic basis. There were no significant transactions during the periods presented. In April 1996 and December 1997 the Company entered into two long-term transactions representing approximately $1.5 billion of reserve transfers on structured settlement policies. Through these transactions, 100% of certain risks were transferred, such as payments contingent upon the beneficiary living at the time payment is owed, beginning in 2017 for certain policies, and non-contingent payments guaranteed for a certain minimum number of years, for other policies.
MetLife Holdings
For our life products, we have historically reinsured the mortality risk primarily on an excess of retention basis or on a quota share basis. We currently reinsure 90% of the mortality risk in excess of $2 million for most products. In addition to reinsuring mortality risk as described above, we reinsure other risks, as well as specific coverages. Placement of reinsurance is done primarily on an automatic basis and also on a facultative basis for risks with specified characteristics. On a case by case basis, we may retain up to $20 million per life and reinsure 100% of amounts in excess of the amount we retain. We evaluate our reinsurance programs routinely and may increase or decrease our retention at any time.
For annuities, we reinsure 100% of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with certain variable annuities issued since 2004 to an affiliate and portions of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with our variable annuities issued prior to 2004 to affiliated and unaffiliated reinsurers. Under these reinsurance agreements, we pay a reinsurance premium generally based on fees associated with the guarantees collected from policyholders, and receive reimbursement for benefits paid or accrued in excess of account values, subject to certain limitations. We also assume 100% of certain variable annuity risks issued by an affiliate.
Catastrophe Coverage
We have exposure to catastrophes which could contribute to significant fluctuations in our results of operations. We use excess reinsurance agreements, under which the direct writing company reinsures risk in excess of a specific dollar value for each policy within a class of policies, to provide greater diversification of risk and minimize exposure to larger risks. Such excess reinsurance agreements include retention reinsurance agreements and quota share reinsurance agreements. Retention reinsurance agreements provide for a portion of a risk to remain with the direct writing company, and quota share reinsurance agreements provide for the direct writing company to transfer a fixed percentage of all risks of a class of policies. Our life insurance products, particularly group life, subject us to catastrophe risk which we do not reinsure other than through our ongoing mortality reinsurance program which transfers risk at the individual policy level.
Reinsurance Recoverables
For information regarding ceded reinsurance recoverable balances, included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables on the consolidated balance sheets, see Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

11

Regulation
Index to Regulation

12

Overview
The U.S. insurance industry is regulated primarily at the state level, with some products and services also subject to federal regulation. In addition, we are subject to regulation under the insurance holding company laws of New York. Furthermore, some of our operations, products and services are subject to consumer protection laws, securities regulation, environmental and unclaimed property laws and regulations, and to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”). If MetLife, Inc. were re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, it could also be subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve and the FDIC and, as a subsidiary of MetLife, Inc., we could be affected by such regulation. We may also be affected by any additional capital requirements to which MetLife, Inc. may become subject as a global systemically important insurer.
The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”) effected the most far-reaching overhaul of financial regulation in the United States in decades. However, President Trump and the majority party have expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank. See “— Insurance Regulation” and “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated and Changes in Regulation and In Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth” for the discussion of Dodd-Frank.
Insurance Regulation
State insurance regulation generally aims at supervising and regulating insurers, with the goal of protecting policyholders and ensuring that insurance companies remain solvent. Insurance regulators have increasingly sought information about the potential impact of activities in holding company systems as a whole, and some jurisdictions have adopted laws and regulations enhancing “group-wide” supervision, as supported by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners’ (“NAIC”) Solvency Modernization Initiative. See “— NAIC” for information regarding group-wide supervision.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has all material licenses to transact business in, and is subject to regulation and supervision by, all 50 states, the District of Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the Northern Mariana Islands. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is regulated and has all material licenses in each U.S. jurisdiction where it conducts insurance business. The extent of such regulation varies, but most jurisdictions have laws and regulations governing the financial aspects and business conduct of insurers. State laws in the U.S. grant insurance regulatory authorities broad administrative powers with respect to, among other things:
•
licensing companies and agents to transact business;
•
calculating the value of assets to determine compliance with statutory requirements;
•
mandating certain insurance benefits;
•
regulating certain premium rates;
•
reviewing and approving certain policy forms, including required policyholder disclosures;
•
regulating unfair trade and claims practices, including through the imposition of restrictions on marketing and sales practices, distribution arrangements and payment of inducements, and identifying and paying to the states benefits and other property that is not claimed by the owners;
•
regulating advertising;
•
protecting privacy;
•
establishing statutory capital and reserve requirements and solvency standards;
•
specifying the conditions under which a ceding company can take credit for reinsurance in its statutory financial statements (i.e., reduce its reserves by the amount of reserves ceded to a reinsurer);
•
fixing maximum interest rates on insurance policy loans and minimum rates for guaranteed crediting rates on life insurance policies and annuity contracts;
•
adopting and enforcing suitability standards with respect to the sale of annuities and other insurance products;
•
approving changes in control of insurance companies;
•
restricting the payment of dividends and other transactions between affiliates; and
•
regulating the types, amounts and valuation of investments.
We are required to file reports, generally including detailed annual financial statements, with insurance regulatory authorities in each of the jurisdictions in which we do business, and our operations and accounts are subject to periodic examination by such authorities. We must also file, and in many jurisdictions and in some lines of insurance obtain regulatory approval for, rules, rates and forms relating to the insurance written in the jurisdictions in which we operate.

13

State and federal insurance and securities regulatory authorities and other state law enforcement agencies and attorneys general from time to time make inquiries regarding our compliance with insurance, securities and other laws and regulations regarding the conduct of our insurance and securities businesses. We cooperate with such inquiries and take corrective action when warranted. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Holding Company Regulation
Insurance holding company laws and regulations vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but generally require a controlled insurance company (i.e., insurers that are subsidiaries of insurance holding companies) to register with state regulatory authorities and to file with those authorities certain reports, including information concerning its capital structure, ownership, financial condition, certain intercompany transactions and general business operations. The NAIC adopted revisions to the NAIC Insurance Holding Company System Model Act (“Model Holding Company Act”) and the Insurance Holding Company System Model Regulation (“Regulation”) in December 2010 and December 2014. The Model Holding Company Act and Regulation serve as a basis for action by the states. See “— NAIC” for further information on the Model Holding Company Act and Regulation.
State insurance statutes also typically place restrictions and limitations on the amount of dividends or other distributions payable by insurance company subsidiaries to their parent companies, as well as on transactions between an insurer and its affiliates. Dividends in excess of prescribed limits and transactions above a specified size between an insurer and its affiliates require the approval of the insurance regulator in the insurer’s state of domicile. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Statutory Capital and Dividends.” See also “Dividend Restrictions” in Note 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding such limitations, as well as an amendment to the New York Insurance Law permitting MLIC to pay stockholder dividends to MetLife, Inc. in any calendar year without prior insurance regulatory clearance under one of two alternative formulations during 2016 and going forward.
Federal Initiatives
Although the insurance business in the United States is primarily regulated by the states, federal initiatives often have an impact on our business in a variety of ways. From time to time, federal measures are proposed which may significantly affect the insurance business.
Dodd-Frank effected the most far-reaching overhaul of financial regulation in the United States in decades. The full impact of Dodd-Frank on us will depend on whether MetLife, Inc. again becomes subject to supervision and regulation as a non-bank SIFI, as well as the adoption and implementation of final rules for insurance non-bank SIFIs required or permitted by Dodd-Frank, a number of which remain to be completed. Additionally, President Trump and the majority party have expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank and President Trump has issued an Executive Order that calls for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank in light of certain enumerated core principles of financial system regulation. We are not able to predict with certainty whether any such proposal would have a material effect on our business operations and cannot currently identify all of the risks or opportunities, if any, that may be posed to our businesses as a result of changes to, or legislative replacements for, Dodd-Frank.
Dodd-Frank also includes provisions that may impact our investments and investment activities, including the federal regulation of such activities. Until the various final regulations are promulgated pursuant to Dodd-Frank, and perhaps for some time thereafter, the full impact of Dodd-Frank on such activities will remain unclear. Such provisions and regulations include, but are not limited to, the potential application of enhanced prudential standards and capital requirements, including additional quantitative limits with respect to proprietary trading and sponsoring or investing in hedge funds or private equity funds, to non-bank SIFIs, all of which could potentially affect MetLife, Inc. See “— Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI.” However, following the transition occurring in the United States government and the priorities of the Trump Administration, we cannot predict with certainty whether any such regulations will be adopted. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth” for information regarding the Trump Administration’s expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank.
Guaranty Associations and Similar Arrangements
Most of the jurisdictions in which we are admitted to transact business require life and health insurers doing business within the jurisdiction to participate in guaranty associations, which are organized to pay certain contractual insurance benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed insurers, or those that may become impaired, insolvent or fail, for example, following the occurrence of one or more catastrophic events. These associations levy assessments, up to prescribed limits, on all member insurers in a particular state on the basis of the proportionate share of the premiums written by member insurers in the lines of business in which the impaired, insolvent or failed insurer is engaged. Some states permit member insurers to recover assessments paid through full or partial premium tax offsets.

14

In the past five years, the aggregate assessments levied against us have not been material. We have established liabilities for guaranty fund assessments that we consider adequate. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on the guaranty association assessments.
Insurance Regulatory Examinations and Other Activities
As part of their regulatory oversight process, state insurance departments conduct periodic detailed examinations of the books, records, accounts, and business practices of insurers domiciled in their states. State insurance departments also have the authority to conduct examinations of non-domiciliary insurers that are licensed in their states. Except as otherwise disclosed in Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, during the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we did not receive any material adverse findings resulting from state insurance department examinations.
Regulatory authorities in a number of states and Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and occasionally the SEC, have had investigations or inquiries relating to sales of individual life insurance policies or annuities or other products by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. These investigations often focus on the conduct of particular financial services representatives and the sale of unregistered or unsuitable products or the misuse of client assets. Over the past several years, these and a number of investigations by other regulatory authorities were resolved for monetary payments and certain other relief, including restitution payments. We may continue to receive, and may resolve, further investigations and actions on these matters in a similar manner. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
In addition, claims payment practices by insurance companies have received increased scrutiny from regulators. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information regarding retained asset accounts and unclaimed property inquiries and related litigation and sales practices claims.
The International Association of Insurance Supervisors has encouraged U.S. insurance supervisors, such as the NYDFS, to establish Supervisory Colleges for U.S.-based insurance groups with international operations, including MetLife, to facilitate cooperation and coordination among the insurance groups’ supervisors and to enhance the member regulators’ understanding of an insurance group’s risk profile. In September 2016, a Supervisory College meeting was chaired by the NYDFS and attended by MetLife’s key U.S. and international regulators. MetLife, Inc. has not received any reports or recommendations from the Supervisory College meeting, and we do not expect any outcome of the meeting to have a material adverse effect on our business.
Policy and Contract Reserve Adequacy Analysis
Annually, we, as well as our captive reinsurer subsidiary, are required to conduct an analysis of the adequacy of all statutory reserves. In each case, a qualified actuary must submit an opinion which states that the statutory reserves make adequate provision, according to accepted actuarial standards of practice, for the anticipated cash flows required by the contractual obligations and related expenses of the insurance company. The adequacy of the statutory reserves is considered in light of the assets held by the insurer with respect to such reserves and related actuarial items including, but not limited to, the investment earnings on such assets, and the consideration anticipated to be received and retained under the related policies and contracts. We may increase reserves in order to submit an opinion without qualification. Since the inception of this requirement, we, as well as our captive insurance subsidiary, have provided these opinions, as required, without qualifications.
NAIC
The NAIC is an organization, the mission of which is to assist state insurance regulatory authorities in serving the public interest and achieving the insurance regulatory goals of its members, the state insurance regulatory officials. Through the NAIC, state insurance regulators establish standards and best practices, conduct peer reviews, and coordinate their regulatory oversight. The NAIC provides standardized insurance industry accounting and reporting guidance through its Accounting Practices and Procedures Manual (the “Manual”), which states have largely adopted by regulation. However, statutory accounting principles continue to be established by individual state laws, regulations and permitted practices, which may differ from the Manual. Changes to the Manual or modifications by the various state insurance departments may impact the statutory capital and surplus of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.
The Model Holding Company Act and Regulation include a requirement that the ultimate controlling person of a U.S. insurer file an annual enterprise risk report with the lead state of the insurer identifying risks likely to have a material adverse effect upon the financial condition or liquidity of the insurer or its insurance holding company system as a whole. To date, all of the states where MetLife has domestic insurers have enacted a version of the revised Model Holding Company Act, including the enterprise risk reporting requirement. In December 2014, the NAIC adopted amendments to the Model Holding Company Act that would authorize state insurance commissioners to act as global group-wide supervisors for internationally active insurance groups, as well as other insurers that choose to opt in for the group-wide supervision. The amendments create a selection process for the group-wide supervisor, extend confidentiality protection to communications with the group-wide supervisor, and outline the duties of the group-wide supervisor. To date, a number of jurisdictions have adopted laws and regulations enhancing group-wide supervision.

15

The NAIC has concluded its “Solvency Modernization Initiative,” which was designed to review the U.S. financial regulatory system and all aspects of financial regulation affecting insurance companies. Though broad in scope, the NAIC’s Solvency Modernization Initiative focused on: (1) capital requirements; (2) corporate governance and risk management; (3) group supervision; (4) statutory accounting and financial reporting; and (5) reinsurance. In furtherance of this initiative, the NAIC adopted the Corporate Governance Annual Filing Model Act and Regulation at its August 2014 meeting. The model, which requires insurers to make an annual confidential filing regarding their corporate governance policies, has been adopted in approximately 10 states. In addition, in September 2012, the NAIC adopted the Risk Management and Own Risk and Solvency Assessment Model Act (“ORSA Model Act”), which has been enacted by New York, our domiciliary state. The ORSA Model Act requires that insurers maintain a risk management framework and conduct an internal own risk and solvency assessment of the insurer’s material risks in normal and stressed environments. The assessment must be documented in a confidential annual summary report, a copy of which must be made available to regulators as required or upon request. MetLife, Inc. has submitted on behalf of the enterprise an Own Risk and Solvency Assessment summary report to the NYDFS annually since this requirement became effective.
In 2015, the NAIC commenced an initiative to study variable annuity solvency regulations, with the goal of curtailing the use of variable annuity captives. In connection with this study, the NAIC engaged a third-party consultant to develop recommendations in 2016. The NAIC has asked the consultant to conduct an additional study and develop new recommendations in 2017. The NAIC will consider the 2017 recommendations, which, if adopted, would apply to insurers’ existing and new business and likely would materially change the sensitivity of the balance sheet (including reserve and capital requirements) to capital markets. It is not possible to predict whether the amount of reserves or capital required to support our variable annuity contracts would increase or decrease if any such 2017 recommendations are adopted, nor is it possible to predict the extent to which any such recommendations would affect the effectiveness and design of our risk mitigation and hedging programs. Furthermore, no assurances can be given to whether any such recommendations will be adopted or to the timing of any such adoption.
We cannot predict the capital and reserve impacts or compliance costs, if any, that may result from the above initiatives, or what impact these initiatives will have on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
Surplus and Capital; Risk-Based Capital
Insurers are required to maintain their capital and surplus at or above minimum levels. Regulators have discretionary authority, in connection with the continued licensing of an insurer, to limit or prohibit the insurer’s sales to policyholders if, in their judgment, the regulators determine that such insurer has not maintained the minimum surplus or capital or that the further transaction of business will be hazardous to policyholders. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is subject to risk-based capital (“RBC”) requirements that were developed by the NAIC and adopted by New York. RBC is based on a formula calculated by applying factors to various asset, premium, claim, expense and statutory reserve items. The formula takes into account the risk characteristics of the insurer and is calculated on an annual basis. The major categories of risk involved are asset risk, insurance risk, interest rate risk, market risk and business risk. The formula is used as an early warning regulatory tool to identify possible inadequately capitalized insurers for purposes of initiating regulatory action, and not as a means to rank insurers generally. State insurance laws provide insurance regulators the authority to require various actions by, or take various actions against, insurers whose total adjusted capital does not meet or exceed certain RBC levels. As of the date of the most recent annual statutory financial statements filed with insurance regulators, the total adjusted capital of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company was in excess of each of those RBC levels. See “Statutory Equity and Income” in Note 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Statutory Capital and Dividends.”
We are not aware of any NAIC adoptions that would have a material impact on the RBC of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.
Regulation of Investments
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is subject to state laws and regulations that require diversification of investment portfolios and limit the amount of investments that an insurer may have in certain asset categories, such as below investment grade fixed income securities, real estate equity, other equity investments, and derivatives. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations would cause investments exceeding regulatory limitations to be treated as non-admitted assets for purposes of measuring surplus and, in some instances, would require divestiture of such non-qualifying investments. We believe that the investments made by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company complied, in all material respects, with such regulations at December 31, 2016.

16

New York’s Cybersecurity Regulation
On February 16, 2017, the NYDFS announced the adoption of a new cybersecurity regulation for financial services institutions, including banking and insurance entities, under its jurisdiction. The new regulations became effective on March 1, 2017, and will be implemented in stages commencing 180 days later. Among other things, this new regulation requires these entities to establish and maintain a cybersecurity program designed to protect consumers’ private data. The new regulation specifically provides for: (i) controls relating to the governance framework for a cybersecurity program, including funding and staffing requirements, management oversight, and periodic reporting to senior management; (ii) risk-based minimum standards for technology systems including access controls, for data protection; (iii) minimum standards for cyber breach responses, including an incident response plan, preservation of data to respond to such breaches, and notice to NYDFS of material events; and (iv) identification and documentation of material deficiencies, remediation plans and annual certifications of regulatory compliance to the NYDFS.
ERISA Considerations
We provide products and services to certain employee benefit plans that are subject to ERISA or the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). As such, our activities are subject to the restrictions imposed by ERISA and the Code, including the requirement under ERISA that fiduciaries must perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries, and that fiduciaries may not cause a covered plan to engage in certain prohibited transactions. The applicable provisions of ERISA and the Code are subject to enforcement by the Department of Labor (“DOL”), the Internal Revenue Service and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation.
The prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Code generally restrict the provision of investment advice to ERISA plans and participants and Individual Retirement Accounts (“IRAs”) if the investment recommendation results in fees paid to an individual advisor, the firm that employs the advisor or their affiliates that vary according to the investment recommendation chosen.
On July 11, 2016, the DOL, the IRS and the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation proposed revisions to the Form 5500, the form used for ERISA annual reporting. The revisions affect employee pension and welfare benefit plans, including our ERISA plans, and require audits of information, self-directed brokerage account disclosure and additional extensive disclosure. We cannot predict the effect these proposals will have on our business, if enacted, or what other proposals may be made, what legislation may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation may have on our results of operations and financial condition.
In addition, the DOL has issued a number of regulations that increase the level of disclosure that must be provided to plan sponsors and participants. The participant disclosure regulations and the regulations which require service providers to disclose fee and other information to plan sponsors took effect in 2012. In John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company v. Harris Trust and Savings Bank (1993), the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain assets in excess of amounts necessary to satisfy guaranteed obligations under a participating group annuity general account contract are “plan assets.” Therefore, these assets are subject to certain fiduciary obligations under ERISA, which requires fiduciaries to perform their duties solely in the interest of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries. On January 5, 2000, the Secretary of Labor issued final regulations indicating, in cases where an insurer has issued a policy backed by the insurer’s general account to or for an employee benefit plan, the extent to which assets of the insurer constitute plan assets for purposes of ERISA and the Code. The regulations apply only with respect to a policy issued by an insurer on or before December 31, 1998 (“Transition Policy”). No person will generally be liable under ERISA or the Code for conduct occurring prior to July 5, 2001, where the basis of a claim is that insurance company general account assets constitute plan assets. An insurer issuing a new policy that is backed by its general account and is issued to or for an employee benefit plan after December 31, 1998 will generally be subject to fiduciary obligations under ERISA, unless the policy is a guaranteed benefit policy.
The regulations indicate the requirements that must be met so that assets supporting a Transition Policy will not be considered plan assets for purposes of ERISA and the Code. These requirements include detailed disclosures to be made to the employee benefits plan and the requirement that the insurer must permit the policyholder to terminate the policy on 90 days’ notice and receive without penalty, at the policyholder’s option, either (i) the unallocated accumulated fund balance (which may be subject to market value adjustment) or (ii) a book value payment of such amount in annual installments with interest. We have taken and continue to take steps designed to ensure compliance with these regulations.

17

Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI
On December 18, 2014, the FSOC designated MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, as well as to enhanced supervision and prudential standards. On January 13, 2015, MetLife, Inc. filed an action in the D.C. District Court asking the Court to review and rescind the FSOC’s designation. On March 30, 2016, the D.C. District Court ordered that the designation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI by the FSOC be rescinded. On April 8, 2016, the FSOC appealed the D.C. District Court’s order to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and oral argument was heard on October 24, 2016. If the FSOC prevails on appeal or re-designates MetLife, Inc. as systemically important as part of its ongoing review of non-bank financial companies, MetLife, Inc. could once again be subject to regulation as a non-bank SIFI.
Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI could materially and adversely affect our business. For example, the Federal Reserve Board has issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking but not yet finally determined the enhanced capital requirements that would apply to insurance non-bank SIFIs. If MetLife, Inc. were re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, those capital requirements may adversely affect our ability to compete with other insurers that are not subject to those requirements, and our ability to issue guarantees could be constrained. In addition, if re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, MetLife, Inc. would need to obtain Federal Reserve approval before directly or indirectly acquiring, merging or consolidating with a financial company having more than $10 billion of assets or acquiring 5% or more of any voting class of securities of a bank or bank holding company and, depending on the extent of the combined company’s liabilities, would be subject to additional restrictions regarding its ability to merge. The Federal Reserve would also have the right to require us, or our insurance company affiliates, to take prompt action to correct any financial weaknesses.
Together with other large financial institutions and non-bank SIFIs, if MetLife, Inc. were re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, it would be subject to a number of Dodd-Frank requirements including responsibility to pay certain assessments and other charges (i) equal to the total expenses the Federal Reserve Board thinks is necessary for its supervision of bank holding companies and non-bank SIFIs, and (ii) in connection with the Financial Research Fund within the U.S. Department of Treasury that funds the Office of Financial Research, an agency established by Dodd-Frank to improve the quality of financial data available to policymakers and facilitate more robust and sophisticated analysis of the financial system. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI Could Adversely Affect Our Ability to Compete and Our Business and Results of Operations.” See also “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth” for information regarding the Trump Administration’s expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank.
Enhanced Prudential Standards for Non-Bank SIFIs
The Federal Reserve Board has indicated that it plans to apply enhanced prudential standards, including enhanced capital requirements, governance, risk management and liquidity requirements, to non-bank SIFIs by rule or order. Once capital requirements for non-bank SIFIs are determined, non-bank SIFIs will be required to undergo three stress tests each year. Companies will be required to take the results of the stress tests into consideration in their annual capital planning and resolution and recovery planning. Non-bank SIFIs are also required to submit a resolution plan (annually and upon change of circumstances) setting forth how the company could be resolved under the Bankruptcy Code in the event of material financial distress. A failure to submit a “credible” resolution plan could result in the imposition of a variety of measures, including additional capital, leverage, or liquidity requirements, and forced divestiture of assets or operations.
In addition, if MetLife, Inc. were re-designated as a non-bank SIFI and if it were determined that MetLife, Inc. posed a substantial threat to U.S. financial stability, the applicable federal regulators would have the right to require it to take one or more other mitigating actions to reduce that risk.
Following the transition occurring in the United States government and the priorities of the Trump Administration, however, we cannot predict with certainty whether any such regulations will be adopted, nor how they might apply to MetLife, Inc. were it to be re-designated as a non-bank SIFI. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth” for information regarding the Trump Administration’s expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank.

18

Orderly Liquidation Authority
Under the provisions of Dodd-Frank relating to the resolution or liquidation of certain types of financial institutions, if MetLife, Inc. or another financial institution were to become insolvent or were in danger of defaulting on its obligations, it could be compelled to undergo liquidation with the FDIC as receiver. For this new regime to be applicable, a number of determinations would have to be made, including that a default by the affected company would have serious adverse effects on financial stability in the U.S. While under this new regime an insurance company would be resolved in accordance with state insurance law, if the FDIC were to be appointed as the receiver for another type of company (including an insurance holding company such as MetLife, Inc.), the liquidation of that company would occur under the provisions of the new liquidation authority, and not under the Bankruptcy Code, which ordinarily governs liquidations. The FDIC’s purpose under the liquidation regime is to mitigate the systemic risks the institution’s failure poses, which is different from that of a bankruptcy trustee under the Bankruptcy Code. In such a liquidation, the holders of such company’s debt could in certain respects be treated differently than under the Bankruptcy Code. As required by Dodd-Frank, the FDIC has established rules relating to the priority of creditors’ claims and the potentially dissimilar treatment of similarly situated creditors. These provisions could apply to some financial institutions whose outstanding debt securities we hold in our investment portfolios. Dodd-Frank also provides for the assessment of bank holding companies with assets of $50 billion or more and non-bank SIFIs to cover the costs of liquidating any financial company subject to the new liquidation authority.
Volcker Rule
Under the Volcker Rule, Dodd-Frank authorizes through rulemaking additional capital requirements and quantitative limits on proprietary trading and sponsoring or investing in funds (hedge funds and private equity funds) that rely on certain exemptions from the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended (the “Investment Company Act”), by a non-bank SIFI. Regulations defining and governing such requirements and limits on non-bank SIFIs have not been proposed and were not addressed in the final regulations issued on December 10, 2013 implementing the Volcker Rule for insured depository institutions and their affiliates (“Volcker Rule Regulations”). After designation as a non-bank SIFI, a non-bank SIFI will have a two-year period, subject to further extension by the Federal Reserve Board, to conform to any such requirements and limits that may be set forth in final regulations applicable to non-bank SIFIs. Subject to safety and soundness determinations as part of rulemaking that could require additional capital requirements and quantitative limits, Dodd-Frank provides that the exemptions under the Volcker Rule also are available to exempt any additional capital requirements and quantitative limits on non-bank SIFIs. The Volcker Rule Regulations provide an exemption, subject to certain requirements, for trading activities and fund sponsorship and investments by a regulated insurance company and its affiliates solely for the general account or separate account of such insurance company. Until final regulations applicable to non-bank SIFIs have been promulgated, it is unclear whether MetLife, Inc., were it to be re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, and MLIC, as an affiliate of MetLife, Inc., would have to alter any of their future activities to comply.
Regulation of Over-the-Counter Derivatives
Dodd-Frank includes a framework of regulation of the over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives markets which requires clearing of certain types of transactions currently traded OTC and imposes additional costs, including new reporting and margin requirements, and will likely impose additional regulation on the Company, including new capital requirements. Our costs of risk mitigation are increasing under Dodd-Frank. For example, Dodd-Frank imposes requirements, including the requirement to pledge initial margin (i) for “OTC-cleared” transactions (OTC derivatives that are cleared and settled through central clearing counterparties), and (ii) for “OTC-bilateral” transactions (OTC derivatives that are bilateral contracts between two counterparties) entered into after the phase-in period; these requirements will likely be applicable to us in September 2020 as the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Federal Reserve Board, FDIC, Farm Credit Administration and Federal Housing Finance Agency (collectively, the “Prudential Regulators”) and the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) adopted final margin requirements for non-centrally cleared derivatives during the fourth quarter of 2015, which are broadly consistent with the requirements published by the Bank of International Settlements and International Organization of Securities. These increased margin requirements, combined with increased capital charges for our counterparties and central clearinghouses with respect to non-cash collateral, will likely require increased holdings of cash and highly liquid securities with lower yields causing a reduction in income and less favorable pricing for OTC-cleared and OTC-bilateral transactions. Centralized clearing of certain OTC derivatives exposes us to the risk of a default by a clearing member or clearinghouse with respect to our cleared derivative transactions. We use derivatives to mitigate a wide range of risks in connection with our businesses, including the impact of increased benefit exposures from certain of our annuity products that offer guaranteed benefits. We have always been subject to the risk that hedging and other management procedures might prove ineffective in reducing the risks to which insurance policies expose us or that unanticipated policyholder behavior or mortality, combined with adverse market events, could produce economic losses beyond the scope of the risk management techniques employed. Any such losses could be increased by higher costs of writing derivatives (including customized derivatives) and the reduced availability of customized derivatives that might result from the implementation of Dodd-Frank and comparable international derivatives regulations.

19

Dodd-Frank also expanded the definition of “swap” and mandated the SEC and CFTC (collectively, the “Commissions”) to study whether “stable value contracts” should be treated as swaps. Pursuant to the new definition and the Commissions’ interpretive regulations, products we offer other than stable value contracts might also be treated as swaps, even though we believe otherwise. Should such products become regulated as swaps, we cannot predict how the rules would be applied to them or the effect on such products’ profitability or attractiveness to our clients.
See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth” for information regarding the Trump Administration’s expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank.
Securities Regulation
Some of our activities in offering and selling variable insurance products as well as certain fixed interest rate or index-linked contracts, are subject to extensive regulation under the federal securities laws administered by the SEC. We issue variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies through separate accounts that are registered with the SEC as investment companies under the Investment Company Act. Each registered separate account is generally divided into sub-accounts, each of which invests in an underlying mutual fund which is itself a registered investment company under the Investment Company Act. In addition, the variable annuity contracts and variable life insurance policies issued by these registered separate accounts are registered with the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933 (“Securities Act”). We also issue fixed interest rate or index-linked contracts with features that require them to be registered as securities under the Securities Act. Certain variable contract separate accounts we sponsor are exempt from registration, but may be subject to other provisions of the federal securities laws.
Federal and state securities regulatory authorities from time to time make inquiries and conduct examinations regarding our compliance with securities laws and regulations. We cooperate with such inquiries and examinations and take corrective action when warranted.
Federal and state securities laws and regulations are primarily intended to protect investors in the securities markets and generally grant regulatory agencies broad rulemaking and enforcement powers, including the power to limit or restrict the conduct of business for failure to comply with such laws and regulations. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Changes in Tax Laws or Interpretations of Such Laws Could Materially Impact Our Operations by Increasing Our Corporate Taxes and Making Some of Our Products Less Attractive to Consumers.”
Environmental Considerations
As an owner and operator of real property, we are subject to extensive federal, state and local environmental laws and regulations. Inherent in such ownership and operation is also the risk that there may be potential environmental liabilities and costs in connection with any required remediation of such properties. In addition, we hold equity interests in companies that could potentially be subject to environmental liabilities. We routinely have environmental assessments performed with respect to real estate being acquired for investment and real property to be acquired through foreclosure. We cannot provide assurance that unexpected environmental liabilities will not arise. However, based on information currently available to us, we believe that any costs associated with compliance with environmental laws and regulations or any remediation of such properties will not have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Unclaimed Property
We are subject to the laws and regulations of states and other jurisdictions concerning identification, reporting and escheatment of unclaimed or abandoned funds, and are subject to audit and examination for compliance with these requirements. See Note 16 of the Notes of the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Company Ratings
Insurer financial strength ratings represent the opinions of rating agencies, including A.M. Best Company (“A.M. Best”), Fitch Ratings (“Fitch”), Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”) and Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings (“S&P”), regarding the ability of an insurance company to meet its financial obligations to policyholders and contractholders.
Rating Stability Indicators
Rating agencies use an “outlook statement” of “positive,” “stable,” ‘‘negative’’ or “developing” to indicate a medium- or long-term trend in credit fundamentals which, if continued, may lead to a rating change. A rating may have a “stable” outlook to indicate that the rating is not expected to change; however, a “stable” rating does not preclude a rating agency from changing a rating at any time, without notice. Certain rating agencies assign rating modifiers such as “CreditWatch” or “under review” to indicate their opinion regarding the potential direction of a rating. These ratings modifiers are generally assigned in connection with certain events such as potential mergers, acquisitions, dispositions or material changes in a company’s results, in order for the rating agency to perform its analysis to fully determine the rating implications of the event.

20

Insurer Financial Strength Ratings
The following insurer financial strength ratings represent each rating agency’s opinion of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s ability to pay obligations under insurance policies and contracts in accordance with their terms and are not evaluations directed toward the protection of investors in securities of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Insurer financial strength ratings are not statements of fact nor are they recommendations to purchase, hold or sell any security, contract or policy. Each rating should be evaluated independently of any other rating.
Our insurer financial strength ratings at the date of this filing are indicated in the following table. Additional information about financial strength ratings can be found on the websites of the respective rating agencies.
 
A.M. Best
 
Fitch
 
Moody’s
 
S&P
Ratings Structure
“A++ (superior)” to “S (suspended)”
 
“AAA (exceptionally strong)” to “C (distressed)”
 
“Aaa (highest quality)” to “C (lowest rated)”
 
“AAA (extremely strong)” to “SD (Selective Default)” or “D (Default)”
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
A+
 
AA-
 
Aa3
 
AA-
2nd of 16
 
4th of 19
 
4th of 21
 
4th of 22
Rating agencies may continue to review and adjust our ratings, including in connection with the proposed Separation. See “Business Overview — Other Key Information” for further details on the proposed Separation and “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — A Downgrade or a Potential Downgrade in Our Financial Strength or Credit Ratings or MetLife, Inc.’s Credit Ratings Could Result in a Loss of Business and Materially Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” See also “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Rating Agencies” for an in-depth description of the impact of a ratings downgrade.

21

Item 1A. Risk Factors
Economic Environment and Capital Markets-Related Risks
If Difficult Conditions in the Global Capital Markets and the Economy Generally Persist, They May Materially Adversely Affect Our Business and Results of Operations
Our business and results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the global capital markets and the economy generally. Stressed conditions, volatility and disruptions in financial asset classes or various markets, including global capital markets, can have an adverse effect on us, in part because we have a large investment portfolio and our insurance liabilities are sensitive to changing market factors. Global market factors, including interest rates, credit spreads, equity prices, derivative prices and availability, real estate markets, foreign currency exchange rates, consumer spending, business investment, government spending, the volatility and strength of the capital markets, deflation and inflation, all affect our financial condition, as well as the volume, profitability and results of our business operations and our ability to meet our obligations, either directly or by virtue of their impact on the business and economic environment generally and on general levels of economic activity, employment and customer behavior specifically. Upheavals in the financial markets can also affect our financial condition (including our liquidity and capital levels) as a result of mismatched impacts on the value of our assets and our liabilities. Significant market volatility, and government actions taken in response, may exacerbate some of the risks we face. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Investments — Current Environment.” In addition, the impact on global capital markets, the economy and MetLife of the transition occurring in the United States government and the priorities of the Trump Administration is uncertain.
To the extent these uncertain financial market conditions persist, our revenues, reserves and net investment income, as well as the demand for certain of our products, are likely to remain under pressure. Similarly, sustained periods of low interest rates and risk asset returns could reduce income from our investment portfolio, increase our liabilities for claims and future benefits, and increase the cost of risk transfer measures such as hedging, causing our profit margins to erode as a result of reduced income from our investment portfolio and increase in insurance liabilities. See “— We Are Exposed to Significant Global Financial and Capital Markets Risks Which May Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity, and May Cause Our Net Investment Income to Vary from Period to Period.” Also, in the event of extreme prolonged market events, such as the global credit crisis, we could incur significant capital and/or operating losses due to, among other reasons, losses incurred in our general account and as a result of the impact on us of guarantees, including increases in liabilities, capital maintenance obligations and/or collateral requirements associated with our affiliated reinsurers and other similar arrangements. Even in the absence of a market downturn, we are exposed to substantial risk of loss due to sustained periods of low market returns, low levels of U.S. interest rates, and/or heightened market volatility, which may also increase the cost and limit the availability of the hedging instruments and other protective measures we take to mitigate such risk, or increase the cost of our insurance liabilities, which could have a material adverse effect on our statutory capital and earnings, as well as impair our financial strength ratings.
Adverse Global Capital and Credit Market Conditions May Significantly Affect Our Ability to Meet Liquidity Needs, Our Access to Capital and Our Cost of Capital
The global capital and credit markets may be subject to periods of extreme volatility. Disruptions in capital markets could cause our liquidity and credit capacity to be limited.
We need liquidity to pay claims and other operating expenses, interest on our debt and dividends on our capital stock, provide our subsidiaries with cash or collateral, maintain our securities lending activities and replace certain maturing liabilities. Without sufficient liquidity, we could be forced to curtail our operations and limit our investments, and our business and financial results may suffer. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources.”
In the event global capital market or other conditions have an adverse impact on our capital and liquidity, or our stress-testing indicates that such conditions could have such an impact beyond expectations and our current resources do not satisfy our needs or regulatory requirements, we may have to seek additional financing. The availability of additional financing will depend on a variety of factors and may not be available on favorable terms, or at all. Similarly, our access to funds may be impaired if regulatory authorities or rating agencies take negative actions against us.

22

Disruptions, uncertainty or volatility in the capital and credit markets may also limit our access to capital needed to operate our business, most significantly in our insurance operations. Such market conditions may limit our ability to replace, in a timely manner, maturing liabilities, satisfy regulatory capital requirements, and access the capital necessary to grow our business. See “— Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth.” As a result, we may be forced to delay raising capital, issue different types of securities than we would have otherwise, less effectively deploy such capital, issue shorter tenor securities than we prefer, or bear an unattractive cost of capital, which could decrease our profitability and significantly reduce our financial flexibility. Our results of operations, financial condition, cash flows and statutory capital position could be materially adversely affected by disruptions in the financial markets.
We Are Exposed to Significant Global Financial and Capital Markets Risks Which May Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity, and May Cause Our Net Investment Income to Vary from Period to Period
We are exposed to significant global financial and capital markets risks, including changes in interest rates, equity prices, market volatility, global economic performance in general, derivatives and other factors outside our control. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Investments — Current Environment.”
Interest Rate Risk
Some of our products, principally traditional life, universal life, fixed annuities and guaranteed interest contracts, expose us to the risk that changes in interest rates will reduce our investment margin or “spread,” or the difference between the amounts that we are required to pay under the contracts in our general account and the rate of return we earn on general account investments intended to support obligations under such contracts. Our spread is a key component of our net income.
In a low interest rate environment, we may be forced to reinvest proceeds from investments that have matured or have been prepaid or sold at lower yields, which will reduce our investment margin. Moreover, borrowers may prepay or redeem the fixed income securities and commercial, agricultural or residential mortgage loans in our investment portfolio with greater frequency in order to borrow at lower market rates, thereby exacerbating this risk. Although lowering interest crediting rates can help offset decreases in spreads on some products, our ability to lower these rates is limited to the portion of our in-force product portfolio that has adjustable interest crediting rates, and could be limited by competition or contractually guaranteed minimum rates and may not match the timing or magnitude of changes in asset yields. As a result, our spread could decrease or potentially become negative, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. See “— Risks Related to Our Business — Guarantees Within Certain of Our Products May Decrease Our Earnings, Increase the Volatility of Our Results, Result in Higher Risk Management Costs and Expose Us to Increased Counterparty Risk.”
Our expectation for future spreads is an important component in the amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”) and value of business acquired (“VOBA”). Significantly lower spreads may cause us to accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period and potentially negatively affecting our credit instrument covenants or rating agency assessment of our financial condition. In addition, during periods of declining interest rates, life insurance and annuity products may be relatively more attractive investments to consumers. This could result in increased premium payments on products with flexible premium features, repayment of policy loans and increased persistency, or a higher percentage of insurance policies remaining in-force from year to year, during a period when our new investments carry lower returns. A decline in market interest rates could also reduce our return on investments that do not support particular policy obligations. During periods of sustained lower interest rates, our reserves for policy liabilities may not be sufficient to meet future policy obligations and may need to be strengthened. Accordingly, declining and sustained lower interest rates may materially affect our results of operations, financial position, cash flows, and significantly reduce our profitability.
Increases in interest rates could also negatively affect our profitability. In periods of rapidly increasing interest rates, we may not be able to replace, in a timely manner, the investments in our general account with higher yielding investments needed to fund the higher crediting rates necessary to keep interest rate sensitive products competitive. We, therefore, may have to accept a lower credit spread and, thus, lower profitability or face a decline in sales and greater loss of existing contracts and related assets. In addition, policy loans, surrenders and withdrawals may tend to increase as policyholders seek investments with higher perceived returns as interest rates rise. This process may result in cash outflows requiring that we sell investments at a time when the prices of those investments are adversely affected by the increase in interest rates, which may result in realized investment losses. Unanticipated withdrawals, terminations and substantial policy amendments may cause us to accelerate the amortization of DAC and VOBA, which reduces net income and potentially negatively affects our credit instrument covenants and rating agency assessment of our financial condition.

23

We manage interest rate risk as part of our asset and liability management strategies, which include maintaining an investment portfolio with diversified maturities that has a weighted average duration that reflects the duration of our estimated liability cash flow profile. For certain of our liability portfolios it is not possible to invest assets to the full liability duration, thereby creating some asset/liability mismatch. We also use derivatives to mitigate interest rate risk. Although we take measures to manage the economic risks of investing in a changing interest rate environment, we may not be able to mitigate the interest rate risk of our fixed income investments relative to our interest rate sensitive liabilities. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.” In addition, asymmetrical and non-economic accounting may cause material changes to our net income and stockholders’ equity in any given period because our non-qualified derivatives are recorded at fair value through earnings, while the related hedged items either follow an accrual-based accounting model, such as insurance liabilities, or are recorded at fair value through other comprehensive income. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the primary reasons why many of the Company’s derivatives do not qualify for hedge accounting, even though they may be effective economic hedges.
Significant volatility in the markets could cause changes in the risks set forth above which, individually or in tandem, could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition, liquidity or cash flows through realized investment losses, derivative losses, changes in insurance liabilities, impairments, increased valuation allowances, increases in reserves for future policyholder benefits, reduced net investment income and changes in unrealized gain or loss positions.
Equity Risk
We are exposed to equity risk due to our investments in leveraged buy-out funds, hedge funds and other private equity funds. The amount and timing of net investment income from such funds tends to be uneven as a result of the performance of the underlying investments. The timing of distributions from such funds, which depends on particular events relating to the underlying investments, as well as the funds’ schedules for making distributions and their needs for cash, can be difficult to predict. As a result, the amount of net investment income from these investments can vary substantially from period to period. Significant volatility could adversely impact returns and net investment income on these alternative investment classes. In addition, the estimated fair value of such investments may be impacted by downturns or volatility in equity markets. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.”
Regulatory and Legal Risks
Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth
Our insurance businesses are subject to a wide variety of insurance and other laws and regulations. Additionally, Dodd-Frank, discussed further below, effected the most far-reaching overhaul of financial regulation in the United States in decades. However, President Trump and the majority party have expressed goals to dismantle or roll back Dodd-Frank and President Trump has issued an Executive Order that calls for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank in light of certain enumerated core principles of financial system regulation. We are not able to predict with certainty whether any such proposal would have a material effect on our business operations and cannot currently identify all of the risks or opportunities, if any, that may be posed to our businesses as a result of changes to, or legislative replacements for, Dodd-Frank. See “Business — Regulation,” as supplemented by discussions of regulatory developments in our subsequently filed Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q under the caption “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Business — Regulatory Developments.”
Insurance Regulation
The NAIC is an organization whose mission is to assist state insurance regulatory authorities in serving the public interest and achieving the insurance regulatory goals of its members, the state insurance regulatory officials. State insurance regulators may act independently or adopt regulations proposed by the NAIC. State insurance regulators and the NAIC regularly re-examine existing laws and regulations applicable to insurance companies and their products. Changes in these laws and regulations, or in interpretations thereof, can sometimes lead to additional expense for the insurer and, thus, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

24

In 2015, the NAIC commenced an initiative to study variable annuity solvency regulations, with the goal of curtailing the use of variable annuity captives. In connection with this study, the NAIC engaged a third-party consultant to develop recommendations in 2016 regarding reserve and capital requirements, and has asked the consultant to conduct an additional study and develop new recommendations in 2017. The NAIC will consider the 2017 recommendations which, if adopted, would apply to insurers’ existing and new business and likely would materially change the sensitivity of the balance sheet (including reserve and capital requirements) to capital markets. It is not possible to predict whether the amount of reserves or capital required to support our variable annuity contracts would increase or decrease if any such 2017 recommendations are adopted, nor is it possible to predict the extent to which any such recommendations would affect the effectiveness and design of our risk mitigation and hedging programs. Furthermore, no assurances can be given as to whether any such recommendations will be adopted or to the timing of any such adoption.
The NAIC is also studying its RBC factors for bonds, real estate and collateral pledged to support FHLB advances. It is premature to project the impact of any such adoption.
ERISA Considerations
We provide products and services to certain employee benefit plans that are subject to ERISA or the Code. As such, our activities are subject to the restrictions imposed by ERISA and the Code, including the requirement under ERISA that fiduciaries must perform their duties solely in the interests of ERISA plan participants and beneficiaries, and those fiduciaries may not cause a covered plan to engage in certain prohibited transactions. The prohibited transaction rules of ERISA and the Code generally restrict the provision of investment advice to ERISA plans and participants and IRAs if the investment recommendation results in fees paid to the individual advisor, the firm that employs the advisor or their affiliates that vary according to the investment recommendation chosen, unless an exemption or exception is available. Similarly, without an exemption or exception, fiduciary advisors are prohibited from receiving compensation from third parties in connection with their advice. ERISA also affects certain of our in-force insurance policies and annuity contracts, as well as insurance policies and annuity contracts we may sell in the future.
General
From time to time, regulators raise issues during examinations or audits of us that could, if determined adversely, have a material impact on us. In addition, the interpretations of regulations by regulators may change and statutes may be enacted with retroactive impact, particularly in areas such as accounting or statutory reserve requirements. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations is time consuming and personnel-intensive, and changes in these laws and regulations may materially increase our direct and indirect compliance and other expenses of doing business, thus having a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI Could Adversely Affect Our Ability to Compete and Our Business and Results of Operations
On December 18, 2014, the FSOC designated MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI. On January 13, 2015, MetLife, Inc. filed an action in the D.C. District Court asking the Court to review and rescind the FSOC’s designation. On March 30, 2016, the D.C. District Court ordered that the designation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI by the FSOC be rescinded. On April 8, 2016, the FSOC appealed the D.C. District Court’s order to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and oral argument was heard on October 24, 2016.
If the FSOC prevails on appeal or re-designates MetLife, Inc. as systemically important as part of its ongoing review of non-bank financial companies, MetLife, Inc. could once again be subject to regulation that could materially and adversely affect our business and competitive position. Non-bank SIFIs are supervised by the Federal Reserve Board and subject to enhanced prudential standards which Dodd-Frank requires the Federal Reserve Board to adopt. The Federal Reserve Board has not yet fully implemented most of the standards that will apply to non-bank SIFIs. Accordingly, the manner in which the ultimate standards might apply to MetLife, Inc. were it to be re-designated as a non-bank SIFI and the full impact of such standards on us, remains unclear. If MetLife, Inc. were to be re-designated as a non-bank SIFI, however, it is possible that such regulations could cause us, among other things, to raise the price of the products we offer, reduce the amount of risk we take on, or stop offering certain products altogether.
The Trump Administration has called for a comprehensive review of Dodd-Frank and has generally delayed all pending regulations. We cannot predict with certainty what other proposals may be made or what legislation or regulations may be introduced or enacted, or what impact any such legislation or regulations may have on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

25

Changes in Tax Laws or Interpretations of Such Laws Could Materially Impact Our Operations by Increasing Our Corporate Taxes and Making Some of Our Products Less Attractive to Consumers
Changes in tax laws or interpretations of such laws could increase our corporate taxes, which may materially impact our net equity. Budget deficits make it likely that governments’ need for additional revenue will result in future tax proposals that will increase our effective tax rate. Additionally, the Trump Administration and Congress have publicly stated that fundamental U.S. tax reform is a priority. The substance, timing and likelihood of tax law changes and potential tax reform are uncertain and could impact the Company’s corporate taxes, whether favorably or adversely.
Such changes could not only directly impact our corporate taxes but also could adversely impact our products (both life insurance and retirement plans) by making some of our products less attractive to consumers. A shift away from life insurance and annuity contracts and other tax-deferred products by our customers would reduce our income from sales of these products, as well as the asset base upon which we earn investment income and fees, thereby reducing our earnings and potentially affecting the value of our deferred tax assets.
Litigation and Regulatory Investigations Are Increasingly Common in Our Businesses and May Result in Significant Financial Losses and/or Harm to Our Reputation
We face a significant risk of litigation and regulatory investigations and actions in the ordinary course of operating our businesses, including the risk of class action lawsuits. Our pending legal and regulatory actions include proceedings specific to us and others generally applicable to business practices in the industries in which we operate. In connection with our insurance operations, plaintiffs’ lawyers may bring or are bringing class actions and individual suits alleging, among other things, issues relating to sales or underwriting practices, claims payments and procedures, product design, disclosure, administration, investments, denial or delay of benefits and breaches of fiduciary or other duties to customers. Plaintiffs in class action and other lawsuits against us may seek very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages. Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may normally be difficult to ascertain. Uncertainties can include how fact finders will evaluate documentary evidence and the credibility and effectiveness of witness testimony, and how trial and appellate courts will apply the law in the context of the pleadings or evidence presented, whether by motion practice, or at trial or on appeal. Disposition valuations are also subject to the uncertainty of how opposing parties and their counsel will themselves view the relevant evidence and applicable law. Material pending litigation and regulatory matters affecting us and risks to our business presented by these proceedings are discussed in Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. Updates are provided in the notes to our interim condensed consolidated financial statements included in our subsequently filed quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, as well as in Part II, Item 1 (“Legal Proceedings”) of those quarterly reports.
A substantial legal liability or a significant federal, state or other regulatory action against us, as well as regulatory inquiries or investigations, could harm our reputation, result in material fines or penalties, result in significant legal costs and otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Even if we ultimately prevail in the litigation, regulatory action or investigation, our ability to attract new customers and retain our current customers could be materially and adversely impacted. Regulatory inquiries and litigation may also cause volatility in the price of stocks of companies in our industry.
Current claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and other proceedings against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. It is also possible that related or unrelated claims, litigation, unasserted claims probable of assertion, investigations and proceedings may be commenced in the future, and we could become subject to further investigations and have lawsuits filed or enforcement actions initiated against us. Increased regulatory scrutiny and any resulting investigations or proceedings in any of the countries where we operate could result in new legal actions and precedents and industry-wide regulations that could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

26

Investments-Related Risks
Should the Need Arise, We May Have Difficulty Selling Certain Holdings in Our Investment Portfolio or in Our Securities Lending Program in a Timely Manner and Realizing Full Value Given Their Illiquid Nature, and Our Requirements to Pledge Collateral in Derivatives Transactions May Adversely Affect Our Liquidity
There may be a limited market for certain investments we hold in our investment portfolio, making them relatively illiquid. These include privately-placed fixed maturity securities, certain derivative instruments, mortgage loans, policy loans, leveraged leases, other limited partnership interests, and real estate equity, such as real estate joint ventures and funds. In recent years, even some of our very high quality investments experienced reduced liquidity during periods of market volatility or disruption. If we were forced to sell certain of our investments during periods of market volatility or disruption, market prices may be lower than our carrying value in such investments. This could result in realized losses which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition, as well as our financial ratios, which could affect compliance with our credit instruments and rating agency capital adequacy measures.
Similarly, we loan blocks of our securities to third parties (primarily brokerage firms and commercial banks) through our securities lending program, including fixed maturity (primarily U.S. government and U.S. government-backed securities) and equity securities, short-term investments and cash equivalents. Under this program, we obtain collateral, usually cash, at the inception of a loan and typically purchase securities with the cash collateral. Upon the return to us of these loaned securities, we must return to the third party the cash collateral we received. If the cash collateral has been invested in securities, we need to sell the securities. However, in some cases, the maturity of those securities may exceed the term of the related securities on loan and the estimated fair value of the securities we need to sell may fall below the amount of cash received.
If we are required to return significant amounts of cash collateral under our securities lending program or otherwise need significant amounts of cash on short notice and we are forced to sell securities, we may have difficulty selling such collateral that is invested in securities in a timely manner, be forced to sell securities in a volatile or illiquid market for less than we otherwise would have been able to realize under normal market conditions, or both. In the event of a forced sale, accounting guidance requires the recognition of a loss for securities in an unrealized loss position and may require the impairment of other securities based on our ability to hold those securities, which would negatively impact our financial condition, as well as our financial ratios, which could affect compliance with our credit instruments and rating agency capital adequacy measures. In addition, under stressful capital market and economic conditions, liquidity broadly deteriorates, which may further restrict our ability to sell securities. Furthermore, if we decrease the amount of our securities lending activities over time, the amount of net investment income generated by these activities will also likely decline. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Investments,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Uses — Securities Lending” and Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Our liquidity could also be adversely affected under the terms of our derivatives. Substantially all of our derivatives transactions require us to pledge collateral related to any decline in the net estimated fair value of such derivatives transactions executed through a specific broker at a clearinghouse or entered into with a specific counterparty on a bilateral basis. Certain derivatives financing transactions require us to pledge collateral or make payments related to declines in the estimated fair value of the specified assets under certain circumstances to central clearinghouses or our counterparties. The amount of collateral we may be required to pledge and the payments we may be required to make under our derivatives transactions may increase under certain circumstances, such as restriction or elimination of certain types of previously eligible collateral. We may also incur charges to pledge such non-cash collateral, which would increase our costs and could adversely affect the liquidity of our investments and the composition of our investment portfolio. See “Business — Regulation — Regulation of Over-the-Counter Derivatives,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Uses — Pledged Collateral,” and Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

27

Gross Unrealized Losses on Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities May Result in Future Impairments to the Carrying Value of Such Securities, Resulting in a Reduction in Our Net Income
Fixed maturity and equity securities classified as available-for-sale (“AFS”) securities are reported at their estimated fair value. Unrealized gains or losses on AFS securities are recognized as a component of other comprehensive income (loss) and are, therefore, excluded from net income. In recent periods, as a result of low interest rates, the unrealized gains on our fixed maturity securities have exceeded the unrealized losses. However, if interest rates rise, our unrealized gains would decrease and our unrealized losses would increase, perhaps substantially. The accumulated change in estimated fair value of these AFS securities is recognized in net income when the gain or loss is realized upon the sale of the security or in the event that the decline in estimated fair value is determined to be other-than-temporary and an impairment charge to earnings is taken. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Investments — Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS.”
The Defaults or Deteriorating Credit of Other Financial Institutions Could Adversely Affect Us
We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including brokers and dealers, central clearinghouses, commercial banks, investment banks, hedge funds and investment funds and other financial institutions. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty. In addition, with respect to secured transactions, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due to us. We also have exposure to these financial institutions in the form of unsecured debt instruments, non-redeemable and redeemable preferred securities, derivatives, joint venture, hedge fund and equity investments. Further, potential action by governments and regulatory bodies, such as investment, nationalization, conservatorship, receivership and other intervention, whether under existing legal authority or any new authority that may be created, or lack of action by governments and central banks, as well as deterioration in the banks’ credit standing, could negatively impact these instruments, securities, transactions and investments or limit our ability to trade with them. Any such losses or impairments to the carrying value of these investments or other changes may materially and adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Risks Related to Our Business
An Inability to Access Credit Facilities Could Result in a Reduction in Our Liquidity and Lead to Downgrades in MetLife, Inc.’s Credit Ratings and Our Credit and Financial Strength Ratings
We rely on the unsecured credit facility maintained by MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc. (“MetLife Funding”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (the “Credit Facility”), as a potential source of liquidity. The right to borrow funds under the Credit Facility is subject to the fulfillment of certain important conditions, including our compliance with all covenants, and the ability to borrow under the Credit Facility is also subject to the continued willingness and ability of the lenders that are parties to the Credit Facility to provide funds. Our failure to comply with the covenants in the Credit Facility or fulfill the conditions to borrowings, or the failure of lenders to fund their lending commitments (whether due to insolvency, illiquidity or other reasons) in the amounts provided for under the terms of the Credit Facility, would restrict our ability to access the Credit Facility when needed and, consequently, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations, and our credit and financial strength ratings, as well as MetLife, Inc.’s credit ratings. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Sources — Global Funding Sources — Credit and Committed Facilities” and Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We May Need to Fund Deficiencies in Our Closed Block; Assets Allocated to the Closed Block Benefit Only the Holders of Closed Block Policies
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s plan of reorganization, as amended, established in connection with its demutualization, required that we establish and operate an accounting mechanism, known as a closed block, to ensure that the reasonable dividend expectations of policyholders who own individual participating whole life insurance policies of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in force at the time of the demutualization are met. We allocated assets to the closed block in an amount that will produce cash flows which, together with anticipated revenue from the policies included in the closed block, are reasonably expected to be sufficient to support obligations and liabilities relating to these policies and to provide for the continuation of the policyholder dividend scales in effect for 1999 and for appropriate adjustments in such scales. The closed block assets, the cash flows generated by the closed block assets and the anticipated revenue from the policies included in the closed block will benefit only the holders of the policies in the closed block but may not be sufficient to provide for the benefits guaranteed under these policies. If they are not, we must fund the shortfall. Even if they are sufficient, we may choose, for competitive reasons, to support policyholder dividend payments with our general account funds. See Note 7 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

28

A Downgrade or a Potential Downgrade in Our Financial Strength or Credit Ratings or MetLife, Inc.’s Credit Ratings Could Result in a Loss of Business and Materially Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Financial strength ratings are published by various Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“NRSROs”) and similar entities not formally recognized as NRSROs. They indicate the NRSROs’ opinion regarding an insurance company’s ability to meet contractholder and policyholder obligations, and are important to maintaining public confidence in our products and our competitive position. See “Business — Company Ratings” for additional information regarding our financial strength ratings.
Downgrades in our financial strength or credit ratings, MetLife, Inc.’s credit ratings or changes to our or MetLife, Inc.’s ratings outlooks could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways, including:
•
reducing new sales of insurance products, annuities and other investment products;
•
impacting our ability to generate cash flows from issuances of funding agreements and other capital market products;
•
impacting the cost and availability of financing for MetLife, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including us.
•
adversely affecting our relationships with our sales force and independent sales intermediaries;
•
materially increasing the number or amount of policy surrenders and withdrawals by contractholders and policyholders;
•
requiring us to post additional collateral under certain of our financing and derivative transactions;
•
requiring us to reduce prices for many of our products and services to remain competitive;
•
providing termination rights for the benefit of our derivative instrument counterparties;
•
adversely affecting our ability to obtain reinsurance at reasonable prices or at all;
•
limiting our access to the capital markets;
•
potentially increasing the cost of debt;
•
requiring us to post collateral; and
•
subjecting us to potentially increased regulatory scrutiny.
In addition to our financial strength ratings, various NRSROs also publish credit ratings for MetLife, Inc. and several of its subsidiaries, including us. Credit ratings indicate the NRSROs’ opinion regarding a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner and are important factors in our overall funding profile and ability to access certain types of liquidity. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the impact of a one-notch downgrade with respect to derivative transactions with financial strength or credit rating downgrade triggers and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Uses — Pledged Collateral” for further information on the impact of a one-notch downgrade. See also “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Liquidity and Capital Resources — Capital — Rating Agencies.”
In view of the difficulties experienced by many financial institutions as a result of the financial crisis and ensuing global recession, including our competitors in the insurance industry, we believe it is possible that the NRSROs will continue to heighten the level of scrutiny that they apply to insurance companies, will continue to increase the frequency and scope of their credit reviews, will continue to request additional information from the companies that they rate, and may adjust upward the capital and other requirements employed in the models for maintenance of certain ratings levels. Our ratings could be downgraded at any time and without notice by any NRSRO.
Reinsurance May Not Be Available, Affordable or Adequate to Protect Us Against Losses
We use reinsurance, indemnification and derivatives to mitigate our risks in various circumstances. While reinsurance agreements generally bind the reinsurer for the life of the business reinsured at generally fixed pricing, market conditions beyond our control determine the availability and cost of the reinsurance protection for new business. In certain circumstances, the price of reinsurance for business already reinsured may also increase. Any decrease in the amount of reinsurance will increase our risk of loss and any increase in the cost of reinsurance will, absent a decrease in the amount of reinsurance, reduce our earnings. Accordingly, we may be forced to incur additional expenses for reinsurance or may not be able to obtain sufficient reinsurance on acceptable terms, which could adversely affect our ability to write future business or result in the assumption of more risk with respect to those policies we issue.

29

In addition, reinsurance, indemnification and derivatives, in general, do not relieve us of our direct liability to our policyholders, even when the reinsurer is liable to us. Accordingly, we bear credit risk with respect to our reinsurers, indemnitors, counterparties and central clearinghouses. A reinsurer’s, indemnitor’s, counterparty’s or central clearinghouse’s insolvency, inability or unwillingness to make payments under the terms of reinsurance agreements, indemnity agreements or derivatives agreements with us or inability or unwillingness to return collateral could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations, including our liquidity. See “Business — Reinsurance Activity” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Derivatives.”
Differences Between Actual Claims Experience and Underwriting and Reserving Assumptions May Adversely Affect Our Financial Results
Our earnings significantly depend upon the extent to which our actual claims experience is consistent with the assumptions we use in setting prices for our products and establishing liabilities for future policy benefits and claims. Such amounts are established based on estimates by actuaries of how much we will need to pay for future benefits and claims. We cannot determine precisely the amounts which we will ultimately pay to settle our liabilities, and such amounts may vary from the estimated amounts, particularly when those payments may not occur until well into the future. We evaluate our liabilities periodically based on accounting requirements, which change from time to time, the assumptions used to establish the liabilities, as well as our actual experience. If the liabilities originally established for future benefit payments prove inadequate, we must increase them and/or reduce associated DAC and/or VOBA. Such adjustments could affect earnings negatively and have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. See “Business — Policyholder Liabilities.” See also “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired,” “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives,” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Results of Operations — Consolidated Results — Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015 — Actuarial Assumption Review” for further information regarding the manner in which policyholder behavior and other events may differ from our assumptions and, thereby affect our financial results.
If Our Business Does Not Perform Well or if Actual Experience Versus Estimates Used in Valuing and Amortizing DAC, Deferred Sales Inducements (“DSI”) and VOBA Vary Significantly, We May Be Required to Accelerate the Amortization and/or Impair the DAC, DSI and VOBA Which Could Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations or Financial Condition
We incur significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that are related directly to the successful acquisition of new and renewal insurance business are deferred and referred to as DAC. Bonus amounts credited to certain policyholders, either immediately upon receiving a deposit or as excess interest credits for a period of time, are deferred and referred to as DSI. VOBA represents the excess of book value over the estimated fair value of acquired insurance, annuity, and investment-type contracts in-force at the acquisition date. The estimated fair value of the acquired liabilities is based on actuarially determined projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operating expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. DAC, DSI and VOBA related to fixed and variable universal life and deferred annuity contracts are amortized in proportion to actual and expected future gross profits and for most participating contracts in proportion to actual and expected future gross margins. The amount of future gross profit or margin is dependent principally on investment returns in excess of the amounts credited to policyholders, mortality, morbidity, persistency, interest crediting rates, dividends paid to policyholders, expenses to administer the business, creditworthiness of reinsurance counterparties and certain economic variables, such as inflation. Of these factors, we anticipate that investment returns are most likely to impact the rate of amortization of DAC for the aforementioned contracts.
If actual gross profits or margins are less than originally expected, then the amortization of such costs would be accelerated in the period the actual experience is known and would result in a charge to net income. Significant or sustained equity market declines could result in an acceleration of amortization of DAC, DSI and VOBA related to variable annuity and variable universal life contracts, resulting in a charge to net income. Such adjustments could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition. See “— Economic Environment and Capital Markets-Related Risks — We are Exposed to Significant Global Financial and Capital Markets Risks Which May Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity, and May Cause Our Net Investment Income to Vary from Period to Period” for a discussion of how significantly lower spreads may cause us to accelerate amortization, thereby reducing net income in the affected reporting period.
See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired” and Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further consideration of DAC and VOBA.

30

Guarantees Within Certain of Our Products May Decrease Our Earnings, Increase the Volatility of Our Results, Result in Higher Risk Management Costs and Expose Us to Increased Counterparty Risk
Certain of our variable annuity products include guaranteed benefits, including guaranteed minimum death benefits, guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits, guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits, and guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIBs”). Certain of our interest rate sensitive products include a minimum crediting rate feature which could be guaranteed for a period of time or life time of the policies. These guarantees are designed to protect policyholders against significant downturns in equity markets and interest rates. Any such periods of significant and sustained downturns in equity markets, increased equity volatility, or reduced interest rates could result in an increase in the valuation of our liabilities associated with those products. An increase in these liabilities would result in a decrease in our net income.
We use derivatives and other risk management strategies to hedge the economic exposure inherent in these liabilities. These economically effective hedges do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, and, as result, such non-qualifying derivatives may introduce volatility in the results of our operations, including net income, to the extent the financial measurement of the hedged liability does not fully reflect the sensitivity to the underlying economic exposure.
We also use derivatives and other risk management strategies to directly mitigate the volatility in net income associated with certain of these liabilities that are measured at fair value. These strategies involve the use of reinsurance and derivatives, which may not be completely effective. For example, in the event that reinsurers, derivative counterparties or central clearinghouses are unable or unwilling to pay, we remain liable for the guaranteed benefits. See “— Reinsurance May Not Be Available, Affordable or Adequate to Protect Us Against Losses.”
In addition, hedging instruments may not effectively offset the costs of guarantees or may otherwise be insufficient in relation to our obligations. Furthermore, we are subject to the risk that changes in policyholder behavior or mortality, combined with adverse market events, produce economic losses not addressed by the risk management techniques employed. These, individually or collectively, may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, including net income, capitalization, financial condition or liquidity. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further consideration of the risks associated with guaranteed benefits.
Risks Related to Acquisitions, Dispositions or Other Structural Changes
We Could Face Difficulties, Unforeseen Liabilities, Asset Impairments or Rating Actions Arising from Business Acquisitions, Dispositions of Businesses, or Legal Entity Reorganizations
MetLife, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including us, have engaged in dispositions and acquisitions of businesses in the past, and expect to continue to do so in the future. Such activity exposes us to a number of risks arising from (i) potential difficulties achieving projected financial results, including the costs and benefits of integration or deconsolidation; (ii) unforeseen liabilities or asset impairments; (iii) the scope and duration of rights to indemnification for losses; (iv) the use of capital which could be used for other purposes; (v) rating agency reactions; (vi) regulatory requirements that could impact our operations or capital requirements; (vii) changes in statutory or U.S. GAAP accounting principles, practices or policies; and (viii) certain other risks specifically arising from activities relating to an initial public offering, spin-off, joint venture or legal entity reorganization.
Risks Relating to Acquisitions
Our ability to achieve certain financial benefits we anticipate from any acquisitions of businesses will depend in part upon our ability to successfully integrate such businesses in an efficient and effective manner.
There may be liabilities or asset impairments that we fail, or are unable, to discover in the course of performing acquisition-related due diligence investigations. Furthermore, even for obligations and liabilities that we do discover during the due diligence process, neither the valuation adjustment nor the contractual protections we negotiate may be sufficient to fully protect us from losses.
Risks Relating to Dispositions
MetLife, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including us, may from time to time dispose of business or blocks of in-force business through an outright sale, reinsurance transaction or by alternate means such as a public offering of shares in an independent, publicly traded company or a spin-off, which would also result in a separate, possibly independent and publicly traded, company.

31

When we dispose of subsidiaries or operations, we may remain liable to the acquiror or to third parties for certain losses or costs arising from the divested business or on other bases. We may also not realize the anticipated profit on a disposition or incur a loss on the disposition. In anticipation of any disposition, we may need to restructure our operations, which could disrupt such operations and affect our ability to recruit key personnel needed to operate and grow such business pending the completion of such transaction. In addition, the actions of key employees of the business to be divested could adversely affect the success of such disposition as they may be more focused on obtaining employment, or the terms of their employment, than on maximizing the value of the business to be divested. Furthermore, transitional services or tax arrangements related to any such separation could further disrupt our operations and may impose restrictions, liabilities, losses or indemnification obligations on us. Depending on its particulars, a separation could increase our exposure to certain risks, such as by decreasing the diversification of our sources of revenue. Moreover, we may be unable to timely dissolve all contractual relationships with the divested business in the course of the proposed transaction, which may materially adversely affect our ability to realize value from the disposition. Such restructuring could also adversely affect our internal controls and procedures and impair our relationships with key customers, distributors and suppliers. An interruption or significant change in certain key relationships could materially affect our ability to market our products and could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition.
Risks Relating to Joint Ventures
We may enter into joint ventures with other companies, including joint ventures where we may have a lesser degree of control over the business operations, which may expose us to additional operational, financial, legal or compliance risks. We may be dependent on a joint venture counterparty for capital, product distribution, local market knowledge, or other resources.
A joint venture may require an investment of considerable management, financial and operational resources to establish sufficient infrastructure such as underwriting, actuarial, risk management, compliance or other processes. If we are unable to effectively cooperate with joint venture counterparties, or any joint venture counterparty fails to meet its obligations under the joint venture arrangement, encounters financial difficulty, or elects to alter, modify or terminate the relationship, we may be unable to exercise management control or influence over these joint venture operations and our ability to achieve our objectives and our results of operations may be negatively impacted thereby impairing our investment.
Risks Relating to Legal Entity Reorganizations
In addition, we may reorganize or consolidate the legal entities through which we conduct business. The implementation of legal entity reorganizations is a complex undertaking and involves a number of risks similar to those outlined above that are present in the case of an acquisition, including additional costs and expenses, information technology-related delays and problems, loss of key personnel and distraction of management. Many aspects of these transactions are subject to regulatory approvals from a number of different jurisdictions. We may not obtain needed regulatory approvals in the timeframe anticipated or at all, which could reduce or prevent us from realizing the anticipated benefits of these transactions. These transactions or the related regulatory approvals may entail modifications of certain aspects of our operations, the composition of certain of our investment portfolios, and/or the cost of our derivatives hedging activities, which could result in additional costs or reduce net investment income. These transactions are often effected to achieve certain operational, capital or tax benefits and to the extent not realized could affect the ongoing value and financial results of such entities. Any of these risks, if realized, could result in a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.
Operational Risks
MetLife’s Risk Management Policies and Procedures May Leave Us Exposed to Unidentified or Unanticipated Risk, Which Could Negatively Affect Our Business
MetLife’s enterprise risk management program is designed to mitigate material risks and loss to MetLife. MetLife has developed and continues to develop risk management policies and procedures for itself and its subsidiaries, including us, to reflect the ongoing review of risks and expects to continue to do so in the future. Nonetheless, these policies and procedures may not be comprehensive and may not identify every risk to which we are exposed. Models used by MetLife’s business are based on assumptions and projections which may be inaccurate. Business decisions based on incorrect or misused model output and reports could have a material adverse impact on our results of operations. Model risk may be the result of a model being misspecified for its intended purpose, being misused or producing incorrect or inappropriate results. Models used by our business may not operate properly or fully predict future exposures and could contain errors related to model inputs, data, assumptions, calculations, or output. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.”

32

The Failure in Cyber- or Other Information Security Systems, as well as the Occurrence of Events Unanticipated in MetLife’s Disaster Recovery Systems and Management Continuity Planning, Could Result in a Loss or Disclosure of Confidential Information, Damage to Our Reputation and Impairment of Our Ability to Conduct Business Effectively
Our business is highly dependent upon the effective operation of MetLife’s computer systems. We rely on these systems throughout our business for a variety of functions, including processing claims, transactions and applications, providing information to customers and distributors, performing actuarial analyses and maintaining financial records. We also retain confidential and proprietary information on MetLife’s computer systems and we rely on sophisticated technologies to maintain the security of that information. MetLife’s computer systems have been, and will likely continue to be, subject to computer viruses or other malicious codes, unauthorized access, cyberattacks or other computer-related penetrations. While, to date, MetLife has not experienced a material breach of cybersecurity, administrative and technical controls and other preventive actions we take to reduce the risk of cyber-incidents and protect our information technology may be insufficient to prevent physical and electronic break-ins, cyber-attacks or other security breaches to our computer systems. In some cases, such physical and electronic break-ins, cyber-attacks or other security breaches may not be immediately detected. This may impede or interrupt our business operations and could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the availability and cost of insurance for operational and other risks relating to our business and systems may change and any such change may affect our results of operations.
In the event of a disaster such as a natural catastrophe, epidemic, industrial accident, blackout, computer virus, terrorist attack, cyberattack or war, unanticipated problems with our disaster recovery systems could have a material adverse impact on our ability to conduct business and on our results of operations and financial position, particularly if those problems affect our computer-based data processing, transmission, storage and retrieval systems and destroy valuable data. In addition, in the event that a significant number of our managers, or employees generally, were unavailable following a disaster, our ability to effectively conduct business could be severely compromised. These interruptions also may interfere with our suppliers’ ability to provide goods and services and our employees’ ability to perform their job responsibilities.
The failure of our computer systems and/or our disaster recovery plans for any reason could cause significant interruptions in our operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to our customers. Such a failure could harm our reputation, subject us to regulatory sanctions and legal claims, lead to a loss of customers and revenues and otherwise adversely affect our business and financial results. Although we conduct due diligence, negotiate contractual provisions and, in many cases, conduct periodic reviews of our vendors, distributors, and other third parties that provide operational or information technology services to us to confirm compliance with MetLife’s information security standards, the failure of such third parties’ computer systems and/or their disaster recovery plans for any reason might cause significant interruptions in our operations and result in a failure to maintain the security, confidentiality or privacy of sensitive data, including personal information relating to our customers. Such a failure could harm our reputation, subject us to regulatory sanctions and legal claims, lead to a loss of customers and revenues and otherwise adversely affect our business and financial results. While MetLife maintains cyber liability insurance that provides both third-party liability and first-party liability coverages, this insurance may not be sufficient to protect us against all losses. MetLife, Inc. and its subsidiaries maintain a primary cybersecurity and privacy liability insurance policy with a limit of $15 million, and have additional coverage for cybersecurity and privacy liability available under blended professional liability excess coverage policies with a total limit of $210 million. There can be no assurance that MetLife’s information security policies and systems in place can prevent unauthorized use or disclosure of confidential information, including nonpublic personal information.

33

Any Failure to Protect the Confidentiality of Client Information Could Adversely Affect Our Reputation and Have a Material Adverse Effect on Our Business, Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Pursuant to U.S. federal and state laws, and laws of other jurisdictions in which MetLife operates, various government agencies have established rules protecting the privacy and security of personal information. In addition, most U.S. states and a number of jurisdictions outside the United States, have enacted laws, which vary significantly from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, to safeguard the privacy and security of personal information. The MetLife employees who conduct our business have access to, and routinely process, personal information of clients through a variety of media, including information technology systems. We rely on various internal processes and controls to protect the confidentiality of client information that is accessible to, or in the possession of, our company and MetLife employees. It is possible that a MetLife employee could, intentionally or unintentionally, disclose or misappropriate confidential client information or our data could be the subject of a cybersecurity attack. If we fail to maintain adequate internal controls or if MetLife employees fail to comply with our policies and procedures, misappropriation or intentional or unintentional inappropriate disclosure or misuse of client information could occur. Such internal control inadequacies or non-compliance could materially damage our reputation or lead to civil or criminal penalties, which, in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, we analyze customer data to better manage our business. There has been increased scrutiny, including from U.S. state regulators, regarding the use of “big data” techniques such as price optimization. We cannot predict what, if any, actions may be taken with regard to “big data,” but any inquiries could cause reputational harm and any limitations could have a material impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
General Risks
Changes in Accounting Standards Issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board or Other Standard-Setting Bodies May Adversely Affect Our Financial Statements
Our financial statements are subject to the application of GAAP, which is periodically revised and/or expanded. Accordingly, from time to time we are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards issued by recognized authoritative bodies, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”). The impact of accounting pronouncements that have been issued but not yet implemented is disclosed in our reports filed with the SEC. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. An assessment of proposed standards is not provided as such proposals are subject to change through the exposure process and official positions of the FASB are determined only after extensive due process and deliberations. Therefore, the effects on our financial statements cannot be meaningfully assessed. The required adoption of future accounting standards could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
Not applicable.
Item 2. Properties
We lease 418,000 rentable square feet in an office building in Manhattan, New York. The term of that lease commenced in February 2008 and continues until April 2029. We have subleased 66,000 rentable square feet of that space to two subtenants, which met our standards of review with respect to creditworthiness. We also lease 595,000 rentable square feet at 200 Park Avenue, New York (the “MetLife Building”) under multiple leases beginning in May 2005 and expiring on various dates through September 2027. This space includes MetLife, Inc.’s boardroom. We have leased 12,000 rentable square feet in the MetLife Building to a subtenant for a term that began July 2016 and extends through December 2019. Each of these spaces under lease is occupied by both of our segments, as well as Corporate & Other. The Company began to consolidate its existing New York City area offices to the MetLife Building in December 2016 and expects to complete the consolidation by May 2017. As a result of the consolidation, the spaces to be vacated are being actively marketed for sublease.
We lease 512,000 rentable square feet in Charlotte, North Carolina in two buildings, which are predominantly occupied by the U.S. segment, as well as Corporate & Other. We have leased 69,000 rentable square feet in these buildings to subtenants through December 2017. The leases for these two buildings commenced in April 2013 and in November 2014 and both extend through September 2026. We lease 436,000 rentable square feet in two buildings in Cary, North Carolina, which are occupied primarily by Global Technology & Operations, which supports all of our segments, as well as Corporate & Other. The initial lease, commencing in February 2015, was expanded in April 2015, and continues through April 2030.

34

We own eight buildings in the United States that we use in the operation of our business. These buildings contain 1.7 million rentable square feet and are located in the following states: Florida, Illinois, Missouri, New York, Oklahoma and Pennsylvania. Our computer center in Rensselaer, New York is not owned in fee but rather is occupied pursuant to a long-term ground lease. In addition to the aforementioned leases in New York and North Carolina, we have 100 leases in over 90 other locations throughout the United States including our Long Island City, New York, facility. These additional leased facilities consist of 4.3 million rentable square feet. Of these leases, over 35 are occupied as sales offices while the balance of the space is utilized for corporate functions supporting business activities. We believe that these properties are suitable and adequate for our current and anticipated business operations.
MetLife arranges for property & casualty coverage on our properties, taking into consideration our risk exposures and the cost and availability of commercial coverages, including deductible loss levels. In connection with the renewal of those coverages, MetLife has arranged $500 million of property insurance, including coverage for terrorism, on our real estate portfolio through May 1, 2017, its renewal date.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures
Not applicable.

35

Part II
Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
No established public trading market exists for Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s common equity; all of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s common stock is held by MetLife, Inc.
During the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company paid cash dividends of $3.6 billion and $1.5 billion, respectively, to MetLife, Inc. Also, during the year ended December 31, 2016, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company distributed all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc. in the form of a non-cash extraordinary dividend in the amount of $981 million and $1.2 billion, respectively, as calculated on a statutory basis. See Note 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of restrictions on Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s ability to pay dividends. The maximum amount of dividends which Metropolitan Life Insurance Company may pay in 2017, without prior regulatory approval, is $2.7 billion.
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(a) of Form 10-K.

36

Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations
Index to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

37

Forward-Looking Statements and Other Financial Information
For purposes of this discussion, “MLIC,” the “Company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, a New York corporation incorporated in 1868, and its subsidiaries. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (MetLife, Inc., together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “MetLife”). Management's narrative analysis of the Company’s results of operations is presented pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(a) of Form 10-K. This narrative analysis should be read in conjunction with “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” “Risk Factors,” “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk” and the Company's consolidated financial statements included elsewhere herein.
This narrative analysis may contain or incorporate by reference information that includes or is based upon forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements give expectations or forecasts of future events. These statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts. They use words such as “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “project,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe” and other words and terms of similar meaning, or are tied to future periods, in connection with a discussion of future operating or financial performance. In particular, these include statements relating to future actions, prospective services or products, future performance or results of current and anticipated services or products, sales efforts, expenses, the outcome of contingencies such as legal proceedings, trends in operations and financial results. Any or all forward-looking statements may turn out to be wrong. Actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in the forward-looking statements. See “Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.”
This narrative analysis includes references to our performance measure, operating earnings, that is not based on GAAP. This measure is used by management to evaluate performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, operating earnings is also our GAAP measure of segment performance. Operating earnings allows analysis of our performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results. Forward-looking guidance provided on a non-GAAP basis cannot be reconciled to the most directly comparable GAAP measures on a forward-looking basis because net income may fluctuate significantly if net investment gains and losses and net derivative gains and losses move outside of estimated ranges. See “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for a definition and discussion of this and other financial measures, and “— Results of Operations” for reconciliations of historical non-GAAP financial measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.
Overview
MLIC is a provider of life insurance, annuities, employee benefits and asset management. MLIC is organized into two segments: U.S. and MetLife Holdings. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other. See “Business — Segments and Corporate & Other” and Note 2 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on the Company’s segments and Corporate & Other. Management continues to evaluate the Company’s segment performance and allocated resources and may adjust related measurements in the future to better reflect segment profitability.
Other Key Information
In December 2016, MLIC distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a non-cash extraordinary dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC. This transaction did not have a material impact on consolidated net income or operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to 2015; however, it may have resulted in changes to the underlying components of earnings. See Note 3 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
On January 12, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced its plan to pursue the Separation. MetLife, Inc. subsequently re-segmented the business to be separated and rebranded it “Brighthouse Financial.”
On October 5, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., a subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“Brighthouse”), filed a registration statement on Form 10 (the “Form 10”) with the SEC. On December 6, 2016, Brighthouse filed an amendment to its registration statement on Form 10 with the SEC. The information statement filed as an exhibit to the Form 10 disclosed that MetLife, Inc. intends to include Brighthouse Insurance, NELICO, a former wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Brighthouse NY, MetLife Advisers, LLC and certain captive reinsurance companies in the proposed separated business and distribute at least 80.1% of the shares of Brighthouse’s common stock on a pro rata basis to the holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock.

38

The ultimate form and timing of the Separation will be influenced by a number of factors, including regulatory considerations and economic conditions. MetLife continues to evaluate and pursue structural alternatives for the proposed Separation. The life insurance closed block and the life and annuity business sold through Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is not expected to be a part of Brighthouse Financial. The Separation remains subject to certain conditions including, among others, obtaining final approval from the MetLife, Inc. Board of Directors, receipt of a favorable ruling from the IRS and an opinion from MetLife’s tax advisor regarding certain U.S. federal income tax matters, insurance and other regulatory approvals, and an SEC declaration of the effectiveness of the Form 10.
In July 2016, MetLife, Inc. completed the U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture. MassMutual assumed all of the liabilities related to such assets that arise or occur at or after the closing of the sale. As part of the transactions, MetLife, Inc. and MassMutual entered into a product development agreement under which MetLife’s U.S. retail business will be the exclusive developer of certain annuity products to be issued by MassMutual. In the MassMutual purchase agreement, MetLife, Inc. agreed to indemnify MassMutual for certain claims, liabilities and breaches of representations and warranties up to limits described in the purchase agreement.
On December 18, 2014, FSOC designated MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, as well as to enhanced supervision and prudential standards. On March 30, 2016, the D.C. District Court ordered that the designation of MetLife, Inc. as a non-bank SIFI by the FSOC be rescinded. On April 8, 2016, the FSOC appealed the D.C. District Court’s order to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, and oral argument was heard on October 24, 2016. If the FSOC prevails on appeal or designates MetLife, Inc. as systemically important as part of its ongoing review of non-bank financial companies, MetLife, Inc. could once again be subject to regulation as a non-bank SIFI. See “Business — Regulation — Potential Regulation of MetLife, Inc. as a Non-Bank SIFI.”
Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported on the Consolidated Financial Statements. For a discussion of our significant accounting policies, see Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The most critical estimates include those used in determining:
(i)
liabilities for future policy benefits and the accounting for reinsurance;
(ii)
capitalization and amortization of DAC and the establishment and amortization of VOBA;
(iii)
estimated fair values of investments in the absence of quoted market values;
(iv)
investment impairments;
(v)
estimated fair values of freestanding derivatives and the recognition and estimated fair value of embedded derivatives requiring bifurcation;
(vi)
measurement of employee benefit plan liabilities;
(vii)
measurement of income taxes and the valuation of deferred tax assets; and
(viii)
liabilities for litigation and regulatory matters.
In applying our accounting policies and estimates, management makes subjective and complex judgments that frequently require assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. Many of these policies, estimates and related judgments are common in the insurance and financial services industries; others are specific to our business and operations. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Liability for Future Policy Benefits
Generally, future policy benefits are payable over an extended period of time and related liabilities are calculated as the present value of future expected benefits to be paid, reduced by the present value of future expected premiums. Such liabilities are established based on methods and underlying assumptions in accordance with GAAP and applicable actuarial standards. Principal assumptions used in the establishment of liabilities for future policy benefits are mortality, morbidity, policy lapse, renewal, retirement, disability incidence, disability terminations, investment returns, inflation, expenses and other contingent events as appropriate to the respective product type. These assumptions are established at the time the policy is issued and are intended to estimate the experience for the period the policy benefits are payable. Utilizing these assumptions, liabilities are established on a block of business basis. If experience is less favorable than assumed, additional liabilities may be established, resulting in a charge to policyholder benefits and claims.

39

Future policy benefit liabilities for disabled lives are estimated using the present value of benefits method and experience assumptions as to claim terminations, expenses and interest.
Liabilities for unpaid claims are estimated based upon our historical experience and other actuarial assumptions that consider the effects of current developments, anticipated trends and risk management programs.
Future policy benefit liabilities for minimum death and income benefit guarantees relating to certain annuity contracts are based on estimates of the expected value of benefits in excess of the projected account balance, recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on total expected assessments. Liabilities for universal and variable life secondary guarantees and paid-up guarantees are determined by estimating the expected value of death benefits payable when the account balance is projected to be zero and recognizing those benefits ratably over the accumulation period based on total expected assessments. The assumptions used in estimating the secondary and paid-up guarantee liabilities are consistent with those used for amortizing DAC, and are thus subject to the same variability and risk. The assumptions of investment performance and volatility for variable products are consistent with historical experience of the appropriate underlying equity index, such as the S&P 500 Index.
We regularly review our estimates of liabilities for future policy benefits and compare them with our actual experience. Differences between actual experience and the assumptions used in pricing these policies and guarantees, as well as in the establishment of the related liabilities, result in variances in profit and could result in losses.
See Note 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our liability for future policy benefits.
Reinsurance
Accounting for reinsurance requires extensive use of assumptions and estimates, particularly related to the future performance of the underlying business and the potential impact of counterparty credit risks. We periodically review actual and anticipated experience compared to the aforementioned assumptions used to establish assets and liabilities relating to ceded and assumed reinsurance and evaluate the financial strength of counterparties to our reinsurance agreements using criteria similar to that evaluated in our security impairment process. See “— Investment Impairments.” Additionally, for each of our reinsurance agreements, we determine whether the agreement provides indemnification against loss or liability relating to insurance risk, in accordance with applicable accounting standards. We review all contractual features, including those that may limit the amount of insurance risk to which the reinsurer is subject or features that delay the timely reimbursement of claims. If we determine that a reinsurance agreement does not expose the reinsurer to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk, we record the agreement using the deposit method of accounting.
See Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our reinsurance programs.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs and Value of Business Acquired
We incur significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that relate directly to the successful acquisition or renewal of insurance contracts are capitalized as DAC. In addition to commissions, certain direct response advertising expenses and other direct costs, deferrable costs include the portion of an employee’s total compensation and benefits related to time spent selling, underwriting or processing the issuance of new and renewal insurance business only with respect to actual policies acquired or renewed. We utilize various techniques to estimate the portion of an employee’s time spent on qualifying acquisition activities that result in actual sales, including surveys, interviews, representative time studies and other methods. These estimates include assumptions that are reviewed and updated on a periodic basis or more frequently to reflect significant changes in processes or distribution methods.
VOBA represents the excess of book value over the estimated fair value of acquired insurance, annuity and investment-type contracts in-force at the acquisition date. The estimated fair value of the acquired obligations is based on projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operating expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. Actual experience on the purchased business may vary from these projections. The recovery of DAC and VOBA is dependent upon the future profitability of the related business.

40

Separate account rates of return on variable universal life contracts and variable deferred annuity contracts affect in-force account balances on such contracts each reporting period, which can result in significant fluctuations in amortization of DAC and VOBA. Our practice to determine the impact of gross profits resulting from returns on separate accounts assumes that long-term appreciation in equity markets is not changed by short-term market fluctuations, but is only changed when sustained interim deviations are expected. We monitor these events and only change the assumption when our long-term expectation changes. The effect of an increase (decrease) by 100 basis points in the assumed future rate of return is reasonably likely to result in a decrease (increase) in the DAC and VOBA amortization with an offset to our unearned revenue liability which nets to approximately $40 million. We use a mean reversion approach to separate account returns where the mean reversion period is five years with a long-term separate account return after the five-year reversion period is over. The current long-term rate of return assumption for the variable universal life contracts and variable deferred annuity contracts is 7.0%.
We periodically review long-term assumptions underlying the projections of estimated gross margins and profits. These assumptions primarily relate to investment returns, policyholder dividend scales, interest crediting rates, mortality, persistency, and expenses to administer business. Assumptions used in the calculation of estimated gross margins and profits which may have significantly changed are updated annually. We expect these assumptions to be the ones most reasonably likely to cause significant changes in the future. Changes in these assumptions can be offsetting and we are unable to predict their movement or offsetting impact over time.
In 2016, as part of the annual actuarial assumption review, the Company made changes to policyholder behavior and long-term economic assumptions, as well as risk margins, resulting in changes to the actual and expected future gross profits. Other assumptions, such as expenses, in-force or persistency assumptions and policyholder dividends on participating traditional life contracts, variable and universal life contracts were also reviewed. See “— Results of Operations — Consolidated Results — Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015 — Actuarial Assumption Review” for further information
See Note 5 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on DAC and VOBA.
Estimated Fair Value of Investments
In determining the estimated fair value of our investments, fair values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical investments in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. When such quoted prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar but not identical investments, or other observable inputs. If these inputs are not available, or observable inputs are not determinable, unobservable inputs and/or adjustments to observable inputs requiring management judgment are used to determine the estimated fair value of investments.
The methodologies, assumptions and inputs utilized are described in Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Financial markets are susceptible to severe events evidenced by rapid depreciation in asset values accompanied by a reduction in asset liquidity. Our ability to sell investments, or the price ultimately realized for investments, depends upon the demand and liquidity in the market and increases the use of judgment in determining the estimated fair value of certain investments.
Investment Impairments
One of the significant estimates related to AFS securities is our impairment evaluation. The assessment of whether an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) occurred is based on our case-by-case evaluation of the underlying reasons for the decline in estimated fair value on a security-by-security basis. Our review of each fixed maturity and equity security for OTTI includes an analysis of gross unrealized losses by three categories of severity and/or age of gross unrealized loss. An extended and severe unrealized loss position on a fixed maturity security may not have any impact on the ability of the issuer to service all scheduled interest and principal payments. Accordingly, such an unrealized loss position may not impact our evaluation of recoverability of all contractual cash flows or the ability to recover an amount at least equal to its amortized cost based on the present value of the expected future cash flows to be collected. In contrast, for certain equity securities, greater weight and consideration are given to a decline in estimated fair value and the likelihood such estimated fair value decline will recover.
Additionally, we consider a wide range of factors about the security issuer and use our best judgment in evaluating the cause of the decline in the estimated fair value of the security and in assessing the prospects for near-term recovery. Inherent in our evaluation of the security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. Factors we consider in the OTTI evaluation process are described in Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
The determination of the amount of allowances and impairments on the remaining invested asset classes is highly subjective and is based upon our periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with the respective asset class. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.

41

See Notes 1 and 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information relating to our determination of the amount of allowances and impairments.
Derivatives
The determination of the estimated fair value of freestanding derivatives, when quoted market values are not available, is based on market standard valuation methodologies and inputs that management believes are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing the instruments. Derivative valuations can be affected by changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, financial indices, credit spreads, default risk, nonperformance risk, volatility, liquidity and changes in estimates and assumptions used in the pricing models. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional details on significant inputs into the OTC derivative pricing models and credit risk adjustment.
We issue variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits, some of which are embedded derivatives measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity product, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The estimated fair values of these embedded derivatives are determined based on the present value of projected future benefits minus the present value of projected future fees. The projections of future benefits and future fees require capital market and actuarial assumptions, including expectations concerning policyholder behavior. A risk neutral valuation methodology is used under which the cash flows from the guarantees are projected under multiple capital market scenarios using observable risk-free rates. The valuation of these embedded derivatives also includes an adjustment for our nonperformance risk and risk margins for non-capital market inputs. The nonperformance risk adjustment, which is captured as a spread over the risk-free rate in determining the discount rate to discount the cash flows of the liability, is determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for MetLife, Inc.’s debt, including related credit default swaps. These observable spreads are then adjusted, as necessary, to reflect the priority of these liabilities and the claims paying ability of the issuing insurance subsidiaries compared to MetLife, Inc. Risk margins are established to capture the non-capital market risks of the instrument which represent the additional compensation a market participant would require to assume the risks related to the uncertainties in certain actuarial assumptions. The establishment of risk margins requires the use of significant management judgment, including assumptions of the amount and cost of capital needed to cover the guarantees.
The accounting for derivatives is complex and interpretations of accounting standards continue to evolve in practice. If it is determined that hedge accounting designations were not appropriately applied, reported net income could be materially affected. Assessments of hedge effectiveness and measurements of ineffectiveness of hedging relationships are also subject to interpretations and estimations and different interpretations or estimates may have a material effect on the amount reported in net income.
Variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits may be more costly than expected in volatile or declining equity markets. Market conditions including, but not limited to, changes in interest rates, equity indices, market volatility and foreign currency exchange rates, changes in our nonperformance risk, variations in actuarial assumptions regarding policyholder behavior, mortality and risk margins related to non-capital market inputs, may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of the guarantees that could materially affect net income. If interpretations change, there is a risk that features previously not bifurcated may require bifurcation and reporting at estimated fair value on the consolidated financial statements and respective changes in estimated fair value could materially affect net income.
Additionally, we ceded the risk associated with certain of the variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits described in the preceding paragraphs. The value of the embedded derivatives on the ceded risk is determined using a methodology consistent with that described previously for the guarantees directly written by us with the exception of the input for nonperformance risk that reflects the credit of the reinsurer. Because certain of the direct guarantees do not meet the definition of an embedded derivative and, thus are not accounted for at fair value, significant fluctuations in net income may occur since the change in fair value of the embedded derivative on the ceded risk is being recorded in net income without a corresponding and offsetting change in fair value of the direct guarantee.
See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our derivatives and hedging programs.

42

Employee Benefit Plans
We sponsor and/or administer various plans that provide defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefits covering eligible employees and sales representatives. The calculation of the obligations and expenses associated with these plans requires an extensive use of assumptions such as the discount rate, expected rate of return on plan assets, rate of future compensation increases and healthcare cost trend rates, as well as assumptions regarding participant demographics such as rate and age of retirement, withdrawal rates and mortality. In consultation with external actuarial firms, we determine these assumptions based upon a variety of factors such as historical experience of the plan and its assets, currently available market and industry data, and expected benefit payout streams.
We determine the expected rate of return on plan assets based upon an approach that considers inflation, real return, term premium, credit spreads, equity risk premium and capital appreciation, as well as expenses, expected asset manager performance, asset weights and the effect of rebalancing. We determine the discount rates used to value the pension and postretirement obligations, based upon rates commensurate with current yields on high quality corporate bonds. The assumptions used may differ materially from actual results due to, among other factors, changing market and economic conditions and changes in participant demographics. These differences may have a significant effect on the Company’s consolidated financial statements and liquidity.
See Note 14 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional discussion of assumptions used in measuring liabilities relating to our employee benefit plans.
Income Taxes
We provide for federal, state and foreign income taxes currently payable, as well as those deferred due to temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Our accounting for income taxes represents our best estimate of various events and transactions. Tax laws are often complex and may be subject to differing interpretations by the taxpayer and the relevant governmental taxing authorities. In establishing a provision for income tax expense, we must make judgments and interpretations about the application of inherently complex tax laws. We must also make estimates about when in the future certain items will affect taxable income in the various tax jurisdictions, both domestic and foreign.
In establishing a liability for unrecognized tax benefits, assumptions may be made in determining whether, and to what extent, a tax position may be sustained. Once established, unrecognized tax benefits are adjusted when there is more information available or when events occur requiring a change.
Valuation allowances are established against deferred tax assets when management determines, based on available information, that it is more likely than not that deferred income tax assets will not be realized. Significant judgment is required in determining whether valuation allowances should be established, as well as the amount of such allowances. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information relating to our determination of such valuation allowances.
We may be required to change our provision for income taxes when estimates used in determining valuation allowances on deferred tax assets significantly change, or when receipt of new information indicates the need for adjustment in valuation allowances. Additionally, future events, such as changes in tax laws, tax regulations, or interpretations of such laws or regulations, could have an impact on the provision for income tax and the effective tax rate. Any such changes could significantly affect the amounts reported on the financial statements in the year these changes occur.
See Notes 1 and 15 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information on our income taxes.

43

Litigation Contingencies
We are a party to a number of legal actions and are involved in a number of regulatory investigations. Given the inherent unpredictability of these matters, it is difficult to estimate the impact on our financial position. Liabilities are established when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities related to certain lawsuits, including our asbestos-related liability, are especially difficult to estimate due to the limitation of available data and uncertainty regarding numerous variables that can affect liability estimates. The data and variables that impact the assumptions used to estimate our asbestos-related liability include the number of future claims, the cost to resolve claims, the disease mix and severity of disease in pending and future claims, the impact of the number of new claims filed in a particular jurisdiction and variations in the law in the jurisdictions in which claims are filed, the possible impact of tort reform efforts, the willingness of courts to allow plaintiffs to pursue claims against us when exposure to asbestos took place after the dangers of asbestos exposure were well known, and the impact of any possible future adverse verdicts and their amounts. On a quarterly and annual basis, we review relevant information with respect to liabilities for litigation, regulatory investigations and litigation-related contingencies to be reflected in our consolidated financial statements. It is possible that an adverse outcome in certain of our litigation and regulatory investigations, including asbestos-related cases, or the use of different assumptions in the determination of amounts recorded could have a material effect upon our consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.
See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for additional information regarding our assessment of litigation contingencies.
Economic Capital
Economic capital is an internally developed risk capital model, the purpose of which is to measure the risk in the business and to provide a basis upon which capital is deployed. The economic capital model accounts for the unique and specific nature of the risks inherent in MetLife’s and the Company’s business.
MetLife’s economic capital model, coupled with considerations of local capital requirements, aligns segment allocated equity with emerging standards and consistent risk principles. The model applies statistics-based risk evaluation principles to the material risks to which the Company is exposed. These consistent risk principles include calibrating required economic capital shock factors to a specific confidence level and time horizon while applying an industry standard method for the inclusion of diversification benefits among risk types. Economic capital-based risk estimation is an evolving science and industry best practices have emerged and continue to evolve. Areas of evolving industry best practices include stochastic liability valuation techniques, alternative methodologies for the calculation of diversification benefits, and the quantification of appropriate shock levels. MetLife’s management is responsible for the ongoing production and enhancement of the economic capital model and reviews its approach periodically to ensure that it remains consistent with emerging industry practice standards.
Segment net investment income is credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact the Company’s consolidated net investment income, income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax, or operating earnings.
Net investment income is based upon the actual results of each segment’s specifically identifiable investment portfolios adjusted for allocated equity. Other costs are allocated to each of the segments based upon: (i) a review of the nature of such costs; (ii) time studies analyzing the amount of employee compensation costs incurred by each segment; and (iii) cost estimates included in the Company’s product pricing.
Dispositions
See Note 3 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

44

Results of Operations
Consolidated Results
Business Overview. Overall sales for the year ended December 31, 2016 increased over 2015 levels. An overall increase in sales from our U.S. segment was primarily driven by sales of stable value products, as well as funding agreement issuances. Sales of pension risk transfers and structured settlements improved slightly while sales in the income annuities and pension businesses were slightly lower. In addition, sales increased in the Group Benefits business with strong sales across our core and voluntary products. In our MetLife Holdings segment, the proposed Separation and the U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture negatively impacted sales.
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Revenues
 
 
 
Premiums
$
22,393

 
$
21,934

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
2,542

 
2,584

Net investment income
11,083

 
11,577

Other revenues
1,478

 
1,536

Net investment gains (losses)
132

 
259

Net derivative gains (losses)
(1,138
)
 
881

Total revenues
36,490

 
38,771

Expenses
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
26,491

 
25,791

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
2,233

 
2,183

Capitalization of DAC
(332
)
 
(482
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
441

 
742

Interest expense on debt
112

 
122

Other expenses
5,582

 
5,876

Total expenses
34,527

 
34,232

Income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income tax
1,963

 
4,539

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
207

 
1,782

Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
1,756

 
2,757

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income tax
—

 
—

Net income (loss)
1,756

 
2,757

Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests
(8
)
 
—

Net income (loss) attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
$
1,764

 
$
2,757

Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015
During the year ended December 31, 2016, income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income tax decreased $2.6 billion ($1.0 billion, net of income tax) from 2015 primarily driven by an unfavorable change in net derivative gains (losses) of $2.0 billion ($1.3 billion, net of income tax). In December 2016, MLIC distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a non-cash extraordinary dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC. This transaction did not have a material impact on consolidated net income or operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to 2015; however, it may have resulted in changes to the underlying components of earnings.

45

Management of Investment Portfolio and Hedging Market Risks with Derivatives. We manage our investment portfolio using disciplined asset/liability management (“ALM”) principles, focusing on cash flow and duration to support our current and future liabilities. Our intent is to match the timing and amount of liability cash outflows with invested assets that have cash inflows of comparable timing and amount, while optimizing risk-adjusted net investment income and risk-adjusted total return. Our investment portfolio is heavily weighted toward fixed income investments, with over 80% of our portfolio invested in fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans. These securities and loans have varying maturities and other characteristics which cause them to be generally well suited for matching the cash flow and duration of insurance liabilities.
We purchase investments to support our insurance liabilities and not to generate net investment gains and losses. However, net investment gains and losses are incurred and can change significantly from period to period due to changes in external influences, including changes in market factors such as interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, credit spreads and equity markets; counterparty specific factors such as financial performance, credit rating and collateral valuation; and internal factors such as portfolio rebalancing. Changes in these factors from period to period can significantly impact the levels of both impairments and realized gains and losses on investments sold.
We also use derivatives as an integral part of our management of the investment portfolio and insurance liabilities to hedge certain risks, including changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, credit spreads and equity market levels. We continually reexamine our strategy for managing such risks.
We use freestanding interest rate, equity, credit and currency derivatives to hedge certain invested assets and insurance liabilities. A small portion of these hedges are designated and qualify as accounting hedges, which reduce volatility in earnings. For those hedges not designated as accounting hedges, changes in market factors lead to the recognition of fair value changes in net derivative gains (losses) generally without an offsetting gain or loss recognized in earnings for the item being hedged, which creates volatility in earnings.
Certain direct or assumed variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits contain embedded derivatives that are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). We use reinsurance and derivatives to hedge the market and other risks inherent in these variable annuity guarantees. Ceded reinsurance of direct variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits generally contain embedded derivatives that are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). The valuation of these embedded derivatives includes a nonperformance risk adjustment, which is unhedged, and can be a significant driver of net derivative gains (losses) and volatility in earnings, but does not have an economic impact on us.

46

Net Derivative Gains (Losses). Direct, assumed and ceded variable annuity embedded derivatives, as well as the associated freestanding derivatives, are referred to as “VA program derivatives” in the following table. All other embedded derivatives and all freestanding derivatives that are economic hedges of certain invested assets and insurance liabilities are referred to as “non-VA program derivatives” in the following table. The table below presents the impact on net derivative gains (losses) from non-VA program derivatives and VA program derivatives:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Non-VA program derivatives
 
 
 
Interest rate
$
(276
)
 
$
174

Foreign currency exchange rate
249

 
300

Credit
78

 
28

Equity
19

 
—

Non-VA embedded derivatives
(56
)
 
487

Total non-VA program derivatives
14

 
989

VA program derivatives
 
 
 
Embedded derivatives - direct and assumed guarantees:
 
 
 
Market risks
762

 
136

Nonperformance risk adjustment
76

 
29

Other risks
(1,238
)
 
(280
)
Total
(400
)
 
(115
)
Embedded derivatives - ceded reinsurance:
 
 
 
Market and other risks
62

 
50

Nonperformance risk adjustment
(29
)
 
(4
)
Total
33

 
46

Freestanding derivatives hedging direct and assumed embedded derivatives
(785
)
 
(39
)
Total VA program derivatives
(1,152
)
 
(108
)
Net derivative gains (losses)
$
(1,138
)
 
$
881

The unfavorable change in net derivative gains (losses) on non-VA program derivatives was $975 million ($634 million, net of income tax). This was primarily due to a change in value of the underlying assets unfavorably impacting non-VA embedded derivatives related to funds withheld on a certain reinsurance agreement. The unfavorable change in net derivative gains (losses) on non-VA program derivatives was also due to long-term interest rates increasing in 2016 and decreasing in 2015, unfavorably impacting receive-fixed interest rate swaps and total rate of return swaps primarily hedging long-duration liability portfolios. Because certain of these hedging strategies are not designated or do not qualify as accounting hedges, the changes in the estimated fair value of these freestanding derivatives are recognized in net derivative gains (losses) without an offsetting gain or loss recognized in earnings for the item being hedged.
The unfavorable change in net derivative gains (losses) on VA program derivatives was $1.0 billion ($679 million, net of income tax). This was due to an unfavorable change of $1.1 billion ($693 million, net of income tax) in market and other risks on direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives, net of the impact of market and other risks on the ceded reinsurance embedded derivatives and net of freestanding derivatives hedging those risks, partially offset by a favorable change of $22 million ($14 million, net of income tax) related to the change in the nonperformance risk adjustment on the direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives, net of the impact of the nonperformance risk adjustment on the ceded variable annuity embedded derivatives. Other risks relate primarily to the impact of policyholder behavior and other non-market risks that generally cannot be hedged.
The foregoing unfavorable change of $1.1 billion ($693 million, net of income tax) was primarily driven by changes in other risks and market factors.

47

The primary changes in other risks are summarized as follows:
•
Updates to actuarial policyholder behavior assumptions within the valuation model. For details, see “— Actuarial Assumption Review;”
•
An increase in the risk margin adjustment, measuring policyholder behavior risks, which was also affected by the actuarial assumption update, along with market and interest rate changes; and
•
A combination of other factors, including reserve changes influenced by benefit features and actual policyholder behavior.
The primary changes in market factors are summarized as follows:
•
Long-term interest rates increased in 2016 and decreased in 2015, contributing to an unfavorable change in our freestanding derivatives and a favorable change in our embedded derivatives. For example, the 10-year U.S. swap rate increased 15 basis points in 2016 and decreased 10 basis points in 2015.
•
Key equity index levels mostly increased in 2016 and decreased in 2015, contributing to an unfavorable change in our freestanding derivatives and a favorable change in our embedded derivatives. For example, the S&P 500 Index increased 10% in 2016 and decreased 1% in 2015.
We calculate the nonperformance risk adjustment as the change in the embedded derivative discounted at the risk-adjusted rate (which includes our own credit spread to the extent that the embedded derivative is in-the-money) less the change in the embedded derivative discounted at the risk-free rate. The favorable change in the nonperformance risk adjustment on the direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives of $47 million ($31 million, net of income tax) was primarily due to a favorable change of $62 million, before income tax, as a result of changes in capital market inputs, such as long-term interest rates and key equity index levels, on variable annuity guarantees, partially offset by an unfavorable change of $15 million, before income tax, related to changes in our own credit spread. The unfavorable change in the nonperformance risk adjustment on the ceded variable annuity embedded derivatives of $25 million ($16 million, net of income tax) was due to an unfavorable change of $30 million, before income tax, as a result of the impact of changes in capital market inputs, such as long-term interest rates and key equity index levels, on variable annuity guarantees, partially offset by a favorable change of $5 million, before income tax, related to changes in our own credit spread.
When equity index levels decrease in isolation, the direct and assumed variable annuity guarantees become more valuable to policyholders, which results in an increase in the undiscounted embedded derivative liability. Discounting this unfavorable change by the risk adjusted rate yields a smaller loss than by discounting at the risk-free rate, thus creating a gain from including an adjustment for nonperformance risk on the direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives. The opposite impact occurs with respect to the nonperformance risk adjustment on the ceded variable annuity guarantees.
When the risk-free interest rate decreases in isolation, discounting the embedded derivative liability produces a higher valuation of the liability than if the risk-free interest rate had remained constant. Discounting this unfavorable change by the risk adjusted rate yields a smaller loss than by discounting at the risk-free interest rate, thus creating a gain from including an adjustment for nonperformance risk on the direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives. The opposite impact occurs with respect to the nonperformance risk adjustment on the ceded variable annuity guarantees.
When our own credit spread increases in isolation, discounting the embedded derivative liability produces a lower valuation of the liability than if our own credit spread had remained constant. As a result, a gain is created from including an adjustment for nonperformance risk on the direct and assumed variable annuity embedded derivatives. The opposite impact occurs with respect to the nonperformance risk adjustment on the ceded variable annuity guarantees when the reinsurer’s credit spread increases in isolation. For each of these primary market drivers, the opposite effect occurs when they move in the opposite direction.
Generally, a higher portion of the ceded reinsurance for GMIBs is accounted for as an embedded derivative as compared to the direct guarantees since the settlement provisions of the reinsurance agreements generally meet the accounting criteria of “net settlement.” This mismatch in accounting can lead to significant volatility in earnings, even though the risks inherent in these direct guarantees are fully covered by the ceded reinsurance.
Net Investment Gains (Losses). The unfavorable change in net investment gains (losses) of $127 million ($83 million, net of income tax) primarily reflects lower gains in real estate and lower foreign currency transaction gains, as well as higher impairments on fixed maturity securities, partially offset by increased net gains on the transfer of fixed maturity securities to Brighthouse Insurance related to the recapture of risks related to certain single premium deferred annuity contracts.

48

Actuarial Assumption Review. Results for 2016 include a non-cash charge of $722 million ($469 million, net of income tax) associated with the annual review of actuarial assumptions, of which $798 million ($519 million, net of income tax) was recognized in net derivative gains (losses). Of the $722 million charge, $787 million ($512 million, net of income tax) was related to reserves and a benefit of $65 million ($43 million, net of income tax) was associated with DAC.
The $798 million loss recognized in net derivative gains (losses) associated with this review of assumptions was included within the other risks in embedded derivatives - direct and assumed guarantees and market and other risks in embedded derivatives - ceded reinsurance captions in the table above.
As a result of the annual review of actuarial assumptions, changes were made to economic, policyholder behavior and mortality assumptions, as well as operational updates. The significant impacts of the assumption review were on the variable annuity block of business and are summarized as follows:
•
Changes in policyholder behavior assumptions resulted in reserve increases, partially offset by favorable DAC amortization, resulting in a net charge of $444 million ($289 million, net of income tax). The policyholder behavior assumption changes included:
–
Lower utilization of the elective annuitization option on the guarantee riders on the contracts;
–
Lower election of the guaranteed principal option in certain of our GMIBs, which, if exercised, returns to the policyholder the original purchase payment amounts;
–
Adjusting the rate at which policyholders withdrew funds through systematic withdrawals; and
–
Higher policyholder persistency related to the portion of the business that will remain with the Company after the proposed Separation, dependent on the amount a contract is in-the-money.
•
Changes in economic assumptions resulted in reserve increases and unfavorable DAC amortization resulting in a charge of $90 million ($59 million, net of income tax). These changes include reducing the long-term separate account return assumption from 7.25% to 7.00% (from 7.00% to 6.75% for GMIB’s invested in managed volatility funds), and reducing the projected ultimate 10-year treasury rate from 4.50% to 4.25%.
•
The remaining updates resulted in reserve increases and unfavorable DAC amortization resulting in a charge of $186 million ($121 million, net of income tax). The most notable of these assumption updates related to our projection of closed block results and resulted in a net loss.
Results for 2015 include a $163 million ($106 million, net of income tax), net of reinsurance, charge associated with our annual assumption review related to reserves and DAC, of which a $2 million loss ($1 million, net of income tax) was recognized in net derivative gains (losses). Of the $163 million charge, $60 million ($39 million, net of income tax) was related to reserves and $103 million ($67 million, net of income tax) was associated with DAC.
Taxes. Income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2016 was $207 million, or 11% of income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income tax, compared with $1.8 billion, or 39% of income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income tax, for the year ended December 31, 2015. The Company’s effective tax rates differ from the U.S. statutory rate of 35% typically due to non-taxable investment income, and tax credits for low income housing. Our 2016 results include tax benefits of $39 million for tax audit settlements and $22 million related to an investment tax credit. Our 2015 results include a tax charge of $557 million recorded under accounting guidance for the recognition of tax uncertainties.
Operating Earnings. As more fully described in “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures,” we use operating earnings, which does not equate to income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax, as determined in accordance with GAAP, to analyze our performance, evaluate segment performance, and allocate resources. We believe that the presentation of operating earnings, as we measure it for management purposes, enhances the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business. Operating earnings allows analysis of our performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results. Operating earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax. Operating earnings increased $298 million, net of income tax, to $2.7 billion, net of income tax, for the year ended December 31, 2016 from $2.4 billion, net of income tax, for the year ended December 31, 2015.

49

Reconciliation of income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax, to operating earnings
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
U.S.
 
MetLife
Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
$
1,594

 
$
110

 
$
52

 
$
1,756

Less: Net investment gains (losses)
(33
)
 
226

 
(61
)
 
132

Less: Net derivative gains (losses)
54

 
(1,071
)
 
(121
)
 
(1,138
)
Less: Other adjustments to continuing operations (1)
(263
)
 
(10
)
 
(115
)
 
(388
)
Less: Provision for income tax (expense) benefit
85

 
299

 
103

 
487

Operating earnings
$
1,751

 
$
666

 
$
246

 
$
2,663

Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
U.S.
 
MetLife
Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
$
1,893

 
$
1,086

 
$
(222
)
 
$
2,757

Less: Net investment gains (losses)
264

 
(38
)
 
33

 
259

Less: Net derivative gains (losses)
98

 
227

 
556

 
881

Less: Other adjustments to continuing operations (1)
(148
)
 
(372
)
 
(19
)
 
(539
)
Less: Provision for income tax (expense) benefit
(74
)
 
64

 
(199
)
 
(209
)
Operating earnings
$
1,753

 
$
1,205

 
$
(593
)
 
$
2,365

______________
(1) See definitions of operating revenues and operating expenses under “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for the components of such adjustments.

50

Reconciliation of revenues to operating revenues and expenses to operating expenses
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
U.S.
 
MetLife
Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Total revenues
$
25,491

 
$
10,359

 
$
640

 
$
36,490

Less: Net investment gains (losses)
(33
)
 
226

 
(61
)
 
132

Less: Net derivative gains (losses)
54

 
(1,071
)
 
(121
)
 
(1,138
)
Less: Other adjustments to revenues (1)
(264
)
 
(159
)
 
(6
)
 
(429
)
Total operating revenues
$
25,734

 
$
11,363

 
$
828

 
$
37,925

Total expenses
$
23,007

 
$
10,278

 
$
1,242

 
$
34,527

Less: Adjustments related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)
—

 
(336
)
 
(17
)
 
(353
)
Less: Other adjustments to expenses (1)
(1
)
 
187

 
126

 
312

Total operating expenses
$
23,008

 
$
10,427

 
$
1,133

 
$
34,568

Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
U.S.
 
MetLife
Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Total revenues
$
25,246

 
$
11,847

 
$
1,678

 
$
38,771

Less: Net investment gains (losses)
264

 
(38
)
 
33

 
259

Less: Net derivative gains (losses)
98

 
227

 
556

 
881

Less: Other adjustments to revenues (1)
(163
)
 
(200
)
 
7

 
(356
)
Total operating revenues
$
25,047

 
$
11,858

 
$
1,082

 
$
37,987

Total expenses
$
22,298

 
$
10,270

 
$
1,664

 
$
34,232

Less: Adjustments related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)
—

 
110

 
7

 
117

Less: Other adjustments to expenses (1)
(15
)
 
62

 
19

 
66

Total operating expenses
$
22,313

 
$
10,098

 
$
1,638

 
$
34,049

______________
(1) See definitions of operating revenues and operating expenses under “— Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures” for the components of such adjustments.

51

Consolidated Results — Operating
Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Unless otherwise stated, all amounts discussed below are net of income tax.
In December 2016, MLIC distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a non-cash extraordinary dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC. This transaction did not have a material impact on consolidated net income or operating earnings for the year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to 2015; however, it may have resulted in changes to the underlying components of earnings.
Overview. The primary drivers of the increase in operating earnings were a 2015 tax charge recorded under accounting guidance for the recognition of tax uncertainties and related interest expenses, partially offset by lower investment yields, the recapture of two assumed single-premium deferred annuity reinsurance agreements by affiliates and refinements to DAC and certain insurance liabilities. Our financial results include fees earned related to an affiliated reinsurance agreement, which were recorded in other revenues, but were almost entirely offset by related charges in other expenses.
Business Growth. We benefited from higher sales and business growth in certain of our products. Positive net flows, primarily as a result of growth in the investment portfolio of our U.S. segment, generated higher net investment income. However, the recapture of two assumed single-premium deferred annuity reinsurance agreements by affiliates and the aforementioned distribution of all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc. decreased our invested asset base and, consequently, net investment income. Consistent with the growth in average invested assets from increased premiums, interest credited on long-duration contracts increased. The changes in business growth discussed above resulted in a slight decrease in operating earnings.
Market Factors. Market factors, including low interest rates, volatile equity markets and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations continued to impact our investment yields; however, certain impacts were mitigated by derivatives used to hedge these risks. Investment yields were negatively affected by the adverse impact of the low interest rate environment on fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans, as proceeds from maturing investments and the growth in the investment portfolio were invested at lower yields than the portfolio average. In addition, we experienced a decrease in returns on real estate joint ventures and alternative investments. Lower investment earnings on our securities lending program resulted primarily from lower margins due to the impact of a flatter yield curve. These decreases in net investment income were partially offset by higher income on derivatives and resulted in a $351 million decrease in operating earnings.
Underwriting, Actuarial Assumption Review and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable underwriting decreased operating earnings by $64 million as unfavorable mortality and morbidity in our MetLife Holdings segment was partially offset by favorable mortality and morbidity in our U.S. segment. The impact of the annual actuarial assumption review, which occurred in both 2016 and 2015, resulted in a net operating earnings decrease of $42 million and was related to unfavorable DAC unlockings in our MetLife Holdings segment. Refinements to DAC and certain insurance-related and other liabilities, which were recorded in both 2016 and 2015, resulted in a $111 million decrease in operating earnings, in our MetLife Holdings and U.S. segments.
Expenses and Taxes. Operating earnings increased due to a decline in expenses of $337 million, mainly the result of the aforementioned $235 million charge for interest on uncertain tax positions in 2015. In addition, expenses declined as a result of lower costs associated with corporate initiatives and projects, lower costs as a result of the U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture and lower technology costs. The Company’s effective tax rates differ from the U.S. statutory rate of 35% typically due to non-taxable investment income and tax credits for investments in low income housing. The Company realized additional tax benefits of $57 million compared to 2015, primarily from the higher utilization of tax preferenced investments. Our 2016 results include tax benefits of $39 million for tax audit settlements and $22 million related to an investment tax credit. Our 2015 results included the aforementioned tax charge of $557 million recorded under accounting guidance for the recognition of tax uncertainties.
Other. Annuities reinsurance activity with affiliates decreased operating earnings by $160 million. This was primarily due to the aforementioned recapture of certain single-premium deferred annuity reinsurance agreements that resulted in unfavorable recapture settlements and an increase in the related DAC amortization, partially offset by lower interest credited on the related reinsurance payables. The impact of the lower interest credited was largely offset by the lower net investment income earned on the assets transferred in connection with the recapture.

52

Segment Results and Corporate & Other
U.S.
Business Overview. An increase in sales was primarily driven by sales of stable value products, as well as funding agreement issuances in our Retirement and Income Solutions business. In addition, sales of pension risk transfers and structured settlements were slightly higher than in 2015. These increases were partially offset by slightly lower sales in the income annuities and pensions businesses. Changes in premiums for the Retirement and Income Solutions business were almost entirely offset by the related changes in policyholder benefits and claims. Sales increased over 2015 in the Group Benefits business, with strong sales across our core and voluntary products.
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Operating revenues
 
 
 
Premiums
$
17,921

 
$
17,340

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
988

 
941

Net investment income
6,075

 
6,037

Other revenues
750

 
729

Total operating revenues
25,734

 
25,047

Operating expenses
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
18,935

 
18,384

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
1,297

 
1,212

Capitalization of DAC
(60
)
 
(71
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
56

 
59

Interest expense on debt
10

 
5

Other operating expenses
2,770

 
2,724

Total operating expenses
23,008

 
22,313

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
975

 
981

Operating earnings
$
1,751

 
$
1,753

Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Unless otherwise stated, all amounts discussed below are net of income tax.
Business Growth. The impact of deposits, funding agreement issuances and increased premiums in 2016 resulted in higher average invested assets, improving net investment income. However, consistent with the growth in average invested assets from increased premiums, interest credited on long-duration contracts increased. In addition, an increase in other operating expenses, mainly the result of growth across the segment, was more than offset by the remaining increase in premiums, fees and other revenues. The combined impact of the items discussed above increased operating earnings by $129 million.
Market Factors. Market factors, including low interest rates, volatile equity markets, and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, continued to impact our investment yields; however, certain impacts were mitigated by derivatives used to hedge these risks. Investment yields decreased as a result of the impact of the low interest rate environment on fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans, as proceeds from maturing investments and the growth in the investment portfolio were invested at lower yields than the portfolio average. In addition, lower returns on other limited partnership interests and alternative investments reduced yields. Lower investment earnings on our securities lending program resulted primarily from lower margins due to the impact of a flatter yield curve. These unfavorable changes were partially offset by higher income on derivatives and real estate. Certain of our funding agreements and guaranteed interest contract liabilities have interest credited rates that are contractually tied to current market rates, specifically the 3-month LIBOR and, as a result, a higher average interest credited rate drove an increase in interest credited expense. However, consistent with the decrease in yields on average invested assets, interest credited on certain long-duration insurance contracts decreased. The changes in market factors discussed above resulted in a $134 million decrease in operating earnings.

53

Underwriting and Other Insurance Adjustments. Favorable claims experience in our individual disability and voluntary businesses were partially offset by unfavorable claims experience in our group disability and dental businesses and resulted in a $10 million increase in operating earnings. Favorable mortality in 2016, mainly due to favorable claims experience in our life business, resulted in a $26 million increase in operating earnings. Less favorable mortality from our pension risk transfer business and specialized life insurance products resulted in an $11 million decrease in operating earnings. Refinements to certain insurance and other liabilities, which were recorded in both 2016 and 2015, resulted in a $24 million decrease in operating earnings.
MetLife Holdings
Business Overview. As a result of the proposed Separation and the U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture, we have discontinued the marketing of life and annuity products in this segment, which has led to lower sales. This will result in a declining DAC asset over time and we anticipate a decline in premiums, fees and other revenues. A significant portion of our operating earnings is driven by separate account balances. Most directly, these balances determine asset-based fee income but they also impact DAC amortization and asset-based commissions. Separate account balances are driven by sales, movements in the market, surrenders, withdrawals, benefit payments, transfers and policy charges. Separate account balances increased due to equity market performance, partially offset by the impact of negative net flows, as benefits, surrenders and withdrawals exceeded sales. While net flows are still negative, we are seeing stability in surrenders and withdrawals. Although we have discontinued selling our long-term care product, we continue to collect premiums and administer the existing block of business, which contributed to asset growth in the segment, and we expect the related reserves to grow as this block matures.
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Operating revenues
 
 
 
Premiums
$
4,411

 
$
4,527

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
1,236

 
1,294

Net investment income
5,606

 
5,902

Other revenues
110

 
135

Total operating revenues
11,363

 
11,858

Operating expenses
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
7,255

 
7,218

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
907

 
933

Capitalization of DAC
(267
)
 
(409
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
675

 
527

Interest expense on debt
7

 
4

Other operating expenses
1,850

 
1,825

Total operating expenses
10,427

 
10,098

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
270

 
555

Operating earnings
$
666

 
$
1,205

Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Unless otherwise stated, all amounts discussed below are net of income tax.
Business Growth. The recapture of two assumed single-premium deferred annuity reinsurance agreements by affiliates and the aforementioned distribution of all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of GALIC to MetLife, Inc. decreased our invested asset base and, consequently, net investment income. Excluding these items, our life, annuities and long-term care businesses experienced net asset growth, which resulted in higher net investment income and an increase in interest credited on insurance liabilities. The combined impact of the items discussed above resulted in a $36 million decrease in operating earnings.

54

Market Factors. Market factors, including low interest rates, volatile equity markets, and foreign currency exchange rate fluctuations, continued to impact our investment yields; however, certain impacts were mitigated by derivatives used to hedge these risks. Investment yields decreased on our fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans as proceeds from maturing investments were invested at lower yields than the portfolio average. We also had lower income on alternative investments and derivatives. These decreases in net investment income were partially offset by higher returns on private equities. In our deferred annuity business, lower equity returns in 2015 drove a decline in average separate account balances which resulted in a decrease in asset-based fee income in 2016 relative to 2015, as well as an increase in DAC amortization. These decreases were partially offset by the impact of lower average interest crediting rates. The changes in market factors discussed above resulted in a $195 million decrease in operating earnings.
Underwriting, Actuarial Assumption Review and Other Insurance Adjustments. Unfavorable mortality, primarily in our universal life business, and unfavorable claims experience in our long-term care business, partially offset by the aforementioned distribution of all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of GALIC to MetLife Inc., resulted in an $89 million decrease in operating earnings. The impact of our annual actuarial assumption review, which occurred in both 2016 and 2015, resulted in a net operating earnings decrease of $33 million and was primarily related to unfavorable DAC unlockings. Refinements to DAC and certain insurance-related liabilities that were recorded in both 2016 and 2015, including a 2016 reserve adjustment resulting from modeling improvements in the reserving process in our universal life business, resulted in an $87 million decrease in operating earnings. In addition, a decrease in policyholder dividends in the closed block increased operating earnings by $12 million.
Expenses. Operating earnings increased by $53 million as a result of lower expenses, primarily due to lower costs as a result of the U.S. Retail Advisor Force Divestiture, as well as declines in technology costs.
Other. Annuities reinsurance activity with affiliates decreased operating earnings by $160 million. This was primarily due to the aforementioned recapture of certain single-premium deferred annuity reinsurance agreements that resulted in unfavorable recapture settlements and an increase in the related DAC amortization, partially offset by lower interest credited on the related reinsurance payables. The impact of the lower interest credited was largely offset by the lower net investment income earned on the assets transferred in connection with the recapture.
Corporate & Other
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Operating revenues
 
 
 
Premiums
$
61

 
$
67

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
216

 
249

Net investment income
(67
)
 
94

Other revenues
618

 
672

Total operating revenues
828

 
1,082

Operating expenses
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
130

 
125

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
32

 
34

Capitalization of DAC
(5
)
 
(2
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
56

 
44

Interest expense on debt
95

 
113

Other operating expenses
825

 
1,324

Total operating expenses
1,133

 
1,638

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
(551
)
 
37

Operating earnings
$
246

 
$
(593
)

55

The table below presents operating earnings by source, net of income tax:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Other business activities
$
57

 
$
89

Other net investment income
(110
)
 
(10
)
Interest expense on debt
(62
)
 
(73
)
Corporate initiatives and projects
(38
)
 
(72
)
Incremental tax benefit (expense)
444

 
(232
)
Other
(45
)
 
(295
)
Operating earnings
$
246

 
$
(593
)
Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015
Unless otherwise stated, all amounts discussed below are net of income tax.
Other Business Activities. Operating earnings from other business activities decreased $32 million. This was primarily related to the aforementioned distribution of all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of NELICO to MetLife, Inc. The impact of our annual actuarial assumption review, which occurred in both 2016 and 2015, resulted in a decrease in operating earnings of $9 million. In addition, lower fees and higher employee-related expenses in our life business also decreased operating earnings. These decreases were partially offset by higher results from our start-up operations.
Other Net Investment Income. A $100 million decrease in other net investment income was primarily driven by lower returns on fixed maturity securities as a result of the low interest rate environment and a decrease in average total portfolio holdings, primarily driven by a cash dividend paid to MetLife, Inc in 2016. Additionally, lower returns on private equities, as well as real estate and real estate joint ventures decreased other net investment income.
Corporate Initiatives and Projects. Expenses associated with corporate initiatives and projects decreased by $34 million, primarily due to lower relocation costs, severance and consulting expenses associated with certain enterprise-wide initiatives.
Incremental Tax Benefit (Expense). Corporate & Other benefits from the impact of certain permanent tax preferenced items, including non-taxable investment income and tax credits for investments in low income housing. As a result, our effective tax rate differs from the U.S. statutory rate of 35%. In 2016, we had higher utilization of tax preferenced investments, which increased our operating earnings by $58 million over 2015. In addition, our results for 2016 include a tax benefit of $39 million for tax audit settlements and $22 million related to an investment tax credit. Our 2015 results included the aforementioned tax charge of $557 million, which was recorded under accounting guidance for the recognition of tax uncertainties.
Other. Our 2015 results include the aforementioned $235 million charge for interest on uncertain tax positions. An impairment charge on a real estate property in 2015 also increased operating earnings by $7 million. These increases were partially offset by $13 million of higher interest on uncertain tax positions and a $7 million decrease in refunds received on prior years’ tax audits. Additionally, our results include fees earned related to an affiliated reinsurance agreement, which were recorded in other revenues, but were almost entirely offset by related charges in other expenses.
Effects of Inflation
Management believes that inflation has not had a material effect on the Company’s consolidated results of operations, except insofar as inflation may affect interest rates.
An increase in inflation could affect our business in several ways. During inflationary periods, the value of fixed income investments falls which could increase realized and unrealized losses. Inflation also increases expenses for labor and other materials, potentially putting pressure on profitability if such costs cannot be passed through in our product prices. Prolonged and elevated inflation could adversely affect the financial markets and the economy generally, and dispelling it may require governments to pursue a restrictive fiscal and monetary policy, which could constrain overall economic activity, inhibit revenue growth and reduce the number of attractive investment opportunities.

56

Investments
Investment Risks
Our primary investment objective is to optimize, net of income tax, risk-adjusted investment income and risk-adjusted total return while ensuring that assets and liabilities are managed on a cash flow and duration basis. The Investments Department, led by the Chief Investment Officer, manages investment risks using a risk control framework comprised of policies, procedures and limits, as discussed further below. The Investments Risk Committee, chaired by GRM, reviews and monitors investment risk limits and tolerances. We are exposed to the following primary sources of investment risks:
•
credit risk, relating to the uncertainty associated with the continued ability of a given obligor to make timely payments of principal and interest;
•
interest rate risk, relating to the market price and cash flow variability associated with changes in market interest rates. Changes in market interest rates will impact the net unrealized gain or loss position of our fixed income investment portfolio and the rates of return we receive on both new funds invested and reinvestment of existing funds;
•
liquidity risk, relating to the diminished ability to sell certain investments, in times of strained market conditions;
•
market valuation risk, relating to the variability in the estimated fair value of investments associated with changes in market factors such as credit spreads and equity market levels. A widening of credit spreads will adversely impact the net unrealized gain (loss) position of the fixed income investment portfolio, will increase losses associated with credit-based non-qualifying derivatives where we assume credit exposure, and, if credit spreads widen significantly or for an extended period of time, will likely result in higher OTTI. Credit spread tightening will reduce net investment income associated with purchases of fixed maturity securities and will favorably impact the net unrealized gain (loss) position of the fixed income investment portfolio;
•
currency risk, relating to the variability in currency exchange rates for foreign denominated investments. This risk relates to potential decreases in estimated fair value and net investment income resulting from changes in currency exchange rates versus the U.S. dollar. In general, the weakening of foreign currencies versus the U.S. dollar will adversely affect the estimated fair value of our foreign denominated investments; and
•
real estate risk, relating to commercial, agricultural and residential real estate, and stemming from factors, which include, but are not limited to, market conditions, including the demand and supply of leasable commercial space, creditworthiness of borrowers and their tenants and joint venture partners, capital markets volatility and inherent interest rate movements.
We manage investment risk through in-house fundamental credit analysis of the underlying obligors, issuers, transaction structures and real estate properties. We also manage credit risk, market valuation risk and liquidity risk through industry and issuer diversification and asset allocation. Risk limits to promote diversification by asset sector, avoid concentrations in any single issuer and limit overall aggregate credit and equity risk exposure, as measured by our economic capital framework, are approved annually by a committee of directors that oversees our investment portfolio. For real estate assets, we manage credit risk and market valuation risk through geographic, property type and product type diversification and asset allocation. We manage interest rate risk as part of our ALM strategies. These strategies include maintaining an investment portfolio with diversified maturities that has a weighted average duration that reflects the duration of our estimated liability cash flow profile, and utilizing product design, such as the use of market value adjustment features and surrender charges, to manage interest rate risk. We also manage interest rate risk through proactive monitoring and management of certain non-guaranteed elements of our products, such as the resetting of credited interest and dividend rates for policies that permit such adjustments. In addition to hedging with foreign currency derivatives, we manage currency risk by matching much of our foreign currency liabilities with their respective foreign currency assets, thereby reducing our risk to foreign currency exchange rate fluctuation. We also use certain derivatives in the management of credit, interest rate, and market valuation risk.
We use purchased credit default swaps to mitigate credit risk in our investment portfolio. Generally, we purchase credit protection by entering into credit default swaps referencing the issuers of specific assets we own. In certain cases, basis risk exists between these credit default swaps and the specific assets we own. For example, we may purchase credit protection on a macro basis to reduce exposure to specific industries or other portfolio concentrations. In such instances, the referenced entities and obligations under the credit default swaps may not be identical to the individual obligors or securities in our investment portfolio. In addition, our purchased credit default swaps may have shorter tenors than the underlying investments they are hedging. However, we dynamically hedge this risk through the rebalancing and rollover of our credit default swaps at their most liquid tenors. We believe that our purchased credit default swaps serve as effective economic hedges of our credit exposure.

57

We enter into market standard purchased and written credit default swap contracts. Payout under such contracts is triggered by certain credit events experienced by the referenced entities. For credit default swaps covering North American corporate issuers, credit events typically include bankruptcy and failure to pay on borrowed money. For European corporate issuers, credit events typically also include involuntary restructuring. With respect to credit default contracts on Western European sovereign debt, credit events typically include failure to pay debt obligations, repudiation, moratorium, or involuntary restructuring. In each case, payout on a credit default swap is triggered only after the Credit Derivatives Determinations Committee of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association determines that a credit event has occurred.
Current Environment
The global economy and markets continue to be affected by stress and volatility, which has adversely affected the financial services sector, in particular, and global capital markets. Recently, political and/or economic instability in the United Kingdom (“U.K.”), Mexico, Italy, Turkey and Puerto Rico have contributed to global market volatility. Events following the U.K.’s referendum on June 23, 2016 and the uncertainties associated with its pending withdrawal from the European Union have contributed to market volatility. The impact on global capital markets and the economy generally of the transition occurring in the United States government and the priorities of the Trump Administration is uncertain.
As an insurance company with significant operations in the United States, we are affected by the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve Board in the United States. The Federal Reserve Board’s Federal Open Market Committee has been increasing the federal funds rate, most recently in March 2017. The Federal Reserve may take further actions to influence interest rates in the future, which may have an impact on the pricing levels of risk-bearing investments and may adversely impact the level of product sales. We are also affected by the monetary policy of central banks around the world due to the diversification of our investment portfolio. See “— Selected Country Investments.”
European Investments
We maintain general account investments in Europe for our global portfolio diversification. We have proactively mitigated risk in both direct and indirect exposures by investing in a diversified portfolio of high quality investments with a focus on the higher-rated countries, including the U.K., Germany, France, the Netherlands and Norway. The sovereign debt of these countries continues to maintain investment grade credit ratings from all major rating agencies. European sovereign fixed maturity securities, at estimated fair value, were $1.3 billion at December 31, 2016. Our European corporate securities (fixed maturity and perpetual hybrid securities classified as non-redeemable preferred stock) are invested in a diversified portfolio of primarily non-financial services securities, which comprised $11.5 billion, or 73% of total European corporate securities, at estimated fair value, at December 31, 2016. Of these European fixed maturity securities, 91% were investment grade and, for the 9% that were below investment grade, the majority were non-financial services corporate securities at December 31, 2016. European financial services corporate securities, at estimated fair value, were $4.2 billion (including $2.2 billion within the banking sector) with 98% investment grade, at December 31, 2016. Total European fixed maturity securities, at estimated fair value, were $17.6 billion at December 31, 2016, including $622 million of structured securities.
Selected Country Investments
Recent country specific volatility due to local economic and/or political concerns has affected the performance of certain of our investments.
We have exposure to such volatility, as we maintain general account investments in the selected countries through our global portfolio diversification.

58

The following table presents a summary of fixed maturity securities in these countries. The information below is presented on a country of risk basis (e.g. the country where the issuer primarily conducts business).
 
Selected Country Fixed Maturity Securities at December 31, 2016
 
Sovereign  
 
Financial
Services
 
Non-Financial
Services
 
Structured
 
Total (1)
 
(Dollars in millions)
United Kingdom
—

 
1,313

 
5,091

 
287

 
6,691

Mexico
242

 
78

 
322

 
—

 
642

Italy
10

 
—

 
200

 
104

 
314

Turkey
116

 
38

 
145

 
—

 
299

Puerto Rico (2)
—

 
—

 
64

 
—

 
64

Total
$
368

 
$
1,429

 
$
5,822

 
$
391

 
$
8,010

Investment grade %
68
%
 
94
%
 
90
%
 
100
%
 
90
%
______________
(1)
The par value and amortized cost were $7.4 billion and $8.5 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2016.
(2)
Our exposure to Puerto Rico sovereigns is in the form of political subdivision fixed maturity securities and is composed completely of revenue bonds. We have no Puerto Rico general obligation bonds.
We manage direct and indirect investment exposure in the selected countries through fundamental credit analysis and we continually monitor and adjust our level of investment exposure. We do not expect that our general account investments in these countries will have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.
Current Environment - Summary
All of these factors have had and could continue to have an adverse effect on the financial results of companies in the financial services industry, including MLIC. Such global economic conditions, as well as the global financial markets, continue to impact our net investment income, net investment gains (losses), net derivative gains (losses), level of unrealized gains (losses) within the various asset classes in our investment portfolio, and our level of investment in lower yielding cash equivalents, short-term investments and government securities. See “Risk Factors — Economic Environment and Capital Markets-Related Risks — We Are Exposed to Significant Global Financial and Capital Markets Risks Which May Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity, and May Cause Our Net Investment Income to Vary from Period to Period.”

59

Investment Portfolio Results
The following yield table presents the yield and net investment income for our investment portfolio for the periods indicated. Yields are calculated using reported net investment income which is not adjusted for the impact of changes in foreign currency exchange rates. As described below, this table reflects certain differences from the presentation of net investment income presented in the GAAP consolidated statements of operations. This yield table presentation is consistent with how we measure our investment performance for management purposes, and we believe it enhances understanding of our investment portfolio results.
 
For the Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
Yield% (1)
 
Amount
 
Yield% (1)
 
Amount
 
Yield% (1)
 
Amount
 
(Dollars in millions)
Fixed maturity securities (2) (3)
4.92

%
$
7,578

 
5.12

%
$
7,876

 
5.44

%
$
8,254

Mortgage loans (3)
4.63

%
2,539

 
4.91

%
2,514

 
5.10

%
2,379

Real estate and real estate joint ventures
3.61

%
229

 
4.44

%
330

 
3.28

%
246

Policy loans
5.18

%
404

 
5.13

%
435

 
5.30

%
448

Equity securities
4.83

%
89

 
4.64

%
91

 
4.64

%
86

Other limited partnership interests
10.40

%
413

 
10.96

%
519

 
14.79

%
721

Cash and short-term investments
0.40

%
7

 
0.40

%
12

 
0.76

%
21

Other invested assets
 
 
744

 
 
 
668

 
 
 
536

Investment income
5.05

%
12,003

 
5.25

%
12,445

 
5.54

%
12,691

Investment fees and expenses
(0.16
)
 
(389
)
 
(0.17
)
 
(412
)
 
(0.14
)
 
(326
)
Net investment income (4)(5)
4.89

%
$
11,614

 
5.08

%
$
12,033

 
5.40

%
$
12,365

______________
(1)
Yields are calculated as investment income as a percent of average quarterly asset carrying values. Investment income excludes recognized gains and losses and reflects GAAP adjustments presented in footnote (5) below. Asset carrying values exclude unrealized gains (losses), collateral received in connection with our securities lending program, annuities funding structured settlement claims, freestanding derivative assets, collateral received from derivative counterparties, and the effects of consolidating certain variable interest entities (“VIEs”) under GAAP that are treated as consolidated securitization entities (“CSEs”). A yield is not presented for other invested assets, as it is not considered a meaningful measure of performance for this asset class.
(2)
Investment income (loss) includes amounts from securities for which the fair value option (“FVO”) has been elected (“FVO securities”) and trading securities of $3 million, ($15) million and $23 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(3)
Investment income from fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans includes prepayment fees.
(4)
Net investment income included in yield calculations include earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments or that are used to replicate certain investments, but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment (“investment hedge adjustments”).
(5)
Net investment income presented in the yield table varies from the most directly comparable GAAP measure due to certain reclassifications and adjustments and excludes the effects of consolidating certain VIEs under GAAP that are treated as CSEs. Such reclassifications and adjustments are presented in the table below.
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Net investment income — in the above yield table
$
11,614

 
$
12,033

 
$
12,365

Investment hedge adjustments
(531
)
 
(457
)
 
(473
)
Operating joint ventures adjustment
—

 
1

 
—

Incremental net investment income from CSEs
—

 
—

 
1

Net investment income — GAAP consolidated statements of operations
$
11,083

 
$
11,577

 
$
11,893

See “— Results of Operations — Consolidated Results — Year Ended December 31, 2016 Compared with the Year Ended December 31, 2015” for an analysis of the year over year changes in net investment income.

60

Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS
The following table presents fixed maturity and equity securities AFS by type (public or private) and information about perpetual and redeemable securities held at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of Total
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of Total
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Publicly-traded
$
130,487

 
80.0
%
$
141,216

 
80.4
%
  Privately-placed
32,633

 
20.0
 
34,470

 
19.6
 
    Total fixed maturity securities
$
163,120

 
100.0
%
$
175,686

 
100.0
%
    Percentage of cash and invested assets
61.5
%
 
 
 
63.4
%
 
 
 
Equity securities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  Privately-held
$
963

 
52.4
%
$
890

 
45.7
%
  Publicly-traded
876

 
47.6

1,059

 
54.3

    Total equity securities
$
1,839

 
100.0
%
$
1,949

 
100.0
%
    Percentage of cash and invested assets
0.7
%
 
 
 
0.7
%
 
 
 
Perpetual securities included within fixed maturity and equity securities AFS
$
460

 
 
 
$
604

 
 
 
Redeemable preferred stock with a stated maturity included within fixed maturity securities AFS
$
584

 
 
 
$
720

 
 
 
Perpetual securities are included within fixed maturity and equity securities. Upon acquisition, we classify perpetual securities that have attributes of both debt and equity as fixed maturity securities if the securities have an interest rate step-up feature which, when combined with other qualitative factors, indicates that the securities have more debt-like characteristics; while those with more equity-like characteristics are classified as equity securities. Many of such securities, commonly referred to as “perpetual hybrid securities” have been issued by non-U.S. financial institutions that are accorded the highest two capital treatment categories by their respective regulatory bodies (i.e. core capital, or “Tier 1 capital” and perpetual deferrable securities, or “Upper Tier 2 capital”).
Redeemable preferred stock with a stated maturity is included within fixed maturity securities. These securities, which are commonly referred to as “capital securities,” primarily have cumulative interest deferral features and are primarily issued by U.S. financial institutions.
Valuation of Securities. We are responsible for the determination of the estimated fair value of our investments. We determine the estimated fair value of publicly-traded securities after considering one of three primary sources of information: quoted market prices in active markets, independent pricing services, or independent broker quotations. We determine the estimated fair value of privately placed securities after considering one of three primary sources of information: market standard internal matrix pricing, market standard internal discounted cash flow techniques, or independent pricing services (after we determine the independent pricing services’ use of available observable market data). For publicly-traded securities, the number of quotations obtained varies by instrument and depends on the liquidity of the particular instrument. Generally, we obtain prices from multiple pricing services to cover all asset classes and obtain multiple prices for certain securities, but ultimately utilize the price with the highest placement in the fair value hierarchy. Independent pricing services that value these instruments use market standard valuation methodologies based on data about market transactions and inputs from multiple pricing sources that are market observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data. See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a discussion of the types of market standard valuation methodologies utilized and key assumptions and observable inputs used in applying these standard valuation methodologies. When a price is not available in the active market or through an independent pricing service, management values the security primarily using market standard internal matrix pricing or discounted cash flow techniques, and non-binding quotations from independent brokers who are knowledgeable about these securities. Independent non-binding broker quotations utilize inputs that may be difficult to corroborate with observable market data. As shown in the following section, less than 1% of our fixed maturity securities were valued using non-binding quotations from independent brokers at December 31, 2016.

61

Senior management, independent of the trading and investing functions, is responsible for the oversight of control systems and valuation policies, including reviewing and approving new transaction types and markets, for ensuring that observable market prices and market-based parameters are used for valuation, wherever possible, and for determining that valuation adjustments, when applied, are based upon established policies and are applied consistently over time. See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on our valuation controls and procedures including our formal process to challenge any prices received from independent pricing services that are not considered representative of estimated fair value.
We have reviewed the significance and observability of inputs used in the valuation methodologies to determine the appropriate fair value hierarchy level for each of our securities. Based on the results of this review and investment class analysis, each instrument is categorized as Level 1, 2 or 3 based on the lowest level significant input to its valuation. See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the valuation techniques and inputs by level within the three level fair value hierarchy by major classes of invested assets.
Fair Value of Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities – AFS 
Fixed maturity and equity securities AFS measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding fair value pricing sources are as follows:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Fixed Maturity
Securities
 
Equity
Securities
 
(Dollars in millions)
Level 1
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quoted prices in active markets for identical assets
$
17,597

 
10.8
%
 
$
408

 
22.2
%
Level 2
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Independent pricing sources
131,108

 
80.4

 
943

 
51.3

Internal matrix pricing or discounted cash flow techniques
1,004

 
0.6

 
68

 
3.7

Significant other observable inputs
132,112

 
81.0

 
1,011

 
55.0

Level 3
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Independent pricing sources
10,624

 
6.5

 
303

 
16.5

Internal matrix pricing or discounted cash flow techniques
2,302

 
1.4

 
109

 
5.9

Independent broker quotations
485

 
0.3

 
8

 
0.4

Significant unobservable inputs
13,411

 
8.2

 
420

 
22.8

Total estimated fair value
$
163,120

 
100.0
%
 
$
1,839

 
100.0
%
See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the fixed maturity securities and equity securities AFS fair value hierarchy.
The composition of fair value pricing sources for and significant changes in Level 3 securities at December 31, 2016 are as follows:
•
The majority of the Level 3 fixed maturity and equity securities AFS were concentrated in three sectors: United States and foreign corporate securities and residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”).
•
Level 3 fixed maturity securities are priced principally through market standard valuation methodologies, independent pricing services and, to a much lesser extent, independent non-binding broker quotations using inputs that are not market observable or cannot be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data. Level 3 fixed maturity securities consist of less liquid securities with very limited trading activity or where less price transparency exists around the inputs to the valuation methodologies. Level 3 fixed maturity securities include: sub-prime RMBS; certain below investment grade private securities and less liquid investment grade corporate securities (included in United States and foreign corporate securities); less liquid asset-backed securities (“ABS”) and foreign government securities.
•
During the year ended December 31, 2016, Level 3 fixed maturity securities increased by $405 million, or 3%. The increase was driven by purchases in excess of sales.

62

See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a rollforward of the fair value measurements for fixed maturity securities and equity securities AFS measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs; transfers into and/or out of Level 3; and further information about the valuation techniques and inputs by level by major classes of invested assets that affect the amounts reported above.
Fixed Maturity Securities AFS
See Notes 1 and 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information about fixed maturity securities AFS by sector, contractual maturities and continuous gross unrealized losses.
Fixed Maturity Securities Credit Quality — Ratings 
The Securities Valuation Office of the NAIC evaluates the fixed maturity security investments of insurers for regulatory reporting and capital assessment purposes and assigns securities to one of six credit quality categories called “NAIC designations.” If no designation is available from the NAIC, then, as permitted by the NAIC, an internally developed designation is used. The NAIC designations are generally similar to the credit quality ratings of the NRSRO for fixed maturity securities, except for certain structured securities as described below. Rating agency ratings are based on availability of applicable ratings from rating agencies on the NAIC credit rating provider list, including Moody’s, S&P, Fitch, Dominion Bond Rating Service, A.M. Best, Kroll Bond Rating Agency, Egan Jones Ratings Company and Morningstar, Inc. (“Morningstar”). If no rating is available from a rating agency, then an internally developed rating is used.
The NAIC has adopted revised methodologies for certain structured securities comprised of non-agency RMBS, commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) and ABS. The NAIC’s objective with the revised methodologies for these structured securities was to increase the accuracy in assessing expected losses, and to use the improved assessment to determine a more appropriate capital requirement for such structured securities. The revised methodologies reduce regulatory reliance on rating agencies and allow for greater regulatory input into the assumptions used to estimate expected losses from structured securities. We apply the revised NAIC methodologies to structured securities held by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company that maintain the NAIC statutory basis of accounting. The NAIC’s present methodology is to evaluate structured securities held by insurers using the revised NAIC methodologies on an annual basis. If Metropolitan Life Insurance Company acquires structured securities that have not been previously evaluated by the NAIC, but are expected to be evaluated by the NAIC in the upcoming annual review, an internally developed designation is used until a final designation becomes available. These revised NAIC designations may not correspond to NRSRO ratings.
The following table presents total fixed maturity securities by NRSRO rating and the applicable NAIC designation from the NAIC published comparison of NRSRO ratings to NAIC designations, except for certain structured securities, which are presented using the revised NAIC methodologies as described above, as well as the percentage, based on estimated fair value that each NAIC designation is comprised of at:
 
 
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
 
 
2016
 
 
2015
 
NAIC
Designation
 
NRSRO Rating
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Unrealized
Gain (Loss)
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Unrealized
Gain (Loss)
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
 
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
1
 
Aaa/Aa/A
 
$
100,437

 
$
6,467

 
$
106,904

 
65.5
%
 
$
106,622

 
$
7,407

 
$
114,029

 
64.9
%
2
 
Baa
 
41,445

 
1,470

 
42,915

 
26.3
 
 
46,550

 
516

 
47,066

 
26.8
 
 
 
Subtotal investment grade
 
141,882

 
7,937

 
149,819

 
91.8
 
 
153,172

 
7,923

 
161,095

 
91.7
 
3
 
Ba
 
8,905

 
72

 
8,977

 
5.5
 
 
10,770

 
(327
)
 
10,443

 
5.9
 
4
 
B
 
3,719

 
(15
)
 
3,704

 
2.3
 
 
3,832

 
(218
)
 
3,614

 
2.1
 
5
 
Caa and lower
 
635

 
(15
)
 
620

 
0.4
 
 
584

 
(53
)
 
531

 
0.3
 
6
 
In or near default
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—
 
 
3

 
—

 
3

 
—
 
 
 
Subtotal below investment grade
 
13,259

 
42

 
13,301

 
8.2
 
 
15,189

 
(598
)
 
14,591

 
8.3
 
 
 
Total fixed maturity securities
 
$
155,141

 
$
7,979

 
$
163,120

 
100.0
%
 
$
168,361

 
$
7,325

 
$
175,686

 
100.0
%

63

The following tables present total fixed maturity securities, based on estimated fair value, by sector classification and by NRSRO rating and the applicable NAIC designations from the NAIC published comparison of NRSRO ratings to NAIC designations, except for certain structured securities, which are presented using the NAIC methodologies as described above:
 
Fixed Maturity Securities — by Sector & Credit Quality Rating
NAIC Designation:
1
 
2
 
3
 
4
 
5
 
6
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
NRSRO Rating:
Aaa/Aa/A
 
Baa
 
Ba
 
B
 
Caa and
Lower
 
In or Near
Default
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
21,765

 
$
24,664

 
$
6,157

 
$
2,998

 
$
574

 
$
—

 
$
56,158

U.S. government and agency
35,359

 
256

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
35,615

Foreign corporate
6,557

 
15,234

 
1,993

 
533

 
40

 
—

 
24,357

RMBS
22,689

 
484

 
215

 
27

 
2

 
—

 
23,417

ABS
6,908

 
538

 
57

 
—

 
1

 
—

 
7,504

State and political subdivision
6,966

 
123

 
45

 
—

 
2

 
—

 
7,136

CMBS
4,931

 
4

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
4,935

Foreign government
1,729

 
1,612

 
510

 
146

 
1

 
—

 
3,998

Total fixed maturity securities
$
106,904

 
$
42,915

 
$
8,977

 
$
3,704

 
$
620

 
$
—

 
$
163,120

Percentage of total
65.5
%
 
26.3
%
 
5.5
%
 
2.3
%
 
0.4
%
 
—
%
 
100.0
%
December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
22,530

 
$
28,306

 
$
7,357

 
$
2,913

 
$
451

 
$
—

 
$
61,557

U.S. government and agency
39,693

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
39,693

Foreign corporate
7,284

 
16,558

 
2,357

 
543

 
53

 
—

 
26,795

RMBS
23,012

 
401

 
386

 
90

 
23

 
3

 
23,915

ABS
6,183

 
375

 
8

 
—

 
1

 
—

 
6,567

State and political subdivision
6,840

 
132

 
—

 
—

 
2

 
—

 
6,974

CMBS
6,558

 
6

 
15

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
6,579

Foreign government
1,929

 
1,288

 
320

 
68

 
1

 
—

 
3,606

Total fixed maturity securities
$
114,029

 
$
47,066

 
$
10,443

 
$
3,614

 
$
531

 
$
3

 
$
175,686

Percentage of total
64.9
%
 
26.8
%
 
5.9
%
 
2.1
%
 
0.3
%
 
—
%
 
100.0
%
U.S. and Foreign Corporate Fixed Maturity Securities
We maintain a diversified portfolio of corporate fixed maturity securities across industries and issuers. This portfolio does not have any exposure to any single issuer in excess of 1% of total investments and the top ten holdings comprised 2% of total investments at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The tables below present our U.S. and foreign corporate securities holdings by industry at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Industrial
$
26,151

 
32.5
%
 
$
26,106

 
29.5
%
Consumer
19,394

 
24.1

 
21,832

 
24.7

Finance
13,256

 
16.5

 
14,181

 
16.1

Utility
13,214

 
16.4

 
16,801

 
19.0

Communications
6,865

 
8.5

 
7,066

 
8.0

Other
1,635

 
2.0

 
2,366

 
2.7

Total
$
80,515

 
100.0
%
 
$
88,352

 
100.0
%

64

Structured Securities 
We held $35.9 billion and $37.1 billion of structured securities, at estimated fair value, at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, as presented in the RMBS, ABS and CMBS sections below.
RMBS 
The table below presents our RMBS holdings at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Net
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Net
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
 
(Dollars in millions)
By security type:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Collateralized mortgage obligations
$
14,342

 
61.2
%
 
$
551

 
$
14,111

 
59.0
%
 
$
485

Pass-through securities
9,075

 
38.8

 
80

 
9,804

 
41.0

 
235

Total RMBS
$
23,417

 
100.0
%
 
$
631

 
$
23,915

 
100.0
%
 
$
720

By risk profile:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Agency
$
13,599

 
58.1
%
 
$
239

 
$
14,402

 
60.2
%
 
$
531

Prime
1,316

 
5.6

 
66

 
1,509

 
6.3

 
39

Alt-A
4,779

 
20.4

 
178

 
4,629

 
19.4

 
47

Sub-prime
3,723

 
15.9

 
148

 
3,375

 
14.1

 
103

Total RMBS
$
23,417

 
100.0
%
 
$
631

 
$
23,915

 
100.0
%
 
$
720

Ratings profile:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rated Aaa/AAA
$
13,989

 
59.7
%
 
 
 
$
14,853

 
62.1
%
 
 
Designated NAIC 1
$
22,689

 
96.9
%
 
 
 
$
23,012

 
96.2
%
 
 
Collateralized mortgage obligations are structured by dividing the cash flows of mortgages into separate pools or tranches of risk that create multiple classes of bonds with varying maturities and priority of payments. Pass-through mortgage-backed securities are secured by a mortgage or collection of mortgages. The monthly mortgage payments from homeowners pass from the originating bank through an intermediary, such as a government agency or investment bank, which collects the payments and, for a fee, remits or passes these payments through to the holders of the pass-through securities.
The majority of our RMBS holdings were rated Aaa/AAA by Moody’s, S&P or Fitch; and were designated NAIC 1 by the NAIC at December 31, 2016 and 2015. Agency RMBS were guaranteed or otherwise supported by Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation or Government National Mortgage Association. Non-agency RMBS include prime, alternative residential mortgage loans (“Alt-A”) and sub-prime RMBS. Prime residential mortgage lending includes the origination of residential mortgage loans to the most creditworthy borrowers with high quality credit profiles. Alt-A is a classification of mortgage loans where the risk profile of the borrower is between prime and sub-prime. Sub-prime mortgage lending is the origination of residential mortgage loans to borrowers with weak credit profiles.
Included within prime and Alt-A RMBS are re-securitization of real estate mortgage investment conduit (“Re-REMIC”) securities. Re-REMIC RMBS involve the pooling of previous issues of prime and Alt-A RMBS and restructuring the combined pools to create new senior and subordinated securities. The credit enhancement on the senior tranches is improved through the re-securitization.
Historically, we have managed our exposure to sub-prime RMBS holdings by focusing primarily on senior tranche securities, stress testing the portfolio with severe loss assumptions, and closely monitoring the performance of the portfolio. Our sub-prime RMBS portfolio consists predominantly of securities that were purchased after 2012 at significant discounts to par value and discounts to the expected principal recovery value of these securities. The vast majority of these securities are investment grade under the NAIC designations (e.g., NAIC 1 and NAIC 2). The estimated fair value of our sub-prime RMBS holdings purchased since 2012 was $3.4 billion and $2.9 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, with unrealized gains of $119 million and $78 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

65

ABS 
Our ABS holdings are diversified both by collateral type and by issuer. The following table presents our ABS holdings at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Net
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Net
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
 
(Dollars in millions)
By collateral type:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Collateralized obligations
$
4,115

 
54.8
%
 
$
(41
)
 
$
3,975

 
60.5
%
 
$
(94
)
Automobile loans
762

 
10.2

 
1

 
311

 
4.7

 
—

Student loans
757

 
10.1

 
(15
)
 
623

 
9.5

 
(14
)
Credit card loans
648

 
8.6

 
7

 
464

 
7.1

 
16

Foreign residential loans
261

 
3.5

 
(17
)
 
307

 
4.7

 
(14
)
Other loans
961

 
12.8

 
2

 
887

 
13.5

 
8

Total
$
7,504

 
100.0
%
 
$
(63
)
 
$
6,567

 
100.0
%
 
$
(98
)
Ratings profile:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Rated Aaa/AAA
$
3,657

 
48.7
%
 
 
 
$
3,402

 
51.8
%
 
 
Designated NAIC 1
$
6,908

 
92.1
%
 
 
 
$
6,183

 
94.2
%
 
 
CMBS
Our CMBS holdings are diversified by vintage year. The following tables present our CMBS holdings by NRSRO rating and by vintage year at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Aaa
 
Aa
 
A
 
Baa
 
Below
Investment
Grade
 
Total
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
(Dollars in millions)
2003-2005
$
50

 
$
54

 
$
5

 
$
5

 
$
8

 
$
8

 
$
4

 
$
4

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
67

 
$
71

2006
33

 
36

 
—

 
—

 
3

 
3

 
—

 
—

 
3

 
3

 
39

 
42

2007
71

 
71

 
18

 
18

 
64

 
65

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
153

 
154

2011
106

 
110

 
37

 
38

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
143

 
148

2012
221

 
228

 
193

 
199

 
196

 
201

 
6

 
7

 
—

 
—

 
616

 
635

2013
522

 
548

 
465

 
488

 
265

 
250

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1,252

 
1,286

2014
360

 
366

 
402

 
408

 
151

 
143

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
913

 
917

2015
1,050

 
1,054

 
178

 
170

 
61

 
59

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1,289

 
1,283

2016
352

 
348

 
47

 
46

 
5

 
5

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
404

 
399

Total
$
2,765

 
$
2,815

 
$
1,345

 
$
1,372

 
$
753

 
$
734

 
$
10

 
$
11

 
$
3

 
$
3

 
$
4,876

 
$
4,935

Ratings
Distribution
 
 
57.0
%
 
 
 
27.8
%
 
 
 
14.9
%
 
 
 
0.2
%
 
 
 
0.1
%
 
 
 
100.0
%

66

 
December 31, 2015
 
Aaa
 
Aa
 
A
 
Baa
 
Below
Investment
Grade
 
Total
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amortized
Cost
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
(Dollars in millions)
2003-2005
$
67

 
$
72

 
$
19

 
$
19

 
$
25

 
$
25

 
$
4

 
$
4

 
$
6

 
$
5

 
$
121

 
$
125

2006
636

 
644

 
39

 
39

 
47

 
48

 
25

 
25

 
—

 
—

 
747

 
756

2007
161

 
163

 
87

 
88

 
68

 
71

 
—

 
—

 
65

 
63

 
381

 
385

2011
150

 
156

 
—

 
—

 
30

 
32

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
180

 
188

2012
307

 
311

 
211

 
217

 
351

 
361

 
7

 
8

 
—

 
—

 
876

 
897

2013
548

 
569

 
399

 
416

 
552

 
537

 
12

 
10

 
—

 
—

 
1,511

 
1,532

2014
353

 
355

 
466

 
465

 
279

 
270

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1,098

 
1,090

2015
1,341

 
1,324

 
218

 
211

 
74

 
71

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1,633

 
1,606

Total
$
3,563

 
$
3,594

 
$
1,439

 
$
1,455

 
$
1,426

 
$
1,415

 
$
48

 
$
47

 
$
71

 
$
68

 
$
6,547

 
$
6,579

Ratings
Distribution
 
 
54.7
%
 
 
 
22.1
%
 
 
 
21.5
%
 
 
 
0.7
%
 
 
 
1.0
%
 
 
 
100.0
%
The tables above reflect NRSRO ratings, including Moody’s, S&P, Fitch and Morningstar. CMBS designated NAIC 1 were 99.9% and 99.7% of total CMBS at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Evaluation of AFS Securities for OTTI and Evaluating Temporarily Impaired AFS Securities
See Notes 1 and 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about the evaluation of fixed maturity securities and equity securities AFS for OTTI and evaluation of temporarily impaired AFS securities.
OTTI Losses on Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS Recognized in Earnings
See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about OTTI losses and gross gains and gross losses on AFS securities sold.
Overview of Fixed Maturity and Equity Security OTTI Losses Recognized in Earnings
Impairments of fixed maturity and equity securities were $172 million, $91 million and $47 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Impairments of fixed maturity securities were $97 million, $54 million and $26 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Impairments of equity securities were $75 million, $37 million and $21 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Credit-related impairments of fixed maturity securities were $89 million, $54 million and $26 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Explanation of changes in fixed maturity and equity securities impairments are as follows:
Overall OTTI losses recognized in earnings on fixed maturity and equity securities were $172 million for the year ended December 31, 2016 as compared to $91 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. The most significant increases were in U.S. and foreign corporate securities and common stock, which comprised $156 million for the year ended December 31, 2016, as compared to $73 million for the year ended December 31, 2015. An increase of $83 million in OTTI losses on U.S. and foreign corporate securities and common stock was concentrated in industrial securities and was the result of lower oil prices impacting the energy sector.
Future Impairments
Future OTTI will depend primarily on economic fundamentals, issuer performance (including changes in the present value of future cash flows expected to be collected), and changes in credit ratings, collateral valuation, interest rates and credit spreads. If economic fundamentals deteriorate or if there are adverse changes in the above factors, OTTI may be incurred in upcoming periods.

67

FVO and Trading Securities
FVO securities include certain fixed maturity and equity securities held-for-investment by the general account to support ALM strategies for certain insurance products. FVO securities also include securities held by CSEs. Our trading securities portfolio was principally invested in fixed maturity securities to support investment strategies that involved the active and frequent purchase and sale of securities and the execution of short sale agreements. See Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. In 2016, we reinvested our trading securities portfolio into other asset classes and, at December 31, 2016, we no longer held any actively traded securities. FVO and trading securities were $23 million and $431 million at estimated fair value, or 0.0% and 0.2% of total cash and invested assets at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the FVO and trading securities fair value hierarchy and a rollforward of the fair value measurements for FVO and trading securities measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs.
Securities Lending
We participate in a securities lending program whereby securities are loaned to third parties, primarily brokerage firms and commercial banks. We obtain collateral, usually cash, in an amount generally equal to 102% of the estimated fair value of the securities loaned, which is obtained at the inception of a loan and maintained at a level greater than or equal to 100% for the duration of the loan. We monitor the estimated fair value of the securities loaned on a daily basis with additional collateral obtained as necessary throughout the duration of the loan. Securities loaned under such transactions may be sold or re-pledged by the transferee. We are liable to return to our counterparties the cash collateral under our control. Security collateral on deposit from counterparties may not be sold or re-pledged, unless the counterparty is in default, and is not reflected on the consolidated financial statements. These transactions are treated as financing arrangements and the associated cash collateral liability is recorded at the amount of the cash received.
See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Uses — Securities Lending” and Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding our securities lending program.
Mortgage Loans
Our mortgage loans are principally collateralized by commercial, agricultural and residential properties. Mortgage loans and the related valuation allowances are summarized as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
Valuation
Allowance
 
% of
Recorded
Investment
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
Valuation
Allowance
 
% of
Recorded
Investment
 
(Dollars in millions)
Commercial
$
34,008

 
60.4
%
 
$
167

 
0.5
%
 
$
33,440

 
62.3
%
 
$
165

 
0.5
%
Agricultural
12,358

 
22.0

 
38

 
0.3
%
 
11,663

 
21.7

 
37

 
0.3
%
Residential
9,895

 
17.6

 
62

 
0.6
%
 
8,562

 
16.0

 
55

 
0.6
%
Total
$
56,261

 
100.0
%
 
$
267

 
0.5
%
 
$
53,665

 
100.0
%
 
$
257

 
0.5
%
The information presented in the tables herein exclude mortgage loans where we elected the FVO. Such amounts are presented in Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We diversify our mortgage loan portfolio by both geographic region and property type to reduce the risk of concentration. Of our commercial and agricultural mortgage loan portfolios, 87% are collateralized by properties located in the United States, with the remaining 13% collateralized by properties located outside the United States at December 31, 2016. The carrying value of our commercial and agricultural mortgage loans located in California, New York and Texas were 19%, 10% and 8%, respectively, of total commercial and agricultural mortgage loans at December 31, 2016. Additionally, we manage risk when originating commercial and agricultural mortgage loans by generally lending up to 75% of the estimated fair value of the underlying real estate collateral.
We manage our residential mortgage loan portfolio in a similar manner to reduce risk of concentration. All residential mortgage loans were collateralized by properties located in the United States at December 31, 2016. The carrying value of our residential mortgage loans located in California, Florida, and New York were 36%, 9%, and 7%, respectively, of total residential mortgage loans at December 31, 2016.

68

Commercial Mortgage Loans by Geographic Region and Property Type. Commercial mortgage loans are the largest component of the mortgage loan invested asset class. The tables below present the diversification across geographic regions and property types of commercial mortgage loans at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Amount
 
% of
Total
 
Amount
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Region
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Pacific
$
8,053

 
23.7
%
 
$
7,042

 
21.1
%
Middle Atlantic
5,821

 
17.1

 
5,948

 
17.8

International
5,277

 
15.5

 
6,009

 
18.0

South Atlantic
4,644

 
13.7

 
4,792

 
14.3

West South Central
2,964

 
8.7

 
3,217

 
9.6

East North Central
1,646

 
4.8

 
1,648

 
4.9

Mountain
1,123

 
3.3

 
878

 
2.6

New England
967

 
2.8

 
1,113

 
3.3

West North Central
483

 
1.4

 
467

 
1.4

East South Central
327

 
1.0

 
401

 
1.2

Multi-Region and Other
2,703

 
8.0

 
1,925

 
5.8

Total recorded investment
34,008

 
100.0
%
 
33,440

 
100.0
%
Less: valuation allowances
167

 
 
 
165

 
 
Carrying value, net of valuation allowances
$
33,841

 
 
 
$
33,275

 
 
Property Type
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Office
$
17,220

 
50.6
%
 
$
16,414

 
49.1
%
Retail
6,766

 
19.9

 
7,107

 
21.2

Apartment
4,091

 
12.0

 
4,140

 
12.4

Hotel
3,257

 
9.6

 
3,481

 
10.4

Industrial
2,385

 
7.0

 
2,172

 
6.5

Other
289

 
0.9

 
126

 
0.4

Total recorded investment
34,008

 
100.0
%
 
33,440

 
100.0
%
Less: valuation allowances
167

 
 
 
165

 
 
Carrying value, net of valuation allowances
$
33,841

 
 
 
$
33,275

 
 
Mortgage Loan Credit Quality - Monitoring Process. We monitor our mortgage loan investments on an ongoing basis, including a review of loans that are current, past due, restructured and under foreclosure. See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for tables that present mortgage loans by credit quality indicator, past due and nonaccrual mortgage loans, as well as impaired mortgage loans. See “— Real Estate and Real Estate Joint Ventures” for real estate acquired through foreclosure.
We review our commercial mortgage loans on an ongoing basis. These reviews may include an analysis of the property financial statements and rent roll, lease rollover analysis, property inspections, market analysis, estimated valuations of the underlying collateral, loan-to-value ratios, debt service coverage ratios and tenant creditworthiness. The monitoring process focuses on higher risk loans, which include those that are classified as restructured, delinquent or in foreclosure, as well as loans with higher loan-to-value ratios and lower debt service coverage ratios. The monitoring process for agricultural mortgage loans is generally similar, with a focus on higher risk loans, such as loans with higher loan-to-value ratios, including reviews on a geographic and sector basis. We review our residential mortgage loans on an ongoing basis. See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on our evaluation of residential mortgage loans and related valuation allowance methodology.

69

Loan-to-value ratios and debt service coverage ratios are common measures in the assessment of the quality of commercial mortgage loans. Loan-to-value ratios are a common measure in the assessment of the quality of agricultural mortgage loans. Loan-to-value ratios compare the amount of the loan to the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral. A loan-to-value ratio greater than 100% indicates that the loan amount is greater than the collateral value. A loan-to-value ratio of less than 100% indicates an excess of collateral value over the loan amount. Generally, the higher the loan-to-value ratio, the higher the risk of experiencing a credit loss. The debt service coverage ratio compares a property’s net operating income to amounts needed to service the principal and interest due under the loan. Generally, the lower the debt service coverage ratio, the higher the risk of experiencing a credit loss. For our commercial mortgage loans, our average loan-to-value ratio was 52% at both December 31, 2016 and 2015, and our average debt service coverage ratio was 2.6x at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The debt service coverage ratio, as well as the values utilized in calculating the ratio, is updated annually on a rolling basis, with a portion of the portfolio updated each quarter. In addition, the loan-to-value ratio is routinely updated for all but the lowest risk loans as part of our ongoing review of our commercial mortgage loan portfolio. For our agricultural mortgage loans, our average loan-to-value ratio was 43% and 44% at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The values utilized in calculating the agricultural mortgage loan loan-to-value ratio are developed in connection with the ongoing review of the agricultural loan portfolio and are routinely updated.
Mortgage Loan Valuation Allowances. Our valuation allowances are established both on a loan specific basis for those loans considered impaired where a property specific or market specific risk has been identified that could likely result in a future loss, as well as for pools of loans with similar risk characteristics where a property specific or market specific risk has not been identified, but for which we expect to incur a loss. Accordingly, a valuation allowance is provided to absorb these estimated probable credit losses.
The determination of the amount of valuation allowances is based upon our periodic evaluation and assessment of known and inherent risks associated with our loan portfolios. Such evaluations and assessments are based upon several factors, including our experience for loan losses, defaults and loss severity, and loss expectations for loans with similar risk characteristics. These evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available, which can cause the valuation allowances to increase or decrease over time as such evaluations are revised. Negative credit migration, including an actual or expected increase in the level of problem loans, will result in an increase in the valuation allowance. Positive credit migration, including an actual or expected decrease in the level of problem loans, will result in a decrease in the valuation allowance.
See Notes 1, 8 and 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about how valuation allowances are established and monitored, activity in and balances of the valuation allowance, and the estimated fair value of impaired mortgage loans and related impairments included within net investment gains (losses) as of and for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014.
Real Estate and Real Estate Joint Ventures
We diversify our real estate investments by both geographic region and property type to reduce risk of concentration. Of our real estate investments, excluding funds, 99% were located in the United States, with the remaining 1% located outside the United States at December 31, 2016. The carrying value of our real estate investments, excluding funds, located in California, the District of Columbia and Georgia were 23%, 13% and 11%, respectively, of total real estate investments, excluding funds, at December 31, 2016. Real estate funds, including those classified within traditional, were 14% of our real estate investments at December 31, 2016. The majority of these funds hold underlying real estate investments that are well diversified across the United States.

70

Real estate investments by type consisted of the following at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Traditional
$
6,131

 
96.0
%
 
$
5,584

 
92.9
%
Real estate joint ventures and funds
199

 
3.1

 
342

 
5.7

Subtotal
6,330

 
99.1

 
5,926

 
98.6

Foreclosed (commercial, agricultural and residential)
56

 
0.9

 
40

 
0.7

Real estate held-for-investment
6,386

 
100.0

 
5,966

 
99.3

Real estate held-for-sale
—

 
—

 
42

 
0.7

Total real estate and real estate joint ventures
$
6,386

 
100.0
%
 
$
6,008

 
100.0
%
We classify within traditional, in the table above, income-producing real estate, which is comprised of wholly-owned real estate and joint ventures with interests in single property income-producing real estate. The estimated fair value of the traditional and held-for-sale real estate investment portfolios was $10.0 billion and $8.7 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
We classify within real estate joint ventures and funds, in the table above, our investment in joint ventures with interests in multi-property projects with varying strategies ranging from the development of properties to the operation of income-producing properties, as well as a runoff portfolio of real estate private equity funds. From time to time, if we intend to retain an interest in the property, we transfer investments from these development joint ventures to traditional real estate after the completed property commences operations.
Impairments recognized on real estate and real estate joint ventures were $0, $34 million and $9 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Depreciation expense on real estate investments was $68 million, $131 million and $160 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Real estate investments were net of accumulated depreciation of $597 million and $572 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
We diversify our real estate investments by both geographic region and property type to reduce risk of concentration.
Real estate and real estate joint venture investments by property type are categorized by sector as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Office
$
2,185

 
34.2
%
 
$
1,998

 
33.3
%
Apartment
1,302

 
20.4

 
1,408

 
23.4

Real estate investment funds
801

 
12.6

 
469

 
7.8

Retail
544

 
8.5

 
609

 
10.1

Hotel
466

 
7.3

 
504

 
8.4

Industrial
446

 
7.0

 
455

 
7.6

Land
288

 
4.5

 
219

 
3.6

Agriculture
40

 
0.6

 
15

 
0.3

Other
314

 
4.9

 
331

 
5.5

Total real estate and real estate joint ventures
$
6,386

 
100.0
%
 
$
6,008

 
100.0
%

71

Other Limited Partnership Interests
Other limited partnership interests are comprised of private equity funds and hedge funds. The carrying value of other limited partnership interests was $3.7 billion and $4.1 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, which included $532 million and $835 million of hedge funds, at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Cash distributions on these investments are generated from investment gains, operating income from the underlying investments of the funds and liquidation of the underlying investments of the funds. We estimate that the underlying investments of the funds will be liquidated over the next two to 10 years.
Other Invested Assets
The following table presents the carrying value of our other invested assets by type at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
 
Freestanding derivatives with positive estimated fair values
$
8,728

 
50.6
%
 
$
8,146

 
48.3
%
 
Tax credit and renewable energy partnerships
3,128

 
18.2

 
3,053

 
18.1

 
Loans to affiliates
2,262

 
13.1

 
2,371

 
14.1

 
Leveraged leases, net of non-recourse debt
1,289

 
7.5

 
1,378

 
8.2

 
Annuities funding structured settlement claims
1,288

 
7.5

 
1,298

 
7.7

 
Direct financing leases
215

 
1.2

 
274

 
1.6

 
Funds withheld
151

 
0.9

 
155

 
0.9

 
Operating joint venture
96

 
0.6

 
142

 
0.8

 
Other
75

 
0.4

 
52

 
0.3

 
Total
$
17,232

 
100.0
%
 
$
16,869

 
100.0
%
Leveraged lease impairments were $36 million, $41 million and $80 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
See Notes 8 and 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding tax credit partnerships, leveraged and direct financing leases, loans to affiliates, annuities funding structured settlement claims and freestanding derivatives with positive estimated fair values, respectively. See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information about tax credit and renewable energy partnerships, funds withheld, loans to affiliates and operating joint venture.
Derivatives
Derivative Risks
We are exposed to various risks relating to our ongoing business operations, including interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate, credit and equity market. We use a variety of strategies to manage these risks, including the use of derivatives. See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for:
•
A comprehensive description of the nature of our derivatives, including the strategies for which derivatives are used in managing various risks.
•
Information about the gross notional amount, estimated fair value, and primary underlying risk exposure of our derivatives by type of hedge designation, excluding embedded derivatives held at December 31, 2016 and 2015.
•
The statement of operations effects of derivatives in cash flow, fair value, or nonqualifying hedge relationships for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014.
See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk — Management of Market Risk Exposures — Hedging Activities” for more information about our use of derivatives by major hedge program.

72

Fair Value Hierarchy
See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for derivatives measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding fair value hierarchy.
The valuation of Level 3 derivatives involves the use of significant unobservable inputs and generally requires a higher degree of management judgment or estimation than the valuations of Level 1 and Level 2 derivatives. Although Level 3 inputs are unobservable, management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments and are considered appropriate given the circumstances. The use of different inputs or methodologies could have a material effect on the estimated fair value of Level 3 derivatives and could materially affect net income.
Derivatives categorized as Level 3 at December 31, 2016 include: interest rate forwards with maturities which extend beyond the observable portion of the yield curve; interest rate total return swaps with unobservable repurchase rates; credit default swaps priced using unobservable credit spreads, or that are priced through independent broker quotations; equity variance swaps with unobservable volatility inputs; and equity index options with unobservable correlation inputs. At December 31, 2016, less than 1% of the estimated fair value of our derivatives was priced through independent broker quotations.
See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a rollforward of the fair value measurements for derivatives measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs.
See “— Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives” for further information on the estimates and assumptions that affect derivatives.
Credit Risk
See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about how we manage credit risk related to derivatives and for the estimated fair value of our net derivative assets and net derivative liabilities after the application of master netting agreements and collateral.
Our policy is not to offset the fair value amounts recognized for derivatives executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement. This policy applies to the recognition of derivatives on the consolidated balance sheets, and does not affect our legal right of offset.
Credit Derivatives
The following table presents the gross notional amount and estimated fair value of credit default swaps at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
Credit Default Swaps
 
Gross Notional Amount
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Gross Notional Amount
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
 
(In millions)
Purchased (1)
 
$
961

 
$
6

 
$
819

 
$
20

Written (2)
 
8,025

 
111

 
6,577

 
40

Total
 
$
8,986

 
$
117

 
$
7,396

 
$
60

__________________
(1)
At December 31, 2016, the Company no longer maintained a trading portfolio for derivatives. At December 31, 2015, the gross notional amount and estimated fair value for purchased credit default swaps in the trading portfolio were $175 million and ($2) million, respectively.
(2)
At December 31, 2016, the Company no longer maintained a trading portfolio for derivatives. At December 31, 2015, the gross notional amount and estimated fair value for written credit default swaps in the trading portfolio were $20 million and ($2) million, respectively.

73

The following table presents the gross gains, gross losses and net gain (losses) recognized in income for credit default swaps as follows: 
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
Credit Default Swaps
 
Gross
Gains 
(1)
 
Gross
Losses 
(1)
 
Net
Gains
(Losses)
 
Gross
Gains 
(1)
 
Gross
Losses 
(1)
 
Net
Gains
(Losses)
 
 
(In millions)
Purchased (2), (4)
 
$
7

 
$
(30
)
 
$
(23
)
 
$
26

 
$
(12
)
 
$
14

Written (3), (4)
 
67

 
(19
)
 
48

 
21

 
(78
)
 
(57
)
Total
 
$
74

 
$
(49
)
 
$
25

 
$
47

 
$
(90
)
 
$
(43
)
__________________
(1)
Gains (losses) are reported in net derivative gains (losses), except for gains (losses) on the trading portfolio, which are reported in net investment income.
(2)
The gross gains and gross (losses) for purchased credit default swaps in the trading portfolio were $4 million and ($4) million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2016, and $8 million and ($11) million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2015.
(3)
The gross gains and gross (losses) for written credit default swaps in the trading portfolio were $3 million and ($3) million, respectively, for both of the years ended December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.
(4)
Gains (losses) do not include earned income (expense) on credit default swaps.
The unfavorable change in net gains (losses) on purchased credit default swaps of ($37) million was due to certain credit spreads on credit default swaps hedging certain bonds narrowing in the current period as compared to the prior period. The favorable change in net gains (losses) on written credit default swaps of $105 million was due to certain credit spreads on certain credit default swaps used as replications, narrowing in the current period as compared to the prior period.
The maximum amount at risk related to our written credit default swaps is equal to the corresponding gross notional amount. In a replication transaction, we pair an asset on our balance sheet with a written credit default swap to synthetically replicate a corporate bond, a core asset holding of life insurance companies. Replications are entered into in accordance with the guidelines approved by state insurance regulators and the NAIC and are an important tool in managing the overall corporate credit risk within the Company. In order to match our long-dated insurance liabilities, we seek to buy long-dated corporate bonds. In some instances, these may not be readily available in the market, or they may be issued by corporations to which we already have significant corporate credit exposure. For example, by purchasing Treasury bonds (or other high-quality assets) and associating them with written credit default swaps on the desired corporate credit name, we can replicate the desired bond exposures and meet our ALM needs. In addition, given the shorter tenor of the credit default swaps (generally five-year tenors) versus a long-dated corporate bond, we have more flexibility in managing our credit exposures.
Embedded Derivatives
See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about embedded derivatives measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding fair value hierarchy.
See Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a rollforward of the fair value measurements for embedded derivatives measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs.
See Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information about the nonperformance risk adjustment included in the valuation of guaranteed minimum benefits accounted for as embedded derivatives.
See “— Summary of Critical Accounting Estimates — Derivatives” for further information on the estimates and assumptions that affect embedded derivatives.

74

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
Credit and Committed Facilities
In addition to the Credit Facility, Missouri Reinsurance, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, has access to a committed bank facility of MetLife, Inc. which provides letters of credit for the benefit of certain affiliates of MetLife, Inc., including Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and certain of its subsidiaries, subject to bank consent. These letters of credit are used for collateral for certain of our affiliated reinsurance liabilities (the “Committed Facility”). The Committed Facility matures on June 20, 2018. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Sources — Global Funding Sources — Credit and Committed Facilities” and Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further descriptions of such arrangements, the classification of expenses on the Credit Facility and the Committed Facility and the nature of the associated liability for letters of credit issued and drawdowns on such facilities.
Collateral for Securities Lending and Derivatives
We participate in a securities lending program in the normal course of business for the purpose of enhancing the total return on our investment portfolio. Periodically, we receive non-cash collateral for securities lending from counterparties on deposit from customers, which cannot be sold or re-pledged, and which has not been recorded on our consolidated balance sheets. The amount of this collateral was $14 million and $22 million at estimated fair value at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. See Notes 1 and 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, as well as “— Investments — Securities Lending” for discussion of our securities lending program, the classification of revenues and expenses, and the nature of the secured financing arrangement and associated liability.
We enter into derivatives to manage various risks relating to our ongoing business operations. We have non-cash collateral from counterparties for derivatives, which can be sold or re-pledged subject to certain constraints, and which has not been recorded on our consolidated balance sheets. The amount of this non-cash collateral was $1.6 billion and $1.4 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Liquidity and Capital Uses — Pledged Collateral” and Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding the earned income on and the gross notional amount, estimated fair value of assets and liabilities and primary underlying risk exposure of our derivatives.
Lease Commitments
As lessee, we have entered into various lease and sublease agreements for office space, information technology and other equipment. Our commitments under such lease agreements are included within the contractual obligations table. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Contractual Obligations” and Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Guarantees
See “Guarantees” in Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other
Additionally, we enter into the following commitments in the normal course of business for the purpose of enhancing the total return on our investment portfolio: mortgage loan commitments and commitments to fund partnerships, bank credit facilities, bridge loans and private corporate bond investments. See “Net Investment Income” and “Net Investment Gains (Losses)” in Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information on the investment income, investment expense, gains and losses from such investments. See also “— Investments — Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS” and “— Investments — Mortgage Loans” for information on our investments in fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans. See “— Investments — Real Estate and Real Estate Joint Ventures” and “— Investments — Other Limited Partnership Interests” for information on our partnership investments.
Other than the commitments disclosed in Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, there are no other material obligations or liabilities arising from the commitments to fund mortgage loans, partnerships, bank credit facilities, bridge loans, and private corporate bond investments. For further information on commitments to fund partnership investments, mortgage loans, bank credit facilities, bridge loans and private corporate bond investments. See “— Liquidity and Capital Resources — Contractual Obligations.”
Insolvency Assessments
See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

75

Liquidity and Capital Resources
Overview
Our business and results of operations are materially affected by conditions in the global capital markets and the economy generally. Stressed conditions, volatility and disruptions in global capital markets, particular markets, or financial asset classes can have an adverse effect on us, in part because we have a large investment portfolio and our insurance liabilities and derivatives are sensitive to changing market factors. The global markets and economy continue to experience volatility that may affect our financing costs and market interest for our debt securities. For further information regarding market factors that could affect our ability to meet liquidity and capital needs, see “— Investments — Current Environment.”
Liquidity Management
Based upon the strength of our franchise, diversification of our businesses, strong financial fundamentals and the substantial funding sources available to us as described herein, we continue to believe we have access to ample liquidity to meet business requirements under current market conditions and reasonably possible stress scenarios. We continuously monitor and adjust our liquidity and capital plans for Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its subsidiaries in light of market conditions, as well as changing needs and opportunities.
Short-term Liquidity
We maintain a substantial short-term liquidity position, which was $3.3 billion and $2.7 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Short-term liquidity includes cash and cash equivalents and short-term investments, excluding assets that are pledged or otherwise committed, including amounts received in connection with securities lending, derivatives, and secured borrowings, as well as amounts held in the closed block.
Liquid Assets
An integral part of our liquidity management includes managing our level of liquid assets, which was $83.2 billion and $92.0 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Liquid assets include cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments and publicly-traded securities, excluding assets that are pledged or otherwise committed. Assets pledged or otherwise committed include amounts received in connection with securities lending, derivatives, regulatory deposits, and funding agreements, as well as amounts held in the closed block.
Liquidity
Liquidity refers to the ability to generate adequate amounts of cash to meet our needs. We determine our liquidity needs based on a rolling 12-month forecast by portfolio of invested assets which we monitor daily. We adjust the asset mix and asset maturities based on this rolling 12-month forecast. To support this forecast, we conduct cash flow and stress testing, which include various scenarios of the potential risk of early contractholder and policyholder withdrawal. We include provisions limiting withdrawal rights on many of our products, including general account pension products sold to employee benefit plan sponsors. Certain of these provisions prevent the customer from making withdrawals prior to the maturity date of the product. In the event of significant cash requirements beyond anticipated liquidity needs, we have various alternatives available depending on market conditions and the amount and timing of the liquidity need. These available alternatives include cash flows from operations, sales of liquid assets, global funding sources, including commercial paper, and credit and committed facilities.
Under certain stressful market and economic conditions, our access to liquidity may deteriorate, or the cost to access liquidity may increase. If we require significant amounts of cash on short notice in excess of anticipated cash requirements or if we are required to post or return cash collateral in connection with derivatives or our securities lending program, we may have difficulty selling investments in a timely manner, be forced to sell them for less than we otherwise would have been able to realize, or both. In addition, in the event of such forced sale, for securities in an unrealized loss position, realized losses would be incurred on securities sold and impairments would be incurred, if there is a need to sell securities prior to recovery, which may negatively impact our financial condition. See “Risk Factors — Investment-Related Risks — Should the Need Arise, We May Have Difficulty Selling Certain Holdings in Our Investment Portfolio or in Our Securities Lending Program in a Timely Manner and Realizing Full Value Given Their Illiquid Nature, and Our Requirements to Pledge Collateral in Derivatives Transactions May Adversely Affect Our Liquidity.”
In extreme circumstances, all general account assets within a particular legal entity — other than those which may have been pledged to a specific purpose — are available to fund obligations of the general account of that legal entity.

76

Capital
We manage our capital position to maintain our financial strength and credit ratings. Our capital position is supported by our ability to generate strong cash flows within our operating companies and borrow funds at competitive rates, as well as by our demonstrated ability to raise additional capital to meet operating and growth needs despite adverse market and economic conditions.
Rating Agencies
Rating agencies assign insurer financial strength ratings to certain of MetLife, Inc.’s life insurance subsidiaries, including us, and credit ratings to MetLife, Inc. and certain of its subsidiaries, including us. Financial strength ratings represent the opinion of rating agencies regarding the ability of an insurance company to pay obligations under insurance policies and contracts in accordance with their terms. Credit ratings indicate the rating agency’s opinion regarding a debt issuer’s ability to meet the terms of debt obligations in a timely manner. They are important factors in our overall funding profile and ability to access certain types of liquidity. The level and composition of regulatory capital of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company are among the many factors considered in determining our insurer financial strength ratings and credit ratings. Each agency has its own capital adequacy evaluation methodology, and assessments are generally based on a combination of factors. In addition to heightening the level of scrutiny that they apply to insurance companies, rating agencies have increased and may continue to increase the frequency and scope of their credit reviews, may request additional information from the companies that they rate and may adjust upward the capital and other requirements employed in the rating agency models for maintenance of certain ratings levels. See “Business — Company Ratings” for further information on our insurer financial strength ratings.
Downgrades in our insurer financial strength or credit ratings, MetLife, Inc.’s credit ratings or changes to our or MetLife, Inc.’s ratings outlooks could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations in many ways, See “Risk Factors — Risks Related to Our Business — A Downgrade or a Potential Downgrade in Our Financial Strength or Credit Ratings or MetLife, Inc.’s Credit Ratings Could Result in a Loss of Business and Materially Adversely Affect Our Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” “— Liquidity and Capital Uses — Pledged Collateral” and Note 9 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Statutory Capital and Dividends
We have statutory surplus and RBC levels well above levels to meet current regulatory requirements.
RBC requirements are used as minimum capital requirements by the NAIC and the state insurance departments to identify companies that merit regulatory action. RBC is based on a formula calculated by applying factors to various asset, premium, claim, expense and statutory reserve items. The formula takes into account the risk characteristics of the insurer, including asset risk, insurance risk, interest rate risk, market risk and business risk and is calculated on an annual basis. The formula is used as an early warning regulatory tool to identify possible inadequately capitalized insurers for purposes of initiating regulatory action, and not as a means to rank insurers generally. These rules apply to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. State insurance laws provide insurance regulators the authority to require various actions by, or take various actions against, insurers whose total adjusted capital does not meet or exceed certain RBC levels. At the date of the most recent annual statutory financial statements filed with insurance regulators, the total adjusted capital of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company was in excess of each of those RBC levels.
The amount of the dividend that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company can pay to MetLife, Inc. is constrained by the amount of surplus Metropolitan Life Insurance Company holds to maintain its ratings and provides an additional margin for risk protection and investment in MLIC’s businesses. We proactively take actions to maintain capital consistent with these ratings objectives, which may include adjusting dividend amounts and deploying financial resources from internal or external sources of capital. Certain of these activities may require regulatory approval. See Note 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

77

Affiliated Captive Reinsurance Transactions
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company cedes specific policy classes, including ordinary life insurance, participating whole life insurance, long-term disability insurance and group life insurance, to a wholly-owned captive reinsurer. The wholly-owned captive reinsurer currently only reinsures Metropolitan Life Insurance Company business and the results of the captive reinsurer are eliminated within our consolidated results of operations. In addition, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company reinsures specific policy classes, including term life insurance, universal life insurance and ordinary and industrial life insurance, to other affiliated captive reinsurers. The statutory reserves of such affiliated captive reinsurers are supported by a combination of funds withheld assets, investment assets and letters of credit issued by unaffiliated financial institutions. MetLife, Inc. has committed to maintain the surplus of certain of these domestic affiliated captive reinsurers, as well as provided a guarantee of one such captive reinsurer’s repayment obligations on the letters of credit. MetLife, Inc. has also provided a guarantee of a captive reinsurer’s payment obligations on a retrocession agreement entered into by the captive. We enter into reinsurance agreements with affiliated captive reinsurers for risk and capital management purposes, as well as to manage statutory reserve requirements related to universal life and term life insurance policies.
The NAIC continues to review insurance companies’ use of affiliated captive reinsurers and off-shore entities. The NYDFS continues to have a moratorium on new reserve financing transactions involving captive insurers. We are not aware of any states other than New York and California implementing such a moratorium. While such a moratorium would not impact our existing reinsurance agreements with captive reinsurers, a moratorium placed on the use of captives for new reserve financing transactions could impact our ability to write certain products and/or impact our RBC ratio and ability to deploy excess capital in the future. This could result in our need to increase prices, modify product features or limit the availability of those products to our customers. While this affects insurers across the industry, it could adversely impact our competitive position and our results of operations in the future. We continue to evaluate product modifications, pricing structure and alternative means of managing risks, capital and statutory reserves and we expect the discontinued use of captive reinsurance on new reserve financing transactions would not have a material impact on our future consolidated financial results.
Our variable annuity guaranteed minimum benefit risk and certain other risks were previously ceded to an affiliated captive reinsurer. In November 2014, this captive reinsurer merged with and into Brighthouse Insurance, further reducing the Company’s exposure to and use of captive reinsurers. See “Risk Factors — Regulatory and Legal Risks — Our Insurance Businesses Are Highly Regulated, and Changes in Regulation and in Supervisory and Enforcement Policies May Reduce Our Profitability and Limit Our Growth — Insurance Regulation” and Note 6 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on our reinsurance activities.

78

Summary of Primary Sources and Uses of Liquidity and Capital
Our primary sources and uses of liquidity and capital are summarized as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Sources:
 
 
 
 
 
Operating activities, net
$
5,804

 
$
5,266

 
$
6,201

Investing activities, net
—

 
2,143

 
—

Changes in policyholder account balances, net
3,710

 
—

 
3,692

Changes in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions, net
—

 
—

 
3,071

Long-term debt issued
45

 
907

 
4

Other, net
24

 
2

 
2

Total sources
9,583

 
8,318

 
12,970

Uses:
 
 
 
 
 
Investing activities, net
3,662

 
—

 
10,433

Changes in policyholder account balances, net
—

 
1,032

 
—

Changes in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions, net
696

 
2,230

 
—

Net change in short-term debt
—

 
—

 
320

Long-term debt repaid
58

 
673

 
390

Financing element on certain derivative instruments, net
321

 
66

 
224

Cash paid in connection with noncontrolling interests
—

 
159

 
—

Dividends of subsidiaries
115

 
—

 
—

Dividends paid to MetLife, Inc.
3,600

 
1,489

 
708

Returns of capital
68

 
11

 
—

Total uses
8,520

 
5,660

 
12,075

Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents
$
1,063

 
$
2,658

 
$
895

Cash Flows from Operations
The principal cash inflows from our insurance activities come from insurance premiums, net investment income, annuity considerations and deposit funds. The principal cash outflows are the result of various life insurance, annuity and pension products, operating expenses and income tax, as well as interest expense. A primary liquidity concern with respect to these cash flows is the risk of early contractholder and policyholder withdrawal.
Cash Flows from Investments
The principal cash inflows from our investment activities come from repayments of principal, proceeds from maturities and sales of investments and settlements of freestanding derivatives. The principal cash outflows relate to purchases of investments, issuances of policy loans and settlements of freestanding derivatives. We typically have a net cash outflow from investing activities because cash inflows from insurance operations are reinvested in accordance with our ALM discipline to fund insurance liabilities. We closely monitor and manage these risks through our comprehensive investment risk management process. The primary liquidity concerns with respect to these cash flows are the risk of default by debtors and market disruption.
Cash Flows from Financing
The principal cash inflows from our financing activities come from issuances of debt, deposits of funds associated with policyholder account balances and lending of securities. The principal cash outflows come from repayments of debt, payments of dividends on Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s common stock, withdrawals associated with policyholder account balances and the return of securities on loan. The primary liquidity concern with respect to these cash flows is the risk of early contractholder and policyholder withdrawal.

79

Liquidity and Capital Sources
In addition to the general description of liquidity and capital sources in “— Summary of Primary Sources and Uses of Liquidity and Capital,” the following additional information is provided regarding our primary sources of liquidity and capital:
Global Funding Sources
Liquidity is provided by a variety of global funding sources, including funding agreements, credit facilities and commercial paper. Capital is provided by a variety of global funding sources, including short-term and long-term debt. The diversity of our global funding sources enhances our funding flexibility, limits dependence on any one market or source of funds and generally lowers the cost of funds. Our primary global funding sources include:
Commercial Paper, Reported in Short-term Debt
MetLife Funding and MetLife, Inc. each have a commercial paper program that is supported by the Credit Facility (see “— Credit and Committed Facilities”). MetLife Funding raises cash from its commercial paper program and uses the proceeds to extend loans through MetLife Credit Corp., another subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, to affiliates in order to enhance the financial flexibility and liquidity of these companies.
Federal Home Loan Bank Funding Agreements, Reported in Policyholder Account Balances
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former insurance subsidiary, GALIC, are members of regional FHLBs. During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we issued $16.6 billion, $17.5 billion and $9.7 billion, respectively, and repaid $14.8 billion, $17.7 billion and $9.9 billion, respectively, under funding agreements with certain regional FHLBs. In December 2016, $625 million of funding agreement obligations were deconsolidated due to the disposition of GALIC. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, total obligations outstanding under these funding agreements were $14.4 billion and $13.3 billion, respectively. See Note 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Special Purpose Entity Funding Agreements, Reported in Policyholder Account Balances
We issue fixed and floating rate funding agreements, which are denominated in either U.S. dollars or foreign currencies, to certain SPEs that have issued either debt securities or commercial paper for which payment of interest and principal is secured by such funding agreements. During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we issued $39.7 billion, $35.1 billion and $36.7 billion, respectively, and repaid $38.5 billion, $35.5 billion and $31.7 billion, respectively, under such funding agreements. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, total obligations outstanding under these funding agreements were $30.8 billion and $29.5 billion, respectively. See Note 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation Funding Agreements, Reported in Policyholder Account Balances
We have issued funding agreements to a subsidiary of Farmer Mac, as well as to certain SPEs that have issued debt securities for which payment of interest and principal is secured by such funding agreements, and such debt securities are also guaranteed as to payment of interest and principal by Farmer Mac. The obligations under all such funding agreements are secured by a pledge of certain eligible agricultural mortgage loans. During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, we issued $1.2 billion, $50 million and $200 million, respectively, and repaid $1.2 billion, $50 million and $200 million, respectively, under such funding agreements. At both December 31, 2016 and 2015, total obligations outstanding under these funding agreements were $2.6 billion. See Note 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Debt Issuances
In December 2015, MetLife Private Equity Holdings, LLC, a wholly-owned indirect investment subsidiary of MLIC, borrowed $350 million under term loans that mature in December 2020. See Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Credit and Committed Facilities
MetLife Funding and MetLife, Inc. maintain the Credit Facility. When drawn upon, this facility bears interest at varying rates in accordance with the agreement.
The Credit Facility is used for general corporate purposes, to support the borrowers’ commercial paper programs and for the issuance of letters of credit. At December 31, 2016, we had outstanding $202 million in letters of credit and no drawdowns against this facility, and an affiliate had $528 million in letters of credit outstanding against this facility. Remaining availability was $3.3 billion at December 31, 2016.

80

In December 2016, MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding entered into an agreement to amend the Credit Facility, which provides, among other things, that the facility will be amended and restated upon the completion of the proposed Separation and the satisfaction of certain other conditions. As amended and restated, the unsecured revolving credit facility will provide for borrowings and the issuance of letters of credit in an aggregate amount of up to $3.0 billion. All borrowings under this amended unsecured revolving credit facility must be repaid by December 20, 2021, except that letters of credit outstanding upon termination may remain outstanding until December 20, 2022.
The Committed Facility is used for collateral for certain of our affiliated reinsurance liabilities. When drawn upon, this facility bears interest at varying rates in accordance with the agreement. We had $255 million in letters of credit outstanding and there was no remaining availability under the facility at December 31, 2016. The Committed Facility matures on June 20, 2018.
See Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information about these facilities.
We have no reason to believe that our lending counterparties will be unable to fulfill their respective contractual obligations under these facilities. As commitments associated with letters of credit and financing arrangements may expire unused, these amounts do not necessarily reflect our actual future cash funding requirements.
Outstanding Debt Under Global Funding Sources
The following table summarizes our outstanding debt at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Short-term debt
$
100

 
$
100

Long-term debt (1), (2)
$
1,577

 
$
1,692

______________
(1)
Net of $12 million of unamortized issuance costs, which were reported in other assets at December 31, 2015.
(2)
Excludes $12 million and $11 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, of long-term debt relating to CSEs — FVO (see Note 10 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements). For more information regarding long-term debt, see Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
(3)
Includes $366 million and $451 million of non-recourse debt at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, for which creditors have no access, subject to customary exceptions, to the general assets of the Company other than recourse to certain investment subsidiaries.
Debt and Facility Covenants
Certain of our debt instruments and the Credit Facility contain various administrative, reporting, legal and financial covenants. We believe we were in compliance with all applicable covenants at December 31, 2016.
Liquidity and Capital Uses
In addition to the general description of liquidity and capital uses in “— Summary of Primary Sources and Uses of Liquidity and Capital” and “— Contractual Obligations,” the following additional information is provided regarding our primary uses of liquidity and capital:
Dividends
During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company paid cash dividends to MetLife, Inc. of $3.6 billion, $1.5 billion and $708 million, respectively. Also, during the year ended December 31, 2016, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company distributed to MetLife, Inc. as a non-cash extraordinary dividend all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC. The net book value of NELICO and GALIC at the time of the dividend was $2.9 billion, which was recorded as a dividend of retained earnings of $2.7 billion and a decrease to other comprehensive income of $254 million, net of income tax. During the year ended December 31, 2014, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of its wholly-owned, broker-dealer subsidiary, NES. The net book value of NES at the time of the dividend was $35 million. See Notes 3 and 12 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

81

Debt Repayments
See Note 11 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for further information on long-term and short-term debt, including:
•
In December 2016, the $107 million 7.625% surplus notes were deconsolidated due to the disposition of GALIC;
•
In December 2015, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $110 million of its mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2016;
•
In November 2015, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $188 million of surplus notes issued to MetLife Mexico S.A., an affiliate;
•
In November 2015, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $200 million of surplus notes;
•
During 2015, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $132 million of its 7.26% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2020;
•
In November 2014, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $60 million of its 7.01% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2020;
•
In November 2014, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $60 million of its 4.67% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2017; and
•
In September 2014, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $217 million of surplus notes issued to MetLife Mexico S.A.
Support Agreements
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a party to a capital support commitment with its subsidiary, MetLife Funding. Under the arrangement, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has agreed to cause such entity to meet specified capital requirements. We anticipate that in the event that this arrangement places demands upon us, there will be sufficient liquidity and capital to enable us to meet anticipated demands.
Insurance Liabilities
Liabilities arising from our insurance activities primarily relate to benefit payments under various life insurance, annuity and group pension products, as well as payments for policy surrenders, withdrawals and loans. For annuity or deposit type products, surrender or lapse behavior differs somewhat by segment. In the U.S. segment, which includes individual annuities, lapses and surrenders tend to occur in the normal course of business. During the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, general account surrenders and withdrawals from annuity products were $1.5 billion and $1.6 billion, respectively. In the Retirement and Income Solutions business within the U.S. segment, which includes pension risk transfers, bank-owned life insurance and other fixed annuity contracts, as well as funding agreements and other capital market products, most of the products offered have fixed maturities or fairly predictable surrenders or withdrawals. With regard to the Retirement and Income Solutions business products that provide customers with limited rights to accelerate payments, as of December 31, 2016, there were no funding agreements or other capital market products that could be put back to the Company.
Pledged Collateral
We pledge collateral to, and have collateral pledged to us by, counterparties in connection with our derivatives. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, we had received pledged cash collateral of $4.0 billion and $3.8 billion, respectively. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, we had pledged cash collateral of $226 million and $61 million, respectively. With respect to OTC-bilateral derivatives in a net liability position that have financial strength contingent provisions, a one-notch downgrade in Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s credit or financial strength rating would not have increased our derivative collateral requirements at December 31, 2016.
We pledge collateral from time to time in connection with funding agreements. See Note 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

82

Securities Lending
We participate in a securities lending program whereby securities are loaned to third parties, primarily brokerage firms and commercial banks. We obtain collateral, usually cash, from the borrower, which must be returned to the borrower when the loaned securities are returned to us. Under our securities lending program, we were liable for cash collateral under our control of $16.8 billion and $18.1 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Of these amounts, $4.0 billion and $6.3 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, were on open, meaning that the related loaned security could be returned to us on the next business day requiring the immediate return of cash collateral we hold. The estimated fair value of the securities on loan related to the cash collateral on open at December 31, 2016 was $4.0 billion, all of which were U.S. government and agency securities which, if put to us, could be immediately sold to satisfy the cash requirements to immediately return the cash collateral. See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Litigation
Putative or certified class action litigation and other litigation, and claims and assessments against us, in addition to those discussed elsewhere herein and those otherwise provided for on the consolidated financial statements, have arisen in the course of our business, including, but not limited to, in connection with our activities as an insurer, investor and taxpayer. Further, state insurance regulatory authorities and other federal and state authorities regularly make inquiries and conduct investigations concerning our compliance with applicable insurance and other laws and regulations. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
We establish liabilities for litigation and regulatory loss contingencies when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. For material matters where a loss is believed to be reasonably possible but not probable, no accrual is made but we disclose the nature of the contingency and an aggregate estimate of the reasonably possible range of loss in excess of amounts accrued, when such an estimate can be made. It is not possible to predict or determine the ultimate outcome of all pending investigations and legal proceedings. In some of the matters referred to herein, very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Although in light of these considerations, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain cases could have a material adverse effect upon our financial position, based on information currently known by us, in our opinion, the outcome of such pending investigations and legal proceedings are not likely to have such an effect. However, given the large and/or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters and the inherent unpredictability of litigation, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material adverse effect on our consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.
Contractual Obligations
The following table summarizes our major contractual obligations at December 31, 2016:
 
Total
 
One Year or Less
 
More than One Year to Three Years
 
More than Three Years to Five Years
 
More than Five Years
 
(In millions)
Insurance liabilities
$
218,658

 
$
12,597

 
$
12,113

 
$
11,513

 
$
182,435

Policyholder account balances
125,742

 
21,708

 
23,253

 
10,130

 
70,651

Payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions
20,815

 
20,815

 
—

 
—

 
—

Debt
3,215

 
227

 
212

 
545

 
2,231

Investment commitments
8,125

 
7,893

 
141

 
89

 
2

Operating leases
1,976

 
216

 
404

 
369

 
987

Other
26,198

 
26,088

 
—

 
—

 
110

Total
$
404,729

 
$
89,544

 
$
36,123

 
$
22,646

 
$
256,416


83

Insurance Liabilities
Insurance liabilities include future policy benefits, other policy-related balances, policyholder dividends payable and the policyholder dividend obligation, which are all reported on the consolidated balance sheet and are more fully described in Notes 1 and 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements. The amounts presented reflect future estimated cash payments and (i) are based on mortality, morbidity, lapse and other assumptions comparable with our experience and expectations of future payment patterns; and (ii) consider future premium receipts on current policies in-force. All estimated cash payments presented are undiscounted as to interest, net of estimated future premiums on in-force policies and gross of any reinsurance recoverable. Payment of amounts related to policyholder dividends left on deposit are projected based on assumptions of policyholder withdrawal activity. Because the exact timing and amount of the ultimate policyholder dividend obligation is subject to significant uncertainty and the amount of the policyholder dividend obligation is based upon a long-term projection of the performance of the closed block, we have reflected the obligation at the amount of the liability, if any, presented on the consolidated balance sheet in the more than five years category. Additionally, the more than five years category includes estimated payments due for periods extending for more than 100 years.
The sum of the estimated cash flows of $218.7 billion exceeds the liability amounts of $124.7 billion included on the consolidated balance sheet principally due to (i) the time value of money, which accounts for a substantial portion of the difference; (ii) differences in assumptions, most significantly mortality, between the date the liabilities were initially established and the current date; and (iii) liabilities related to accounting conventions, or which are not contractually due, which are excluded.
Actual cash payments may differ significantly from the liabilities as presented on the consolidated balance sheets and the estimated cash payments as presented due to differences between actual experience and the assumptions used in the establishment of these liabilities and the estimation of these cash payments.
For the majority of our insurance operations, estimated contractual obligations for future policy benefits and policyholder account balances, as presented, are derived from the annual asset adequacy analysis used to develop actuarial opinions of statutory reserve adequacy for state regulatory purposes. These cash flows are materially representative of the cash flows under GAAP. See “— Policyholder Account Balances.”
Policyholder Account Balances
See Notes 1 and 4 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a description of the components of policyholder account balances. See “— Insurance Liabilities” regarding the source and uncertainties associated with the estimation of the contractual obligations related to future policy benefits and policyholder account balances.
Amounts presented represent the estimated cash payments undiscounted as to interest and including assumptions related to the receipt of future premiums and deposits; withdrawals, including unscheduled or partial withdrawals; policy lapses; surrender charges; annuitization; mortality; future interest credited; policy loans and other contingent events as appropriate for the respective product type. Such estimated cash payments are also presented net of estimated future premiums on policies currently in-force and gross of any reinsurance recoverable. For obligations denominated in foreign currencies, cash payments have been estimated using current spot foreign currency rates.
The sum of the estimated cash flows of $125.7 billion exceeds the liability amount of $92.5 billion included on the consolidated balance sheets principally due to (i) the time value of money, which accounts for a substantial portion of the difference; (ii) differences in assumptions, between the date the liabilities were initially established and the current date; and (iii) liabilities related to accounting conventions, or which are not contractually due, which are excluded.
Payables for Collateral Under Securities Loaned and Other Transactions
We have accepted cash collateral in connection with securities lending and derivatives. As the securities lending transactions expire within the next year and the timing of the return of the derivatives collateral is uncertain, the return of the collateral has been included in the one year or less category in the table. We also held non-cash collateral, which is not reflected as a liability on the consolidated balance sheet of $1.6 billion at December 31, 2016.

84

Debt
Amounts presented for debt include short-term debt and long-term debt, the total of which differs from the total of the corresponding amounts presented on the consolidated balance sheet as the amounts presented herein (i) do not include premiums or discounts upon issuance or purchase accounting fair value adjustments; (ii) include future interest on such obligations for the period from January 1, 2017 through maturity; and (iii) do not include $12 million of long-term debt relating to CSEs at December 31, 2016, as such debt does not represent our contractual obligation. Future interest on variable rate debt was computed using prevailing rates at December 31, 2016 and, as such, does not consider the impact of future rate movements. Future interest on fixed rate debt was computed using the stated rate on the obligations. Total debt at December 31, 2016 included affiliated debt obligations of $1.9 billion.
Investment Commitments
To enhance the return on our investment portfolio, we commit to lend funds under mortgage loans, bank credit facilities, bridge loans and private corporate bond investments and we commit to fund partnership investments. In the table, the timing of the funding of mortgage loans and private corporate bond investments is based on the expiration dates of the corresponding commitments. As it relates to commitments to fund partnerships and bank credit facilities, we anticipate that these amounts could be invested any time over the next five years; however, as the timing of the fulfillment of the obligation cannot be predicted, such obligations are generally presented in the one year or less category. Commitments to fund bridge loans are short-term obligations and, as a result, are presented in the one year or less category. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements and “— Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.”
Operating Leases
As a lessee, we have various operating leases, primarily for office space. Contractual provisions exist that could increase or accelerate those lease obligations presented, including various leases with early buyouts and/or escalation clauses. However, the impact of any such transactions would not be material to our financial position or results of operations. See Note 16 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Other
Other obligations presented are principally comprised of amounts due under reinsurance agreements, payables related to securities purchased but not yet settled, securities sold short, accrued interest on debt obligations, estimated fair value of derivative obligations, deferred compensation arrangements, guaranty liabilities, and accruals and accounts payable due under contractual obligations, which are all reported in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. If the timing of any of these other obligations is sufficiently uncertain, the amounts are included within the one year or less category. Items reported in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets that were excluded from the table represent accounting conventions or are not liabilities due under contractual obligations. Unrecognized tax benefits and related accrued interest totaling $1.5 billion was excluded as the timing of payment cannot be reliably determined.
Separate account liabilities are excluded as they are fully funded by cash flows from the corresponding separate account assets and are set equal to the estimated fair value of separate account assets.
We also enter into agreements to purchase goods and services in the normal course of business; however, such amounts are excluded as these purchase obligations were not material to our consolidated results of operations or financial position at December 31, 2016.
Additionally, we have agreements in place for services we provide, generally at cost, to subsidiaries and affiliates relating to insurance, reinsurance, loans and capitalization. Intercompany transactions have been eliminated in consolidation. Intercompany transactions among insurance subsidiaries and affiliates have been approved by the appropriate insurance regulators as required.
Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Future Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements
See Note 1 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

85

Non-GAAP and Other Financial Disclosures
In this report, the Company presents certain measures of its performance that are not calculated in accordance with GAAP. We believe that these non-GAAP financial measures enhance the understanding of our performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of our business.
The following non-GAAP financial measures should not be viewed as substitutes for the most directly comparable financial measures calculated in accordance with GAAP:
Non-GAAP financial measures:
Comparable GAAP financial measures:
(i)
operating revenues
(i)
revenues
(ii)
operating expenses
(ii)
expenses
(iii)
operating earnings
(iii)
income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable historical GAAP measures are included in “— Results of Operations.” Reconciliations of these non-GAAP measures to the most directly comparable GAAP measures is not accessible on a forward-looking basis because we believe it is not possible without unreasonable efforts to provide other than a range of net investment gains and losses and net derivative gains and losses, which can fluctuate significantly within or outside the range and from period to period and may have a material impact on net income.
Our definitions of the various non-GAAP and other financial measures discussed in this report may differ from those used by other companies:
Operating earnings
This measure is used by management to evaluate performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, operating earnings is also our GAAP measure of segment performance. Operating earnings allows analysis of our performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results.
Operating earnings is defined as operating revenues less operating expenses, both net of income tax.
Operating revenues and operating expenses
These financial measures focus on our primary businesses principally by excluding the impact of market volatility, which could distort trends, and revenues and costs related to non-core products and divested businesses and certain entities required to be consolidated under GAAP. Also, these measures exclude results of discontinued operations and other businesses that have been or will be sold or exited by MetLife and are referred to as divested businesses. Operating revenues also excludes net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses).
The following additional adjustments are made to revenues, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating revenues:
•
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees excludes the amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity GMIB fees (“GMIB Fees”); and
•
Net investment income: (i) includes investment hedge adjustments, (ii) includes income from discontinued real estate operations, (iii) excludes post-tax operating earnings adjustments relating to insurance joint ventures accounted for under the equity method, and (iv) excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP.

86

The following additional adjustments are made to expenses, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating expenses:
•
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends excludes: (i) changes in the policyholder dividend obligation related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), (ii) amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets, (iii) benefits and hedging costs related to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”), and (iv) market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”);
•
Interest credited to policyholder account balances includes adjustments for earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of policyholder account balances but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment;
•
Amortization of DAC and VOBA excludes amounts related to: (i) net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), (ii) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs, and (iii) Market Value Adjustments;
•
Interest expense on debt excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP; and
•
Other expenses excludes costs related to noncontrolling interests and goodwill impairments.
The tax impact of the adjustments mentioned above are calculated net of the U.S. or foreign statutory tax rate, which could differ from the Company’s effective tax rate. Additionally, the provision for income tax (expense) benefit also includes the impact related to the timing of certain tax credits, as well as certain tax reforms.
The following additional information is relevant to an understanding of our performance results:
•
We sometimes refer to sales activity for various products. These sales statistics do not correspond to revenues under GAAP, but are used as relevant measures of business activity.
•
Allocated equity is the portion of common stockholders’ equity that MetLife’s management allocates to each of its segments and sub-segments based on local capital requirements and economic capital. See “— Economic Capital.”
Subsequent Events
See Note 19 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

87

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Risk Management
We have developed an integrated process for managing risk, which we conduct through multiple Board and senior management committees (financial and non-financial) within MetLife, Inc.’s GRM, ALM Unit, Treasury Department and Investments Department. The risk committee structure is designed to provide a consolidated enterprise-wide assessment and management of risk. MetLife, Inc.’s Enterprise Risk Committee (“ERC”) is responsible for reviewing all material risks to the enterprise and deciding on actions, if necessary, in the event risks exceed desired tolerances, taking into consideration industry best practices and the current environment to resolve or mitigate those risks. Additional committees at the MetLife, Inc. and subsidiary insurance company level manage capital and risk positions, approve ALM strategies and establish corporate business standards.
Global Risk Management
Independent from the lines of business, the centralized GRM, led by MetLife, Inc.’s Chief Risk Officer (“CRO”) collaborates and coordinates across all committees to ensure that all material risks are properly identified, measured, aggregated, managed and reported across the Company. The CRO reports to MetLife, Inc.’s Chief Executive Officer and is primarily responsible for maintaining and communicating the Company’s enterprise risk policies and for monitoring and analyzing all material risks.
GRM considers and monitors a full range of risks against the Company’s solvency, liquidity, earnings, business operations and reputation. GRM’s primary responsibilities consist of:
•
implementing a corporate risk framework, which outlines MetLife’s approach for managing risk;
•
developing policies and procedures for managing, measuring, monitoring and controlling those risks identified in the corporate risk framework;
•
coordinating Own Risk and Solvency Assessments for the Board, senior management and regulator use;
•
establishing appropriate corporate risk tolerance levels;
•
recommending risk appetite statements and investment general authorizations to the Board;
•
managing capital on an economic basis;
•
recommending capital allocations on an economic capital basis; and
•
reporting to the following committees: (i) the Finance and Risk Committee of MetLife, Inc.’s Board of Directors; (ii) the Investment Committee of MetLife, Inc.’s Board of Directors; (iii) the Compensation Committee of MetLife, Inc.’s Board of Directors; (iv) the Finance Committee of MLIC’s Board of Directors; and (v) the financial and non-financial senior management committees of each of MetLife, Inc. and MLIC on various aspects of risk.
Asset/Liability Management
We actively manage our assets using an approach that balances quality, diversification, asset/liability matching, liquidity, concentration and investment return. The goals of the investment process are to optimize, net of income tax, risk-adjusted investment income and risk-adjusted total return while ensuring that the assets and liabilities are reasonably managed on a cash flow and duration basis. The ALM process is the shared responsibility of the ALM Unit, GRM, the Portfolio Management Unit, and the senior members of MetLife’s business segments and is governed by the ALM Committees. The ALM Committees’ duties include reviewing and approving target portfolios, establishing investment guidelines and limits and providing oversight of the ALM process on a periodic basis. The directives of the ALM Committees are carried out and monitored through ALM Working Groups which are set up by product type. Generally, the ALM Steering Committee oversees the activities of the underlying ALM Committees. The ALM Steering Committee reports to the ERC.
MetLife establishes target asset portfolios for each major insurance product or product group, which represent the investment strategies used to profitably fund our liabilities within acceptable levels of risk. The ALM Working Groups monitor these strategies through regular review of portfolio metrics, such as effective duration, yield curve sensitivity, convexity, liquidity, asset sector concentration and credit quality.

88

Market Risk Exposures
We regularly analyze our exposure to interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate and equity market price risk. As a result of that analysis, we have determined that the estimated fair values of certain assets and liabilities are materially exposed to changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and equity markets. We have exposure to market risk through our insurance operations and investment activities. For purposes of this disclosure, “market risk” is defined as the risk of loss resulting from changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and equity markets.
Interest Rates
Our exposure to interest rate changes results most significantly from our holdings of fixed maturity securities, as well as our interest rate sensitive liabilities. The fixed maturity securities include U.S. and foreign government bonds, securities issued by government agencies, corporate bonds, mortgage-backed securities and ABS, all of which are mainly exposed to changes in medium- and long-term interest rates. The interest rate sensitive liabilities for purposes of this disclosure include debt, policyholder account balances related to certain investment type contracts, and embedded derivatives on variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits which have the same type of interest rate exposure (medium- and long-term interest rates) as fixed maturity securities. See “Risk Factors — Economic Environment and Capital Markets-Related Risks — We Are Exposed to Significant Global Financial and Capital Markets Risks Which May Adversely Affect Our Results of Operations, Financial Condition and Liquidity, and May Cause Our Net Investment Income to Vary from Period to Period.”
Foreign Currency Exchange Rates
Our exposure to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates against the U.S. dollar results from our holdings in non-U.S. dollar denominated fixed maturity and equity securities, mortgage loans, and certain liabilities. The principal currencies that create foreign currency exchange rate risk in our investment portfolios and liabilities are the British pound, the Euro and the Canadian dollar.
Equity Market
Along with investments in equity securities, we have exposure to equity market risk through certain liabilities that involve long-term guarantees on equity performance such as embedded derivatives on variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits and certain policyholder account balances. Equity exposures associated with other limited partnership interests are excluded from this discussion as they are not considered financial instruments under GAAP.
Management of Market Risk Exposures
We use a variety of strategies to manage interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate and equity market risk, including the use of derivatives.
Interest Rate Risk Management
To manage interest rate risk, we analyze interest rate risk using various models, including multi-scenario cash flow projection models that forecast cash flows of the liabilities and their supporting investments, including derivatives. These projections involve evaluating the potential gain or loss on most of our in-force business under various increasing and decreasing interest rate environments. The NYDFS regulations require that we perform some of these analyses annually as part of our review of the sufficiency of our regulatory reserves. For several of our legal entities, we maintain segmented operating and surplus asset portfolios for the purpose of ALM and the allocation of investment income to product lines. For each segment, invested assets greater than or equal to the GAAP liabilities and any non-invested assets allocated to the segment are maintained, with any excess allocated to Corporate & Other. The business segments may reflect differences in legal entity, statutory line of business and any product market characteristic which may drive a distinct investment strategy with respect to duration, liquidity or credit quality of the invested assets. Certain smaller entities make use of unsegmented general accounts for which the investment strategy reflects the aggregate characteristics of liabilities in those entities. We measure relative sensitivities of the value of our assets and liabilities to changes in key assumptions utilizing internal models. These models reflect specific product characteristics and include assumptions based on current and anticipated experience regarding lapse, mortality and interest crediting rates. In addition, these models include asset cash flow projections reflecting interest payments, sinking fund payments, principal payments, bond calls, mortgage loan prepayments and defaults.
We employ product design, pricing and ALM strategies to reduce the potential effects of interest rate movements. Product design and pricing strategies include the use of surrender charges or restrictions on withdrawals in some products and the ability to reset crediting rates for certain products. ALM strategies include the use of derivatives and duration mismatch limits. We also use reinsurance to mitigate interest rate risk.

89

Common industry metrics, such as duration and convexity, are also used to measure the relative sensitivity of assets and liability values to changes in interest rates. In computing the duration of liabilities, consideration is given to all policyholder guarantees and to how we intend to set indeterminate policy elements such as interest credits or dividends. Each asset portfolio has a duration target based on the liability duration and the investment objectives of that portfolio. Where a liability cash flow may exceed the maturity of available assets, we may support such liabilities with equity investments, derivatives or interest rate curve mismatch strategies.
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk Management
MetLife, Inc. has a well-established Enterprise FX (Foreign Exchange) Risk Policy to ensure that we manage foreign currency exchange rate exposures within the Company’s risk tolerance. In general, investments backing specific liabilities are currency matched. This is achieved through direct investments in matching currency or through the use of FX derivatives. Management of each of the Company’s segments, with oversight from the Company’s FX Risk Committee, is responsible for establishing limits and managing any foreign currency exchange rate exposure.
We use foreign currency swaps and forwards to mitigate the liability exposure, risk of loss and financial statement volatility associated with foreign currency denominated fixed income investments and the sale of certain insurance products.
Equity Market Risk Management
We manage equity market risk on an integrated basis with other risks through ALM strategies, including the dynamic hedging of certain variable annuity guarantee benefits, as well as reinsurance, in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to large risks, and provide additional capacity for future growth. We also manage equity market risk exposure in our investment portfolio through the use of derivatives. These derivatives include exchange-traded equity futures, equity index options contracts, total rate of return swaps and equity variance swaps. This risk is managed by the ALM Unit in partnership with the Investments Department.
Hedging Activities
We use derivative contracts primarily to hedge a wide range of risks including interest rate risk, foreign currency exchange rate risk, and equity market risk. Derivative hedges are designed to reduce risk on an economic basis while considering their impact on accounting results and GAAP and statutory capital. Our derivative hedge programs vary depending on the type of risk being hedged. Some hedge programs are asset or liability specific while others are portfolio hedges that reduce risk related to a group of liabilities or assets. Our use of derivatives by major hedge programs is as follows: 
•
Risks Related to Guarantee Benefits — We use a wide range of derivative contracts to mitigate the risk associated with variable annuity living guarantee benefits. These derivatives include equity and interest rate futures, interest rate swaps, currency futures/forwards, equity indexed options, total rate of return swaps, interest rate option contracts, and equity variance swaps.
•
Minimum Interest Rate Guarantees — For certain liability contracts, we provide the contractholder a guaranteed minimum interest rate. These contracts include certain fixed annuities and other insurance liabilities. We purchase interest rate floors to reduce risk associated with these liability guarantees.
•
Reinvestment Risk in Long Duration Liability Contracts — Derivatives are used to hedge interest rate risk related to certain long duration liability contracts. Hedges include interest rate swaps and swaptions.
•
Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Risk — We use currency swaps, forwards and options to hedge foreign currency exchange rate risk. These hedges primarily swap foreign currency denominated bonds or equity market exposures to U.S. dollars.
•
General ALM Hedging Strategies — In the ordinary course of managing our asset/liability risks, we use interest rate futures, interest rate swaps, interest rate caps, interest rate floors and inflation swaps. These hedges are designed to reduce interest rate risk or inflation risk related to the existing assets or liabilities or related to expected future cash flows.

90

Risk Measurement: Sensitivity Analysis
We measure market risk related to our market sensitive assets and liabilities based on changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and equity market prices utilizing a sensitivity analysis. This analysis estimates the potential changes in estimated fair value based on a hypothetical 10% change (increase or decrease) in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates and equity market prices. We believe that a 10% change (increase or decrease) in these market rates and prices is reasonably possible in the near term. In performing the analysis summarized below, we used market rates at December 31, 2016. The sensitivity analysis separately calculates each of our market risk exposures (interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate and equity market) relating to our trading and non-trading assets and liabilities. We modeled the impact of changes in market rates and prices on the estimated fair values of our market sensitive assets and liabilities as follows: 
•
the net present values of our interest rate sensitive exposures resulting from a 10% change (increase or decrease) in interest rates;
•
the U.S. dollar equivalent estimated fair values of our foreign currency exposures due to a 10% change (increase in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to all foreign currencies or decrease in the value of the U.S. dollar compared to all foreign currencies) in foreign currency exchange rates; and
•
the estimated fair value of our equity positions due to a 10% change (increase or decrease) in equity market prices.
The sensitivity analysis is an estimate and should not be viewed as predictive of our future financial performance. We cannot ensure that our actual losses in any particular period will not exceed the amounts indicated in the table below. Limitations related to this sensitivity analysis include: 
•
interest sensitive liabilities do not include $122.3 billion of insurance contracts, which are accounted for on a book value basis. Management believes that the changes in the economic value of those contracts under changing interest rates would offset a significant portion of the fair value changes of interest sensitive assets.
•
the market risk information is limited by the assumptions and parameters established in creating the related sensitivity analysis, including the impact of prepayment rates on mortgage loans;
•
foreign currency risk is not isolated for certain embedded derivatives within host asset and liability contracts, as the risk on these instruments is reflected as equity;
•
for the derivatives that qualify as hedges, the impact on reported earnings may be materially different from the change in market values;
•
the analysis excludes liabilities pursuant to insurance contracts and real estate holdings; and
•
the model assumes that the composition of assets and liabilities remains unchanged throughout the period.
Accordingly, we use such models as tools and not as substitutes for the experience and judgment of our management. Based on our analysis of the impact of a 10% change (increase or decrease) in market rates and prices, we have determined that such a change could have a material adverse effect on the estimated fair value of certain assets and liabilities from interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate and equity market exposures.
The table below illustrates the potential loss in estimated fair value for each market risk exposure of our market sensitive assets and liabilities at:
 
December 31, 2016 (1)
 
(In millions)
Interest rate risk (2)
$
3,517

Foreign currency exchange rate risk (2)
$
284

Equity market risk (2)
$
97

______________
(1)
In 2016, the Company reinvested its trading securities portfolio into other asset classes and, at December 31, 2016, the Company no longer held any actively traded securities. The potential losses in estimated fair value presented are for non-trading securities.
(2)
The risk sensitivities derived used a 10% increase in interest rates, a 10% weakening of the U.S. dollar against foreign currencies, and a 10% decrease in equity prices.

91

The table below provides additional detail regarding the potential loss in estimated fair value of our interest sensitive financial instruments due to a 10% increase in the yield curve by type of asset or liability at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Notional Amount
 
Estimated
Fair
Value (1)
 
Assuming a 10% Increase in the Yield Curve
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
 
$
163,120

 
$
(2,842
)
Equity securities
 
 
$
1,839

 
—

FVO general account securities
 
 
$
15

 
—

Mortgage loans
 
 
$
57,171

 
(467
)
Policy loans
 
 
$
6,953

 
(62
)
Short-term investments
 
 
$
4,690

 
(1
)
Other invested assets
 
 
$
2,302

 
(11
)
Cash and cash equivalents
 
 
$
5,714

 
—

Accrued investment income
 
 
$
2,019

 
—

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
 
 
$
15,789

 
(916
)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)
 
 
$
460

 
(43
)
Total assets
 
 
 
 
$
(4,342
)
Liabilities (3)
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances
 
 
$
74,052

 
$
376

Payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions
 
 
$
20,815

 
—

Short-term debt
 
 
$
100

 
—

Long-term debt
 
 
$
1,755

 
32

Other liabilities
 
 
$
14,814

 
1,134

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)
 
 
$
1,353

 
187

Total liabilities
 
 
 
 
$
1,729

Derivative Instruments
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate and interest rate total return swaps
$
40,997

 
$
4,024

 
$
(662
)
Interest rate floors
$
9,001

 
$
171

 
(20
)
Interest rate caps
$
78,358

 
$
109

 
38

Interest rate futures
$
2,342

 
$
3

 
(10
)
Interest rate options
$
850

 
$
143

 
(31
)
Interest rate forwards
$
4,429

 
$
(373
)
 
(137
)
Synthetic GICs
$
5,566

 
$
—

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
$
29,455

 
$
825

 
(77
)
Foreign currency forwards
$
1,396

 
$
34

 
(1
)
Credit default swaps
$
8,986

 
$
117

 
—

Equity futures
$
1,851

 
$
10

 
—

Equity index options
$
11,119

 
$
(166
)
 
(4
)
Equity variance swaps
$
5,579

 
$
(124
)
 
—

Equity total return swaps
$
1,013

 
$
(41
)
 
—

Total derivative instruments
 
 
 
 
(904
)
Net Change
 
 
 
 
$
(3,517
)
______________
(1)
Separate account assets and liabilities, which are interest rate sensitive, are not included herein as any interest rate risk is borne by the contractholder. FVO general account securities and long-term debt exclude $8 million and $12 million, respectively, related to CSEs. See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding CSEs.
(2)
Embedded derivatives are recognized on the consolidated balance sheet in the same caption as the host contract.

92

(3)
Excludes $122.3 billion of liabilities, at carrying value, pursuant to insurance contracts reported within future policy benefits and other policy-related balances. These liabilities would economically offset a significant portion of the net change in fair value of our financial instruments resulting from a 10% increase in the yield curve.
Sensitivity to rising interest rates increased $416 million, or 13%, to $3.5 billion at December 31, 2016 from $3.1 billion at December 31, 2015. The change was primarily due to an increase of $333 million from the use of derivatives, used by the Company as hedges against low interest rates. Sensitivity also increased as a result of reinsurance activity as well as increased rates, since the sensitivity was calculated based on a 10% increase in the yield curve.

93

The table below provides additional detail regarding the potential loss in estimated fair value of our portfolio due to a 10% decrease in the U.S. dollar compared to all foreign currencies at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Notional Amount
 
Estimated
Fair
Value (1)
 
Assuming a
10% Decrease
in the Foreign
Exchange Rate
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
 
$
163,120

 
$
1,239

Equity securities
 
 
$
1,839

 
—

FVO general account securities
 
 
$
15

 
—

Mortgage loans
 
 
$
57,171

 
389

Policy loans
 
 
$
6,953

 
—

Short-term investments
 
 
$
4,690

 
110

Other invested assets
 
 
$
2,302

 
—

Cash and cash equivalents
 
 
$
5,714

 
—

Accrued investment income
 
 
$
2,019

 
—

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
 
 
$
15,789

 
—

Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)
 
 
$
460

 
—

Total assets
 
 
 
 
$
1,738

Liabilities (3)
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances
 
 
$
74,052

 
$
(1,182
)
Payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions
 
 
$
20,815

 
—

Long-term debt
 
 
$
1,755

 
—

Other liabilities
 
 
$
14,814

 
—

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)
 
 
$
1,353

 
—

Total liabilities
 
 
 
 
$
(1,182
)
Derivative Instruments
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate and interest rate total return swaps
$
40,997

 
$
4,024

 
$
—

Interest rate floors
$
9,001

 
$
171

 
—

Interest rate caps
$
78,358

 
$
109

 
—

Interest rate futures
$
2,342

 
$
3

 
—

Interest rate options
$
850

 
$
143

 
—

Interest rate forwards
$
4,429

 
$
(373
)
 
—

Synthetic GICs
$
5,566

 
$
—

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
$
29,455

 
$
825

 
(790
)
Foreign currency forwards
$
1,396

 
$
34

 
(54
)
Credit default swaps
$
8,986

 
$
117

 
3

Equity futures
$
1,851

 
$
10

 
—

Equity index options
$
11,119

 
$
(166
)
 
1

Equity variance swaps
$
5,579

 
$
(124
)
 
—

Equity total return swaps
$
1,013

 
$
(41
)
 
—

Total derivative instruments
 
 
 
 
(840
)
Net Change
 
 
 
 
$
(284
)
______________
(1)
Does not necessarily represent those financial instruments solely subject to foreign currency exchange rate risk. Separate account assets and liabilities, which are foreign currency exchange rate sensitive, are not included herein as any foreign currency exchange rate risk is borne by the contractholder. FVO general account securities and long-term debt exclude $8 million and $12 million, respectively, related to CSEs. See Note 8 of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for information regarding CSEs.
(2)
Embedded derivatives are recognized on the consolidated balance sheet in the same caption as the host contract.

94

(3)
Excludes $122.3 billion of liabilities, at carrying value, pursuant to insurance contracts reported within future policy benefits and other policy-related balances. These liabilities would economically offset a significant portion of the net change in fair value of our financial instruments resulting from a 10% decrease in foreign currency exchange rates.
Sensitivity to foreign currency exchange rates increased by $124 million, to $284 million at December 31, 2016 from $160 million at December 31, 2015. This increase was primarily due to $232 million of higher sensitivity on derivative hedges which was partially offset by net lower currency risk of foreign denominated assets and liabilities of $108 million.
The table below provides additional detail regarding the potential loss in estimated fair value of our portfolio due to a 10% decrease in equity prices by type of asset or liability at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Notional Amount
 
Estimated
Fair
Value (1)
 
Assuming a
10% Decrease
in Equity
Prices
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
Equity securities
 
 
$
1,839

 
$
(184
)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (2)
 
 
$
460

 
42

Total assets
 
 
 
 
(142
)
Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances
 
 
$
74,052

 
—

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (2)
 
 
$
1,353

 
(319
)
Total liabilities
 
 
 
 
$
(319
)
Derivative Instruments
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate and interest rate total return swaps
$
40,997

 
$
4,024

 
$
—

Interest rate floors
$
9,001

 
$
171

 
—

Interest rate caps
$
78,358

 
$
109

 
—

Interest rate futures
$
2,342

 
$
3

 
—

Interest rate options
$
850

 
$
143

 
—

Interest rate forwards
$
4,429

 
$
(373
)
 
—

Synthetic GICs
$
5,566

 
$
—

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
$
29,455

 
$
825

 
—

Foreign currency forwards
$
1,396

 
$
34

 
—

Credit default swaps
$
8,986

 
$
117

 
—

Equity futures
$
1,851

 
$
10

 
177

Equity index options
$
11,119

 
$
(166
)
 
73

Equity variance swaps
$
5,579

 
$
(124
)
 
5

Equity total return swaps
$
1,013

 
$
(41
)
 
109

Total derivative instruments
 
 
 
 
364

Net Change
 
 
 
 
$
(97
)
______________
(1)
Does not necessarily represent those financial instruments solely subject to equity price risk. Additionally, separate account assets and liabilities, which are equity market sensitive, are not included herein as any equity market risk is borne by the contractholder.
(2)
Embedded derivatives are recognized on the consolidated balance sheet in the same caption as the host contract.
Sensitivity to declining equity prices increased by $73 million to $97 million at December 31, 2016 from $24 million at December 31, 2015. This increase was primarily due to the impact of net embedded derivatives.

95

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Index to Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules
 
Page
Financial Statements at December 31, 2016 and 2015 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014:
 
Financial Statement Schedules at December 31, 2016 and 2015 and for the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014:
 

96

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

To the Board of Directors and Stockholder of
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company:

We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries (the "Company") as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the related consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss), equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016. Our audits also included the financial statement schedules listed in the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules. These consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedules based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the consolidated financial statements are free of material misstatement. The Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company's internal control over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the consolidated financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2016 and 2015, and the results of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2016, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also, in our opinion, such financial statement schedules, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, present fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
New York, New York
March 23, 2017


97

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Consolidated Balance Sheets
December 31, 2016 and 2015
(In millions, except share and per share data)
 
 
2016
 
2015
Assets
 
 
 
 
Investments:
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value (amortized cost: $155,141 and $168,361, respectively; includes $0 and $103, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
$
163,120

 
$
175,686

Equity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value (cost: $1,785 and $1,985, respectively)
 
1,839

 
1,949

Fair value option and trading securities, at estimated fair value (includes $0 and $404, respectively, of actively traded securities; and $8 and $13, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
23

 
431

Mortgage loans (net of valuation allowances of $267 and $257, respectively; includes $566 and $314, respectively, under the fair value option)
 
56,560

 
53,722

Policy loans
 
5,945

 
8,134

Real estate and real estate joint ventures (includes $1,124 and $0, respectively, relating to variable interest entities; includes $56 and $42, respectively, of real estate held-for-sale)
 
6,386

 
6,008

Other limited partnership interests (includes $14 and $27, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
3,725

 
4,088

Short-term investments, principally at estimated fair value
 
4,690

 
5,595

Other invested assets (includes $31 and $43, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
17,232

 
16,869

Total investments
 
259,520

 
272,482

Cash and cash equivalents, principally at estimated fair value (includes $0 and $1, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
5,714

 
4,651

Accrued investment income (includes $0 and $1, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
2,019

 
2,250

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables (includes $6 and $2, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
22,383

 
23,722

Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired
 
4,743

 
6,043

Current income tax recoverable
 
—

 
36

Other assets (includes $3 and $3, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
4,346

 
4,397

Separate account assets
 
133,836

 
135,939

Total assets
 
$
432,561

 
$
449,520

Liabilities and Equity
 
 
 
 
Liabilities
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
 
$
115,556

 
$
118,914

Policyholder account balances
 
92,466

 
94,420

Other policy-related balances
 
6,731

 
7,201

Policyholder dividends payable
 
510

 
624

Policyholder dividend obligation
 
1,931

 
1,783

Payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions
 
20,815

 
21,937

Short-term debt
 
100

 
100

Long-term debt (includes $12 and $61, respectively, at estimated fair value, relating to variable interest entities)
 
1,589

 
1,715

Current income tax payable
 
50

 
—

Deferred income tax liability
 
2,503

 
2,888

Other liabilities (includes $0 and $2, respectively, relating to variable interest entities)
 
29,497

 
32,755

Separate account liabilities
 
133,836

 
135,939

Total liabilities
 
405,584

 
418,276

Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (Note 16)
 


 


Equity
 
 
 
 
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company stockholder’s equity:
 
 
 
 
Common stock, par value $0.01 per share; 1,000,000,000 shares authorized; 494,466,664 shares issued and outstanding
 
5

 
5

Additional paid-in capital
 
14,413

 
14,444

Retained earnings
 
9,250

 
13,738

Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)
 
3,119

 
2,685

Total Metropolitan Life Insurance Company stockholder’s equity
 
26,787

 
30,872

Noncontrolling interests
 
190

 
372

Total equity
 
26,977

 
31,244

Total liabilities and equity
 
$
432,561

 
$
449,520

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

98

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Consolidated Statements of Operations
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums
$
22,393

 
$
21,934

 
$
21,384

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
2,542

 
2,584

 
2,466

Net investment income
11,083

 
11,577

 
11,893

Other revenues
1,478

 
1,536

 
1,808

Net investment gains (losses):
 
 
 
 
 
Other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities
(87
)
 
(49
)
 
(16
)
Other-than-temporary impairments on fixed maturity securities transferred to other comprehensive income (loss)
(10
)
 
(5
)
 
(10
)
Other net investment gains (losses)
229

 
313

 
169

Total net investment gains (losses)
132

 
259

 
143

Net derivative gains (losses)
(1,138
)
 
881

 
1,037

Total revenues
36,490

 
38,771

 
38,731

Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims
25,291

 
24,527

 
23,855

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
2,233

 
2,183

 
2,174

Policyholder dividends
1,200

 
1,264

 
1,240

Other expenses
5,803

 
6,258

 
6,071

Total expenses
34,527

 
34,232

 
33,340

Income (loss) from continuing operations before provision for income tax
1,963

 
4,539

 
5,391

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
207

 
1,782

 
1,532

Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
1,756

 
2,757

 
3,859

Income (loss) from discontinued operations, net of income tax
—

 
—

 
(3
)
Net income (loss)
1,756

 
2,757

 
3,856

Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests
(8
)
 
—

 
(5
)
Net income (loss) attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
$
1,764

 
$
2,757

 
$
3,861

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

99

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Net income (loss)
 
$
1,756

 
$
2,757

 
$
3,856

Other comprehensive income (loss):
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unrealized investment gains (losses), net of related offsets
 
406

 
(4,434
)
 
4,165

Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives
 
36

 
559

 
1,288

Foreign currency translation adjustments
 
13

 
(101
)
 
(44
)
Defined benefit plans adjustment
 
217

 
342

 
(1,001
)
Other comprehensive income (loss), before income tax
 
672

 
(3,634
)
 
4,408

Income tax (expense) benefit related to items of other comprehensive income (loss)
 
(238
)
 
1,285

 
(1,532
)
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of income tax
 
434

 
(2,349
)
 
2,876

Comprehensive income (loss)
 
2,190

 
408

 
6,732

Less: Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interest, net of income tax
 
(8
)
 
—

 
(5
)
Comprehensive income (loss) attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
 
$
2,198

 
$
408

 
$
6,737

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

100

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Consolidated Statements of Equity
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
 
Common
Stock
 
Additional
Paid-in
Capital
 
Retained
Earnings
 
Accumulated
Other
Comprehensive
Income (Loss)
 
Total
Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company
Stockholder’s Equity
 
Noncontrolling
Interests
 
Total
Equity
Balance at December 31, 2013
$
5

 
$
14,515

 
$
9,352

 
$
2,158

 
$
26,030

 
$
250

 
$
26,280

Capital contributions from MetLife, Inc.
 
 
4

 
 
 
 
 
4

 
 
 
4

Returns of capital
 
 
(76
)
 
 
 
 
 
(76
)
 
 
 
(76
)
Excess tax benefits related to stock-based compensation
 
 
5

 
 
 
 
 
5

 
 
 
5

Dividends paid to MetLife, Inc.
 
 
 
 
(708
)
 
 
 
(708
)
 
 
 
(708
)
Dividend of subsidiary (Note 3)
 
 
 
 
(35
)
 
 
 
(35
)
 
 
 
(35
)
Change in equity of noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
—

 
147

 
147

Net income (loss)
 
 
 
 
3,861

 
 
 
3,861

 
(5
)
 
3,856

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of
income tax
 
 
 
 
 
 
2,876

 
2,876

 
 
 
2,876

Balance at December 31, 2014
5

 
14,448

 
12,470

 
5,034

 
31,957

 
392

 
32,349

Capital contributions from MetLife, Inc.
 
 
4

 
 
 
 
 
4

 
 
 
4

Returns of capital
 
 
(11
)
 
 
 
 
 
(11
)
 
 
 
(11
)
Excess tax benefits related to stock-based compensation
 
 
3

 
 
 
 
 
3

 
 
 
3

Dividends paid to MetLife, Inc.
 
 
 
 
(1,489
)
 
 
 
(1,489
)
 
 
 
(1,489
)
Change in equity of noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
—

 
(20
)
 
(20
)
Net income (loss)
 
 
 
 
2,757

 
 
 
2,757

 

 
2,757

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of
income tax
 
 
 
 
 
 
(2,349
)
 
(2,349
)
 

 
(2,349
)
Balance at December 31, 2015
5

 
14,444

 
13,738

 
2,685

 
30,872

 
372

 
31,244

Capital contributions from MetLife, Inc.
 
 
10

 
 
 
 
 
10

 
 
 
10

Returns of capital
 
 
(68
)
 
 
 
 
 
(68
)
 
 
 
(68
)
Excess tax benefits related to stock-based compensation
 
 
27

 
 
 
 
 
27

 
 
 
27

Dividends paid to MetLife, Inc.
 
 
 
 
(3,600
)
 
 
 
(3,600
)
 
 
 
(3,600
)
Dividend of subsidiaries (Note 3)
 
 
 
 
(2,652
)
 
 
 
(2,652
)
 
2

 
(2,650
)
Change in equity of noncontrolling interests
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
—

 
(176
)
 
(176
)
Net income (loss)
 
 
 
 
1,764

 
 
 
1,764

 
(8
)
 
1,756

Other comprehensive income (loss), net of
income tax
 
 
 
 
 
 
434

 
434

 

 
434

Balance at December 31, 2016
$
5

 
$
14,413

 
$
9,250

 
$
3,119

 
$
26,787

 
$
190

 
$
26,977

See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

101

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Cash flows from operating activities
 
 
 
 
 
Net income (loss)
$
1,756

 
$
2,757

 
$
3,856

Adjustments to reconcile net income (loss) to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
 
 
 
 
 
Depreciation and amortization expenses
367

 
474

 
460

Amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts associated with investments, net
(975
)
 
(848
)
 
(664
)
(Gains) losses on investments and from sales of businesses, net
(132
)
 
(259
)
 
(138
)
(Gains) losses on derivatives, net
1,865

 
(426
)
 
(902
)
(Income) loss from equity method investments, net of dividends or distributions
483

 
320

 
374

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
2,233

 
2,183

 
2,174

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
(2,542
)
 
(2,584
)
 
(2,466
)
Change in fair value option and trading securities
406

 
278

 
2

Change in accrued investment income
81

 
113

 
242

Change in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
(2,606
)
 
(135
)
 
711

Change in deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired, net
108

 
260

 
271

Change in income tax
(430
)
 
257

 
229

Change in other assets
701

 
763

 
465

Change in insurance-related liabilities and policy-related balances
2,719

 
2,628

 
2,672

Change in other liabilities
1,731

 
(499
)
 
(1,086
)
Other, net
39

 
(16
)
 
1

Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities
5,804

 
5,266

 
6,201

Cash flows from investing activities
 
 
 
 
 
Sales, maturities and repayments of:
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
74,985

 
82,744

 
63,068

Equity securities
859

 
651

 
186

Mortgage loans
11,286

 
11,189

 
11,605

Real estate and real estate joint ventures
762

 
2,734

 
976

Other limited partnership interests
830

 
1,185

 
375

Purchases of:
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
(72,414
)
 
(76,594
)
 
(69,256
)
Equity securities
(771
)
 
(694
)
 
(173
)
Mortgage loans
(16,039
)
 
(16,268
)
 
(14,769
)
Real estate and real estate joint ventures
(1,390
)
 
(823
)
 
(1,876
)
Other limited partnership interests
(809
)
 
(668
)
 
(773
)
Cash received in connection with freestanding derivatives
1,372

 
1,039

 
740

Cash paid in connection with freestanding derivatives
(2,451
)
 
(1,012
)
 
(1,050
)
Receipts on loans to affiliates
—

 
—

 
75

Issuances of loans to affiliates
—

 
—

 
(100
)
Purchases of loans to affiliates
—

 
—

 
(437
)
Net change in policy loans
85

 
357

 
(70
)
Net change in short-term investments
694

 
(1,117
)
 
1,472

Net change in other invested assets
(434
)
 
(603
)
 
(254
)
Net change in property, equipment and leasehold improvements
(227
)
 
23

 
(140
)
Other, net
—

 
—

 
(32
)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities
$
(3,662
)
 
$
2,143

 
$
(10,433
)
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.




102

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.) — (continued)

Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For the Years Ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
Cash flows from financing activities
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances:
 
 
 
 
 
Deposits
$
64,962

 
$
60,216

 
$
54,902

Withdrawals
(61,252
)
 
(61,248
)
 
(51,210
)
Net change in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions
(696
)
 
(2,230
)
 
3,071

Net change in short-term debt
—

 
—

 
(320
)
Long-term debt issued
45

 
907

 
4

Long-term debt repaid
(58
)
 
(673
)
 
(390
)
Financing element on certain derivative instruments, net
(321
)
 
(66
)
 
(224
)
Cash paid in connection with noncontrolling interests
—

 
(159
)
 
—

Dividend of subsidiaries
(115
)
 
—

 
—

Dividends paid to MetLife, Inc.
(3,600
)
 
(1,489
)
 
(708
)
Returns of capital
(68
)
 
(11
)
 
—

Other, net
24

 
2

 
2

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities
(1,079
)
 
(4,751
)
 
5,127

Change in cash and cash equivalents
1,063

 
2,658

 
895

Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year
4,651

 
1,993

 
1,098

Cash and cash equivalents, end of year
$
5,714

 
$
4,651

 
$
1,993

Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information
 
 
 
 
 
Net cash paid (received) for:
 
 
 
 
 
Interest
$
114

 
$
123

 
$
150

Income tax
$
819

 
$
1,217

 
$
1,304

Non-cash transactions
 
 
 
 
 
Capital contributions from MetLife, Inc.
$
10

 
$
4

 
$
4

Fixed maturity securities received in connection with pension risk transfer transactions
$
985

 
$
903

 
$
—

Transfer of fixed maturity securities from affiliates
$
367

 
$
—

 
$
—

Transfer of fixed maturity securities to affiliates
$
3,940

 
$
—

 
$
—

Transfer of mortgage loans to affiliates
$
626

 
$
—

 
$
—

Deconsolidation of real estate investment vehicles (1):
 
 
 
 
 
Reduction of redeemable noncontrolling interests
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
774

Reduction of long-term debt
$
—

 
$
543

 
$
413

Reduction of real estate and real estate joint ventures
$
354

 
$
389

 
$
1,132

Increase in noncontrolling interests
$
—

 
$
153

 
$
—

Reduction of noncontrolling interests
$
354

 
$
—

 
$
—

Issuance of short-term debt
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
245

Returns of capital
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
76

Disposal of subsidiaries:
 
 
 
 
 
Assets disposed
$
27,476

 
$
—

 
$
69

Liabilities disposed
(24,572
)
 
—

 
(34
)
Net assets disposed
2,904

 
—

 
35

Cash disposed
(115
)
 
—

 
(49
)
Dividend of interests in subsidiaries
(2,789
)
 
—

 
14

Loss on dividend of interests in subsidiaries
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

______________
(1)
For the year ended December 31, 2015, amounts represent the impact of the consolidation of a real estate investment vehicle, offset by the subsequent deconsolidation of such real estate investment vehicle.
See accompanying notes to the consolidated financial statements.

103
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements

1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Business
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its subsidiaries (collectively, “MLIC” or the “Company”) is a provider of life insurance, annuities, employee benefits and asset management and is organized into two segments: U.S. and MetLife Holdings. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (MetLife, Inc., together with its subsidiaries and affiliates, “MetLife”).
Basis of Presentation
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management to adopt accounting policies and make estimates and assumptions that affect amounts reported on the consolidated financial statements. In applying these policies and estimates, management makes subjective and complex judgments that frequently require assumptions about matters that are inherently uncertain. Many of these policies, estimates and related judgments are common in the insurance and financial services industries; others are specific to the Company’s business and operations. Actual results could differ from these estimates.
Consolidation
The accompanying consolidated financial statements include the accounts of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its subsidiaries, as well as partnerships and joint ventures in which the Company has control, and variable interest entities (“VIEs”) for which the Company is the primary beneficiary. Intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
Since the Company is a member of a controlled group of affiliated companies, its results may not be indicative of those of a stand-alone entity.
Discontinued Operations
The results of operations of a component of the Company that has either been disposed of or is classified as held-for-sale are reported in discontinued operations if certain criteria are met. Effective January 1, 2014, the Company adopted new guidance regarding reporting of discontinued operations for disposals or classifications as held-for-sale that have not been previously reported on the consolidated financial statements. A disposal of a component is reported in discontinued operations if the disposal represents a strategic shift that has or will have a major effect on the Company’s operations and financial results.
Separate Accounts
Separate accounts are established in conformity with insurance laws. Generally, the assets of the separate accounts cannot be used to settle the liabilities that arise from any other business of the Company. Separate account assets are subject to general account claims only to the extent the value of such assets exceeds the separate account liabilities. The Company reports separately, as assets and liabilities, investments held in separate accounts and liabilities of the separate accounts if:
•
such separate accounts are legally recognized;
•
assets supporting the contract liabilities are legally insulated from the Company’s general account liabilities;
•
investments are directed by the contractholder; and
•
all investment performance, net of contract fees and assessments, is passed through to the contractholder.
The Company reports separate account assets at their fair value, which is based on the estimated fair values of the underlying assets comprising the individual separate account portfolios. Investment performance (including investment income, net investment gains (losses) and changes in unrealized gains (losses)) and the corresponding amounts credited to contractholders of such separate accounts are offset within the same line on the statements of operations. Separate accounts credited with a contractual investment return are combined on a line-by-line basis with the Company’s general account assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses and the accounting for these investments is consistent with the methodologies described herein for similar financial instruments held within the general account.
The Company’s revenues reflect fees charged to the separate accounts, including mortality charges, risk charges, policy administration fees, investment management fees and surrender charges. Such fees are included in universal life and investment-type product policy fees on the statements of operations.

104
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Reclassifications
Certain amounts in the prior years’ consolidated financial statements and related footnotes thereto have been reclassified to conform with the current year presentation as discussed throughout the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The following are the Company’s significant accounting policies with references to notes providing additional information on such policies and critical accounting estimates relating to such policies.
Accounting Policy
Note
Insurance
4
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles
5
Reinsurance
6
Investments
8
Derivatives
9
Fair Value
10
Employee Benefit Plans
14
Income Tax
15
Litigation Contingencies
16
Insurance
Future Policy Benefit Liabilities and Policyholder Account Balances
The Company establishes liabilities for amounts payable under insurance policies. Generally, amounts are payable over an extended period of time and related liabilities are calculated as the present value of future expected benefits to be paid, reduced by the present value of future expected premiums. Such liabilities are established based on methods and underlying assumptions in accordance with GAAP and applicable actuarial standards. Principal assumptions used in the establishment of liabilities for future policy benefits are mortality, morbidity, policy lapse, renewal, retirement, disability incidence, disability terminations, investment returns, inflation, expenses and other contingent events as appropriate to the respective product type. These assumptions are established at the time the policy is issued and are intended to estimate the experience for the period the policy benefits are payable. Utilizing these assumptions, liabilities are established on a block of business basis. For long-duration insurance contracts, assumptions such as mortality, morbidity and interest rates are “locked in” upon the issuance of new business. However, significant adverse changes in experience on such contracts may require the establishment of premium deficiency reserves. Such reserves are determined based on the then current assumptions and do not include a provision for adverse deviation.
Premium deficiency reserves may also be established for short-duration contracts to provide for expected future losses. These reserves are based on actuarial estimates of the amount of loss inherent in that period, including losses incurred for which claims have not been reported. The provisions for unreported claims are calculated using studies that measure the historical length of time between the incurred date of a claim and its eventual reporting to the Company. Anticipated investment income is considered in the calculation of premium deficiency losses for short-duration contracts.
Liabilities for universal and variable life policies with secondary guarantees and paid-up guarantees are determined by estimating the expected value of death benefits payable when the account balance is projected to be zero and recognizing those benefits ratably over the accumulation period based on total expected assessments. The assumptions used in estimating the secondary and paid-up guarantee liabilities are consistent with those used for amortizing deferred policy acquisition costs (“DAC”), and are thus subject to the same variability and risk as further discussed herein. The assumptions of investment performance and volatility for variable products are consistent with historical experience of appropriate underlying equity indices, such as the Standard & Poor’s Global Ratings (“S&P”) 500 Index. The benefits used in calculating the liabilities are based on the average benefits payable over a range of scenarios.

105
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The Company regularly reviews its estimates of liabilities for future policy benefits and compares them with its actual experience. Differences result in changes to the liability balances with related charges or credits to benefit expenses in the period in which the changes occur.
Policyholder account balances relate to contracts or contract features where the Company has no significant insurance risk.
The Company issues directly and assumes through reinsurance certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits that provide the policyholder a minimum return based on their initial deposit (i.e., the benefit base) less withdrawals. These guarantees are accounted for as insurance liabilities or as embedded derivatives depending on how and when the benefit is paid. Specifically, a guarantee is accounted for as an embedded derivative if a guarantee is paid without requiring (i) the occurrence of specific insurable event, or (ii) the policyholder to annuitize. Alternatively, a guarantee is accounted for as an insurance liability if the guarantee is paid only upon either (i) the occurrence of a specific insurable event, or (ii) annuitization. In certain cases, a guarantee may have elements of both an insurance liability and an embedded derivative and in such cases the guarantee is split and accounted for under both models.
Guarantees accounted for as insurance liabilities in future policy benefits include guaranteed minimum death benefits (“GMDBs”), the portion of guaranteed minimum income benefits (“GMIBs”) that require annuitization, and the life-contingent portion of guaranteed minimum withdrawal benefits (“GMWBs”).
Guarantees accounted for as embedded derivatives in policyholder account balances include the non life-contingent portion of GMWBs, guaranteed minimum accumulation benefits (“GMABs”) and the portion of GMIBs that do not require annuitization. At inception, the Company attributes to the embedded derivative a portion of the projected future guarantee fees to be collected from the policyholder equal to the present value of projected future guaranteed benefits. Any additional fees represent “excess” fees and are reported in universal life and investment-type product policy fees.
Other Policy-Related Balances
Other policy-related balances include policy and contract claims, unearned revenue liabilities, premiums received in advance, policyholder dividends due and unpaid, policyholder dividends left on deposit and obligations assumed under structured settlement assignments.
The liability for policy and contract claims generally relates to incurred but not reported (“IBNR”) death, disability, long-term care and dental claims, as well as claims which have been reported but not yet settled. The liability for these claims is based on the Company’s estimated ultimate cost of settling all claims. The Company derives estimates for the development of IBNR claims principally from analyses of historical patterns of claims by business line. The methods used to determine these estimates are continually reviewed. Adjustments resulting from this continuous review process and differences between estimates and payments for claims are recognized in policyholder benefits and claims expense in the period in which the estimates are changed or payments are made.
The unearned revenue liability relates to universal life-type and investment-type products and represents policy charges for services to be provided in future periods. The charges are deferred as unearned revenue and amortized using the product’s estimated gross profits and margins, similar to DAC as discussed further herein. Such amortization is recorded in universal life and investment-type product policy fees.
The Company accounts for the prepayment of premiums on its individual life, group life and health contracts as premiums received in advance and applies the cash received to premiums when due.
See Note 4 for additional information on obligations assumed under structured settlement assignments.
Recognition of Insurance Revenues and Deposits
Premiums related to traditional life and annuity contracts with life contingencies are recognized as revenues when due from policyholders. Policyholder benefits and expenses are provided to recognize profits over the estimated lives of the insurance policies. When premiums are due over a significantly shorter period than the period over which benefits are provided, any excess profit is deferred and recognized into earnings in a constant relationship to insurance in-force or, for annuities, the amount of expected future policy benefit payments.

106
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Premiums related to short-duration non-medical health and disability contracts are recognized on a pro rata basis over the applicable contract term.
Deposits related to universal life-type and investment-type products are credited to policyholder account balances. Revenues from such contracts consist of fees for mortality, policy administration and surrender charges and are recorded in universal life and investment-type product policy fees in the period in which services are provided. Amounts that are charged to earnings include interest credited and benefit claims incurred in excess of related policyholder account balances.
All revenues and expenses are presented net of reinsurance, as applicable.
Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles
The Company incurs significant costs in connection with acquiring new and renewal insurance business. Costs that are related directly to the successful acquisition or renewal of insurance contracts are capitalized as DAC. Such costs include:
•
incremental direct costs of contract acquisition, such as commissions;
•
the portion of an employee’s total compensation and benefits related to time spent selling, underwriting or processing the issuance of new and renewal insurance business only with respect to actual policies acquired or renewed; and
•
other essential direct costs that would not have been incurred had a policy not been acquired or renewed.
All other acquisition-related costs, including those related to general advertising and solicitation, market research, agent training, product development, unsuccessful sales and underwriting efforts, as well as all indirect costs, are expensed as incurred.
Value of business acquired (“VOBA”) is an intangible asset resulting from a business combination that represents the excess of book value over the estimated fair value of acquired insurance, annuity, and investment-type contracts in-force at the acquisition date. The estimated fair value of the acquired liabilities is based on projections, by each block of business, of future policy and contract charges, premiums, mortality and morbidity, separate account performance, surrenders, operating expenses, investment returns, nonperformance risk adjustment and other factors. Actual experience on the purchased business may vary from these projections.
DAC and VOBA are amortized as follows:
Products:
In proportion to the following over estimated lives of the contracts:
•
Nonparticipating and non-dividend-paying traditional contracts:
Actual and expected future gross premiums.
 
•
Term insurance
 
 
•
Nonparticipating whole life insurance
 
 
•
Traditional group life insurance
 
 
•
Non-medical health insurance
 
•
Participating, dividend-paying traditional contracts
Actual and expected future gross margins.
•
Fixed and variable universal life contracts
Actual and expected future gross profits.
•
Fixed and variable deferred annuity contracts
 
See Note 5 for additional information on DAC and VOBA amortization. Amortization of DAC and VOBA is included in other expenses.
The recovery of DAC and VOBA is dependent upon the future profitability of the related business. DAC and VOBA are aggregated on the financial statements for reporting purposes.

107
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The Company generally has two different types of sales inducements which are included in other assets: (i) the policyholder receives a bonus whereby the policyholder’s initial account balance is increased by an amount equal to a specified percentage of the customer’s deposit; and (ii) the policyholder receives a higher interest rate using a dollar cost averaging method than would have been received based on the normal general account interest rate credited. The Company defers sales inducements and amortizes them over the life of the policy using the same methodology and assumptions used to amortize DAC. The amortization of sales inducements is included in policyholder benefits and claims. Each year, or more frequently if circumstances indicate a potential recoverability issue exists, the Company reviews deferred sales inducements (“DSI”) to determine the recoverability of the asset.
Value of distribution agreements acquired (“VODA”) is reported in other assets and represents the present value of expected future profits associated with the expected future business derived from the distribution agreements acquired as part of a business combination. Value of customer relationships acquired (“VOCRA”) is also reported in other assets and represents the present value of the expected future profits associated with the expected future business acquired through existing customers of the acquired company or business. The VODA and VOCRA associated with past business combinations are amortized over useful lives ranging from 10 to 30 years and such amortization is included in other expenses. Each year, or more frequently if circumstances indicate a possible impairment exists, the Company reviews VODA and VOCRA to determine whether the asset is impaired.
Reinsurance
For each of its reinsurance agreements, the Company determines whether the agreement provides indemnification against loss or liability relating to insurance risk in accordance with applicable accounting standards. Cessions under reinsurance agreements do not discharge the Company’s obligations as the primary insurer. The Company reviews all contractual features, including those that may limit the amount of insurance risk to which the reinsurer is subject or features that delay the timely reimbursement of claims.
For reinsurance of existing in-force blocks of long-duration contracts that transfer significant insurance risk, the difference, if any, between the amounts paid (received), and the liabilities ceded (assumed) related to the underlying contracts is considered the net cost of reinsurance at the inception of the reinsurance agreement. The net cost of reinsurance is recorded as an adjustment to DAC when there is a gain at inception on the ceding entity and to other liabilities when there is a loss at inception. The net cost of reinsurance is recognized as a component of other expenses when there is a gain at inception and as policyholder benefits and claims when there is a loss and is subsequently amortized on a basis consistent with the methodology used for amortizing DAC related to the underlying reinsured contracts. Subsequent amounts paid (received) on the reinsurance of in-force blocks, as well as amounts paid (received) related to new business, are recorded as ceded (assumed) premiums; and ceded (assumed) premiums, reinsurance and other receivables (future policy benefits) are established.
For prospective reinsurance of short-duration contracts that meet the criteria for reinsurance accounting, amounts paid (received) are recorded as ceded (assumed) premiums and ceded (assumed) unearned premiums. Unearned premiums are reflected as a component of premiums, reinsurance and other receivables (future policy benefits). Such amounts are amortized through earned premiums over the remaining contract period in proportion to the amount of insurance protection provided. For retroactive reinsurance of short-duration contracts that meet the criteria of reinsurance accounting, amounts paid (received) in excess of the related insurance liabilities ceded (assumed) are recognized immediately as a loss and are reported in the appropriate line item within the statement of operations. Any gain on such retroactive agreement is deferred and is amortized as part of DAC, primarily using the recovery method.
Amounts currently recoverable under reinsurance agreements are included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and amounts currently payable are included in other liabilities. Assets and liabilities relating to reinsurance agreements with the same reinsurer may be recorded net on the balance sheet, if a right of offset exists within the reinsurance agreement. In the event that reinsurers do not meet their obligations to the Company under the terms of the reinsurance agreements, reinsurance recoverable balances could become uncollectible. In such instances, reinsurance recoverable balances are stated net of allowances for uncollectible reinsurance.

108
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The funds withheld liability represents amounts withheld by the Company in accordance with the terms of the reinsurance agreements. The Company withholds the funds rather than transferring the underlying investments and, as a result, records funds withheld liability within other liabilities. The Company recognizes interest on funds withheld, included in other expenses, at rates defined by the terms of the agreement which may be contractually specified or directly related to the investment portfolio.
Premiums, fees and policyholder benefits and claims include amounts assumed under reinsurance agreements and are net of reinsurance ceded. Amounts received from reinsurers for policy administration are reported in other revenues. With respect to GMIBs, a portion of the directly written GMIBs are accounted for as insurance liabilities, but the associated reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives. These embedded derivatives are included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). Certain assumed GMWB, GMAB and GMIB are also accounted for as embedded derivatives with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses).
If the Company determines that a reinsurance agreement does not expose the reinsurer to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk, the Company records the agreement using the deposit method of accounting. Deposits received are included in other liabilities and deposits made are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables. As amounts are paid or received, consistent with the underlying contracts, the deposit assets or liabilities are adjusted. Interest on such deposits is recorded as other revenues or other expenses, as appropriate. Periodically, the Company evaluates the adequacy of the expected payments or recoveries and adjusts the deposit asset or liability through other revenues or other expenses, as appropriate.
Investments
Net Investment Income and Net Investment Gains (Losses)
Income from investments is reported within net investment income, unless otherwise stated herein. Gains and losses on sales of investments, impairment losses and changes in valuation allowances are reported within net investment gains (losses), unless otherwise stated herein.
Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities
The majority of the Company’s fixed maturity and equity securities are classified as available-for-sale (“AFS”) and are reported at their estimated fair value. Unrealized investment gains and losses on these securities are recorded as a separate component of other comprehensive income (loss) (“OCI”), net of policy-related amounts and deferred income taxes. All security transactions are recorded on a trade date basis. Investment gains and losses on sales are determined on a specific identification basis.
Interest income and prepayment fees are recognized when earned. Interest income is recognized using an effective yield method giving effect to amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts, and is based on the estimated economic life of the securities, which for mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities considers the estimated timing and amount of prepayments of the underlying loans. See Note 8 “— Investments — Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS — Methodology for Amortization of Premium and Accretion of Discount on Structured Securities.” The amortization of premium and accretion of discount of fixed maturity securities also takes into consideration call and maturity dates. Dividends on equity securities are recognized when declared.
The Company periodically evaluates fixed maturity and equity securities for impairment. The assessment of whether impairments have occurred is based on management’s case-by-case evaluation of the underlying reasons for the decline in estimated fair value, as well as an analysis of the gross unrealized losses by severity and/or age as described in Note 8 “— Evaluation of AFS Securities for OTTI and Evaluating Temporarily Impaired AFS Securities.”

109
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

For fixed maturity securities in an unrealized loss position, an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) is recognized in earnings when it is anticipated that the amortized cost will not be recovered. When either: (i) the Company has the intent to sell the security; or (ii) it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery, the OTTI recognized in earnings is the entire difference between the security’s amortized cost and estimated fair value. If neither of these conditions exists, the difference between the amortized cost of the security and the present value of projected future cash flows expected to be collected is recognized as an OTTI in earnings (“credit loss”). If the estimated fair value is less than the present value of projected future cash flows expected to be collected, this portion of OTTI related to other-than-credit factors (“noncredit loss”) is recorded in OCI.
With respect to equity securities, the Company considers in its OTTI analysis its intent and ability to hold a particular equity security for a period of time sufficient to allow for the recovery of its estimated fair value to an amount equal to or greater than cost. If a sale decision is made for an equity security and recovery to an amount at least equal to cost prior to the sale is not expected, the security will be deemed to be other-than-temporarily impaired in the period that the sale decision was made and an OTTI loss will be recorded in earnings. The OTTI loss recognized is the entire difference between the security’s cost and its estimated fair value.
Fair Value Option and Trading Securities
Fair value option (“FVO”) and trading securities are stated at estimated fair value and include investments for which the FVO has been elected (“FVO Securities”) and investments that are actively purchased and sold (“Actively traded securities”).
Changes in estimated fair value of these securities are included in net investment income, except for certain securities included in FVO Securities, where changes are included in net investment gains (losses).
Mortgage Loans
The Company disaggregates its mortgage loan investments into three portfolio segments: commercial, agricultural and residential. The accounting policies that are applicable to all portfolio segments are presented below and the accounting policies related to each of the portfolio segments are included in Note 8.
Mortgage loans are stated at unpaid principal balance, adjusted for any unamortized premium or discount, deferred fees or expenses, and are net of valuation allowances. Interest income and prepayment fees are recognized when earned. Interest income is recognized using an effective yield method giving effect to amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts.
Also included in mortgage loans are residential mortgage loans for which the FVO was elected. These mortgage loans are stated at estimated fair value. Changes in estimated fair value are recognized in net investment income.
Policy Loans
Policy loans are stated at unpaid principal balances. Interest income is recorded as earned using the contractual interest rate. Generally, accrued interest is capitalized on the policy’s anniversary date. Valuation allowances are not established for policy loans, as they are fully collateralized by the cash surrender value of the underlying insurance policies. Any unpaid principal and accrued interest is deducted from the cash surrender value or the death benefit prior to settlement of the insurance policy.
Real Estate
Real estate held-for-investment is stated at cost less accumulated depreciation. Depreciation is recorded on a straight-line basis over the estimated useful life of the asset (typically 20 to 55 years). Rental income is recognized on a straight-line basis over the term of the respective leases. The Company periodically reviews its real estate held-for-investment for impairment and tests for recoverability whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value may not be recoverable and exceeds its estimated fair value. Properties whose carrying values are greater than their undiscounted cash flows are written down to their estimated fair value, which is generally computed using the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at a rate commensurate with the underlying risks.
Real estate for which the Company commits to a plan to sell within one year and actively markets in its current condition for a reasonable price in comparison to its estimated fair value is classified as held-for-sale. Real estate held-for-sale is stated at the lower of depreciated cost or estimated fair value less expected disposition costs and is not depreciated.

110
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Real Estate Joint Ventures and Other Limited Partnership Interests
The Company uses the equity method of accounting for equity securities when it has significant influence or at least 20% interest and for real estate joint ventures and other limited partnership interests (“investees”) when it has more than a minor ownership interest or more than a minor influence over the investee’s operations. The Company generally recognizes its share of the investee’s earnings on a three-month lag in instances where the investee’s financial information is not sufficiently timely or when the investee’s reporting period differs from the Company’s reporting period.
The Company uses the cost method of accounting for investments in which it has virtually no influence over the investee’s operations. The Company recognizes distributions on cost method investments when such distributions become payable or received. Because of the nature and structure of these cost method investments, they do not meet the characteristics of an equity security in accordance with applicable accounting standards.
The Company routinely evaluates its equity method and cost method investments for impairment. For equity method investees, the Company considers financial and other information provided by the investee, other known information and inherent risks in the underlying investments, as well as future capital commitments, in determining whether an impairment has occurred. The Company considers its cost method investments for impairment when the carrying value of such investments exceeds the net asset value (“NAV”). The Company takes into consideration the severity and duration of this excess when determining whether the cost method investment is impaired.
Short-term Investments
Short-term investments include securities and other investments with remaining maturities of one year or less, but greater than three months, at the time of purchase and are stated at estimated fair value or amortized cost, which approximates estimated fair value. Short-term investments also include investments in affiliated money market pools.
Other Invested Assets
Other invested assets consist principally of the following:
•
Freestanding derivatives with positive estimated fair values which are described in “— Derivatives” below.
•
Tax credit and renewable energy partnerships which derive a significant source of investment return in the form of income tax credits or other tax incentives. Where tax credits are guaranteed by a creditworthy third party, the investment is accounted for under the effective yield method. Otherwise, the investment is accounted for under the equity method.
•
Loans to affiliates which are stated at unpaid principal balance and adjusted for any unamortized premium or discount.
•
Leveraged leases which are recorded net of non-recourse debt. Income is recognized by applying the leveraged lease’s estimated rate of return to the net investment in the lease. The Company regularly reviews residual values for impairment.
•
Annuities funding structured settlement claims represent annuities funding claims assumed by the Company in its capacity as a structured settlements assignment company. The annuities are stated at their contract value, which represents the present value of the future periodic claim payments to be provided. The net investment income recognized reflects the amortization of discount of the annuity at its implied effective interest rate. See Note 4.
•
Direct financing leases gross investment is equal to the minimum lease payments plus the unguaranteed residual value. Income is recorded by applying the pre-tax internal rate of return to the investment balance. The Company regularly reviews lease receivables for impairment.
•
Funds withheld represent a receivable for amounts contractually withheld by ceding companies in accordance with reinsurance agreements. The Company recognizes interest on funds withheld at rates defined by the terms of the agreement which may be contractually specified or directly related to the underlying investments.
•
Investment in an operating joint venture that engages in insurance underwriting activities accounted for under the equity method.

111
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Securities Lending Program
Securities lending transactions, whereby blocks of securities are loaned to third parties, primarily brokerage firms and commercial banks, are treated as financing arrangements and the associated liability is recorded at the amount of cash received. The Company obtains collateral at the inception of the loan, usually cash, in an amount generally equal to 102% of the estimated fair value of the securities loaned, and maintains it at a level greater than or equal to 100% for the duration of the loan. Securities loaned under such transactions may be sold or re-pledged by the transferee. The Company is liable to return to the counterparties the cash collateral received. Security collateral on deposit from counterparties in connection with securities lending transactions may not be sold or re-pledged, unless the counterparty is in default, and is not reflected on the Company’s financial statements. The Company monitors the estimated fair value of the securities loaned on a daily basis and additional collateral is obtained as necessary throughout the duration of the loan. Income and expenses associated with securities lending transactions are reported as investment income and investment expense, respectively, within net investment income.
Derivatives
Freestanding Derivatives
Freestanding derivatives are carried on the Company’s balance sheet either as assets within other invested assets or as liabilities within other liabilities at estimated fair value. The Company does not offset the estimated fair value amounts recognized for derivatives executed with the same counterparty under the same master netting agreement.
Accruals on derivatives are generally recorded in accrued investment income or within other liabilities. However, accruals that are not scheduled to settle within one year are included with the derivatives’ carrying value in other invested assets or other liabilities.
If a derivative is not designated as an accounting hedge or its use in managing risk does not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in the estimated fair value of the derivative are reported in net derivative gains (losses) except as follows:
Statement of Operations Presentation:
Derivative:
Policyholder benefits and claims
•
Economic hedges of variable annuity guarantees included in future policy benefits
Net investment income
•
Economic hedges of equity method investments in joint ventures
 
•
All derivatives held in relation to trading portfolios
Hedge Accounting
To qualify for hedge accounting, at the inception of the hedging relationship, the Company formally documents its risk management objective and strategy for undertaking the hedging transaction, as well as its designation of the hedge. Hedge designation and financial statement presentation of changes in estimated fair value of the hedging derivatives are as follows:
•
Fair value hedge (a hedge of the estimated fair value of a recognized asset or liability) - in net derivative gains (losses), consistent with the change in estimated fair value of the hedged item attributable to the designated risk being hedged.
•
Cash flow hedge (a hedge of a forecasted transaction or of the variability of cash flows to be received or paid related to a recognized asset or liability) - effectiveness in OCI (deferred gains or losses on the derivative are reclassified into the statement of operations when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item); ineffectiveness in net derivative gains (losses).
The changes in estimated fair values of the hedging derivatives are exclusive of any accruals that are separately reported on the statement of operations within interest income or interest expense to match the location of the hedged item.

112
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

In its hedge documentation, the Company sets forth how the hedging instrument is expected to hedge the designated risks related to the hedged item and sets forth the method that will be used to retrospectively and prospectively assess the hedging instrument’s effectiveness and the method that will be used to measure ineffectiveness. A derivative designated as a hedging instrument must be assessed as being highly effective in offsetting the designated risk of the hedged item. Hedge effectiveness is formally assessed at inception and at least quarterly throughout the life of the designated hedging relationship. Assessments of hedge effectiveness and measurements of ineffectiveness are also subject to interpretation and estimation and different interpretations or estimates may have a material effect on the amount reported in net income.
The Company discontinues hedge accounting prospectively when: (i) it is determined that the derivative is no longer highly effective in offsetting changes in the estimated fair value or cash flows of a hedged item; (ii) the derivative expires, is sold, terminated, or exercised; (iii) it is no longer probable that the hedged forecasted transaction will occur; or (iv) the derivative is de-designated as a hedging instrument.
When hedge accounting is discontinued because it is determined that the derivative is not highly effective in offsetting changes in the estimated fair value or cash flows of a hedged item, the derivative continues to be carried on the balance sheet at its estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in net derivative gains (losses). The carrying value of the hedged recognized asset or liability under a fair value hedge is no longer adjusted for changes in its estimated fair value due to the hedged risk, and the cumulative adjustment to its carrying value is amortized into income over the remaining life of the hedged item. Provided the hedged forecasted transaction is still probable of occurrence, the changes in estimated fair value of derivatives recorded in OCI related to discontinued cash flow hedges are released into the statement of operations when the Company’s earnings are affected by the variability in cash flows of the hedged item.
When hedge accounting is discontinued because it is no longer probable that the forecasted transactions will occur on the anticipated date or within two months of that date, the derivative continues to be carried on the balance sheet at its estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized currently in net derivative gains (losses). Deferred gains and losses of a derivative recorded in OCI pursuant to the discontinued cash flow hedge of a forecasted transaction that is no longer probable are recognized immediately in net derivative gains (losses).
In all other situations in which hedge accounting is discontinued, the derivative is carried at its estimated fair value on the balance sheet, with changes in its estimated fair value recognized in the current period as net derivative gains (losses).
Embedded Derivatives
The Company sells variable annuities and issues certain insurance products and investment contracts and is a party to certain reinsurance agreements that have embedded derivatives. The Company assesses each identified embedded derivative to determine whether it is required to be bifurcated. The embedded derivative is bifurcated from the host contract and accounted for as a freestanding derivative if:
•
the combined instrument is not accounted for in its entirety at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value recorded in earnings;
•
the terms of the embedded derivative are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the host contract; and
•
a separate instrument with the same terms as the embedded derivative would qualify as a derivative instrument.
Such embedded derivatives are carried on the balance sheet at estimated fair value with the host contract and changes in their estimated fair value are generally reported in net derivative gains (losses). If the Company is unable to properly identify and measure an embedded derivative for separation from its host contract, the entire contract is carried on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income. Additionally, the Company may elect to carry an entire contract on the balance sheet at estimated fair value, with changes in estimated fair value recognized in the current period in net investment gains (losses) or net investment income if that contract contains an embedded derivative that requires bifurcation. At inception, the Company attributes to the embedded derivative a portion of the projected future guarantee fees to be collected from the policyholder equal to the present value of projected future guaranteed benefits. Any additional fees represent “excess” fees and are reported in universal life and investment-type product policy fees.

113
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Fair Value
Fair value is defined 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. In most cases, the exit price and the transaction (or entry) price will be the same at initial recognition.
Subsequent to initial recognition, fair values are based on unadjusted quoted prices for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. When such quoted prices are not available, fair values are based on quoted prices in markets that are not active, quoted prices for similar but not identical assets or liabilities, or other observable inputs. If these inputs are not available, or observable inputs are not determinable, unobservable inputs and/or adjustments to observable inputs requiring management judgment are used to determine the estimated fair value of assets and liabilities.
Employee Benefit Plans
The Company sponsors and administers various qualified and nonqualified defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement employee benefit plans covering eligible employees and sales representatives who meet specified eligibility requirements of the sponsor and its participating affiliates. A December 31 measurement date is used for all of the Company’s defined benefit pension and other postretirement benefit plans.
The Company recognizes the funded status of each of its defined pension and postretirement benefit plans, measured as the difference between the fair value of plan assets and the benefit obligation, which is the projected benefit obligation (“PBO”) for pension benefits and the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (“APBO”) for other postretirement benefits in other assets or other liabilities.
Actuarial gains and losses result from differences between the actual experience and the assumed experience on plan assets or PBO during a particular period and are recorded in accumulated OCI (“AOCI”). To the extent such gains and losses exceed 10% of the greater of the PBO or the estimated fair value of plan assets, the excess is amortized into net periodic benefit costs, generally over the average projected future service years of the active employees. In addition, prior service costs (credit) are recognized in AOCI at the time of the amendment and then amortized to net periodic benefit costs over the average projected future service years of the active employees.
Net periodic benefit costs are determined using management estimates and actuarial assumptions and are comprised of service cost, interest cost, settlement and curtailment costs, expected return on plan assets, amortization of net actuarial (gains) losses, and amortization of prior service costs (credit). Fair value is used to determine the expected return on plan assets.
The Company also sponsors defined contribution plans for substantially all employees under which a portion of employee contributions is matched. Applicable matching contributions are made each payroll period. Accordingly, the Company recognizes compensation cost for current matching contributions. As all contributions are transferred currently as earned to the defined contribution plans, no liability for matching contributions is recognized on the balance sheets.
Income Tax
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its includable subsidiaries join with MetLife, Inc. and its includable subsidiaries in filing a consolidated U.S. life and non-life federal income tax return in accordance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended. Current taxes (and the benefits of tax attributes such as losses) are allocated to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its subsidiaries under the consolidated tax return regulations and a tax sharing agreement. Under the consolidated tax return regulations, MetLife, Inc. has elected the “percentage method” (and 100% under such method) of reimbursing companies for tax attributes, e.g., net operating losses. As a result, 100% of tax attributes are reimbursed by MetLife, Inc. to the extent that consolidated federal income tax of the consolidated federal tax return group is reduced in a year by tax attributes. On an annual basis, each of the profitable subsidiaries pays to MetLife, Inc. the federal income tax which it would have paid based upon that year’s taxable income. If Metropolitan Life Insurance Company or its includable subsidiaries has current or prior deductions and credits (including but not limited to losses) which reduce the consolidated tax liability of the consolidated federal tax return group, the deductions and credits are characterized as realized (or realizable) by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its includable subsidiaries when those tax attributes are realized (or realizable) by the consolidated federal tax return group, even if Metropolitan Life Insurance Company or its includable subsidiaries would not have realized the attributes on a stand-alone basis under a “wait and see” method.

114
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

The Company’s accounting for income taxes represents management’s best estimate of various events and transactions.
Deferred tax assets and liabilities resulting from temporary differences between the financial reporting and tax bases of assets and liabilities are measured at the balance sheet date using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years the temporary differences are expected to reverse.
The realization of deferred tax assets depends upon the existence of sufficient taxable income within the carryback or carryforward periods under the tax law in the applicable tax jurisdiction. Valuation allowances are established against deferred tax assets when management determines, based on available information, that it is more likely than not that deferred income tax assets will not be realized. Significant judgment is required in determining whether valuation allowances should be established, as well as the amount of such allowances. When making such determination the Company considers many factors, including:
•
the nature, frequency, and amount of cumulative financial reporting income and losses in recent years;
•
the jurisdiction in which the deferred tax asset was generated;
•
the length of time that carryforward can be utilized in the various taxing jurisdiction;
•
future taxable income exclusive of reversing temporary differences and carryforwards;
•
future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences;
•
taxable income in prior carryback years; and
•
tax planning strategies.
The Company may be required to change its provision for income taxes when estimates used in determining valuation allowances on deferred tax assets significantly change or when receipt of new information indicates the need for adjustment in valuation allowances. Additionally, the effect of changes in tax laws, tax regulations, or interpretations of such laws or regulations, is recognized in net income tax expense (benefit) in the period of change.
The Company determines whether it is more likely than not that a tax position will be sustained upon examination by the appropriate taxing authorities before any part of the benefit can be recorded on the financial statements. A tax position is measured at the largest amount of benefit that is greater than 50% likely of being realized upon settlement. Unrecognized tax benefits due to tax uncertainties that do not meet the threshold are included within other liabilities and are charged to earnings in the period that such determination is made.
The Company classifies interest recognized as interest expense and penalties recognized as a component of income tax expense.
Litigation Contingencies
The Company is a party to a number of legal actions and is involved in a number of regulatory investigations. Given the inherent unpredictability of these matters, it is difficult to estimate the impact on the Company’s financial position. Liabilities are established when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Except as otherwise disclosed in Note 16, legal costs are recognized as incurred. On a quarterly and annual basis, the Company reviews relevant information with respect to liabilities for litigation, regulatory investigations and litigation-related contingencies to be reflected on the Company’s financial statements.
Other Accounting Policies
Stock-Based Compensation
Stock-based compensation recognized on the Company’s consolidated results of operations is allocated from MetLife, Inc. The accounting policies described below represent those that MetLife, Inc. applies in determining such allocated expenses.

115
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

MetLife, Inc. grants certain employees stock-based compensation awards under various plans that are subject to specific vesting conditions. With the exception of performance shares granted in 2013 and after which are re-measured quarterly, the cost of all stock-based transactions is measured at fair value at the grant date and recognized over the period during which a grantee is required to provide services in exchange for the award. Although the terms of MetLife, Inc.’s stock-based plans do not accelerate vesting upon the attainment of the applicable criteria for post-employment award continuation, the requisite service period subsequent to attaining such criteria is considered non-substantive. Accordingly, MetLife, Inc. recognizes compensation expense related to stock-based awards over the shorter of the requisite service period or the period to attainment of such criteria. An estimation of future forfeitures of stock-based awards is incorporated into the determination of compensation expense when recognizing expense over the requisite service period.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company considers all highly liquid securities and other investments purchased with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the date of purchase to be cash equivalents. Cash equivalents are stated at amortized cost, which approximates estimated fair value.
Property, Equipment, Leasehold Improvements and Computer Software
Property, equipment and leasehold improvements, which are included in other assets, are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation is determined using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the assets, as appropriate. The estimated life is generally 40 years for company occupied real estate property, from one to 25 years for leasehold improvements, and from three to seven years for all other property and equipment. The cost basis of the property, equipment and leasehold improvements was $1.3 billion and $1.2 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Accumulated depreciation and amortization of property, equipment and leasehold improvements was $673 million and $720 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Related depreciation and amortization expense was $139 million, $159 million and $123 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Computer software, which is included in other assets, is stated at cost, less accumulated amortization. Purchased software costs, as well as certain internal and external costs incurred to develop internal-use computer software during the application development stage, are capitalized. Such costs are amortized generally over a four-year period using the straight-line method. The cost basis of computer software was $1.5 billion and $1.4 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Accumulated amortization of capitalized software was $1.1 billion and $1.0 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Related amortization expense was $132 million, $150 million and $145 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Other Revenues
Other revenues include, in addition to items described elsewhere herein, advisory fees, broker-dealer commissions and fees, administrative service fees, and changes in account value relating to corporate-owned life insurance (“COLI”). Such fees and commissions are recognized in the period in which services are performed. Under certain COLI contracts, if the Company reports certain unlikely adverse results in its financial statements, withdrawals would not be immediately available and would be subject to market value adjustment, which could result in a reduction of the account value.
Policyholder Dividends
Policyholder dividends are approved annually by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s board of directors. The aggregate amount of policyholder dividends is related to actual interest, mortality, morbidity and expense experience for the year, as well as management’s judgment as to the appropriate level of statutory surplus to be retained by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.

116
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Foreign Currency
Assets, liabilities and operations of foreign affiliates and subsidiaries are recorded based on the functional currency of each entity. The determination of the functional currency is made based on the appropriate economic and management indicators. The local currencies of foreign operations are the functional currencies. Assets and liabilities of foreign affiliates and subsidiaries are translated from the functional currency to U.S. dollars at the exchange rates in effect at each year-end and revenues and expenses are translated at the average exchange rates during the year. The resulting translation adjustments are charged or credited directly to OCI, net of applicable taxes. Gains and losses from foreign currency transactions, including the effect of re-measurement of monetary assets and liabilities to the appropriate functional currency, are reported as part of net investment gains (losses) in the period in which they occur.
Goodwill
Goodwill, which is included in other assets, represents the future economic benefits arising from net assets acquired in a business combination that are not individually identified and recognized. Goodwill is calculated as the excess of cost over the estimated fair value of such net assets acquired, is not amortized, and is tested for impairment based on a fair value approach at least annually or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that there may be justification for conducting an interim test. The Company performs its annual goodwill impairment testing during the third quarter of each year based upon data as of the close of the second quarter. Goodwill associated with a business acquisition is not tested for impairment during the year the business is acquired unless there is a significant identified impairment event.
The impairment test is performed at the reporting unit level, which is the operating segment or a business one level below the operating segment, if discrete financial information is prepared and regularly reviewed by management at that level. For purposes of goodwill impairment testing, if the carrying value of a reporting unit exceeds its estimated fair value, there may be an indication of impairment. In such instances, the implied fair value of the goodwill is determined in the same manner as the amount of goodwill that would be determined in a business combination. The excess of the carrying value of goodwill over the implied fair value of goodwill would be recognized as an impairment and recorded as a charge against net income.
The Company tests goodwill for impairment by either performing a qualitative assessment or a two-step quantitative test. The qualitative assessment is an assessment of historical information and relevant events and circumstances to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, including goodwill. The Company may elect not to perform the qualitative assessment for some or all of its reporting units and perform a two-step quantitative impairment test. In performing the two-step quantitative impairment test, the Company may determine the fair values of its reporting units by applying a market multiple, discounted cash flow, and/or an actuarial based valuation approach.
For the 2016 annual goodwill impairment tests, the Company utilized qualitative assessments for its reporting units and determined it was not more likely than not that the fair value of any of the reporting units was less than its carrying amount. Therefore, no further testing was needed for these reporting units. The goodwill balance was $70 million in the U.S segment and $31 million in the MetLife Holdings segment, at both December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements
Effective January 1, 2016, the Company retrospectively adopted guidance relating to short-duration contracts. The new guidance requires insurance entities to provide users of financial statements with more transparent information about initial claim estimates and subsequent adjustments to these estimates, including information on: (i) reconciling from the claim development table to the balance sheet liability, (ii) methodologies and judgments in estimating claims, and (iii) the timing, and frequency of claims. The adoption did not have an impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements other than expanded disclosures in Note 4.

117
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

Effective January 1, 2016, the Company retrospectively adopted new guidance relating to the consolidation of certain entities. The objective of the new standard is to improve targeted areas of the consolidation guidance and to reduce the number of consolidation models. The new consolidation standard provides guidance on how a reporting entity (i) evaluates whether the entity should consolidate limited partnerships and similar entities, (ii) assesses whether the fees paid to a decisionmaker or service provider are variable interests in a VIE, and (iii) assesses the variable interests in a VIE held by related parties of the reporting entity. The new guidance also eliminates the VIE consolidation model based on majority exposure to variability that applied to certain investment companies and similar entities. The adoption of the new guidance did not impact which entities are consolidated by the Company. The consolidated VIE assets and liabilities and unconsolidated VIE carrying amounts and maximum exposure to loss as of December 31, 2016, disclosed in Note 8, reflect the application of the new guidance.
Effective November 18, 2014, the Company adopted new guidance on when, if ever, the cost of acquiring an entity should be used to establish a new accounting basis (“pushdown”) in the acquired entity’s separate financial statements. The guidance provides an acquired entity and its subsidiaries with an irrevocable option to apply pushdown accounting in its separate financial statements upon occurrence of an event in which an acquirer obtains control of the acquired entity. If a reporting entity elects to apply pushdown accounting, its stand-alone financial statements would reflect the acquirer’s new basis in the acquired entity’s assets and liabilities. The election to apply pushdown accounting should be determined by an acquired entity for each individual change-in-control event in which an acquirer obtains control of the acquired entity; however, an entity that does not elect to apply pushdown accounting in the period of a change-in-control can later elect to retrospectively apply pushdown accounting to the most recent change-in-control transaction as a change in accounting principle. The new guidance did not have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements upon adoption.
Effective January 1, 2014, the Company adopted new guidance regarding the presentation of an unrecognized tax benefit. The new guidance requires that an unrecognized tax benefit, or a portion of an unrecognized tax benefit, be presented on the financial statements as a reduction to a deferred tax asset for a net operating loss carryforward, a similar tax loss, or a tax credit carryforward. However, when the carryforwards are not available at the reporting date to settle any additional income taxes that would result from the disallowance of a tax position or the applicable tax law does not require, and the entity does not intend to use, the deferred tax asset for such purpose, the unrecognized tax benefit will be presented on the financial statements as a liability and will not be combined with the related deferred tax asset. The adoption was prospectively applied and resulted in a reduction to other liabilities and a corresponding increase to deferred income tax liability in the amount of $190 million.
Effective January 1, 2014, the Company adopted new guidance on other expenses. The objective of this standard is to address how health insurers should recognize and classify in their income statements fees mandated by the Patient Protection and Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, signed into law on March 30, 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. The amendments in this standard specify that the liability for the fee should be estimated and recorded in full once the entity provides qualifying health insurance in the applicable calendar year in which the fee is payable with a corresponding deferred cost that is amortized to expense using the straight-line method of allocation unless another method better allocates the fee over the calendar year that it is payable. In accordance with the adoption of the new accounting pronouncement, on January 1, 2014, the Company recorded $55 million in other liabilities, and a corresponding deferred cost, in other assets.
Future Adoption of New Accounting Pronouncements
In March 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued new guidance on the presentation of net periodic pension cost and net periodic postretirement benefit cost (Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2017-07, Compensation - Retirement Benefits (Topic 715): Improving the Presentation of Net Periodic Pension Cost and Net Periodic Postretirement Benefit Cost). The new guidance is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those annual periods. Early adoption is permitted as of the beginning of an annual period for which financial statements (interim or annual) have not been issued or made available for issuance. The guidance requires that an employer that offers to their employees defined benefit pension or other postretirement benefit plans report the service cost component in the same line item or items as other compensation costs arising from services rendered by the pertinent employees during the period. The other components of net benefit cost are required to be presented in the income statement separately from the service cost component and outside a subtotal of income from operations, if one is presented. The guidance should be applied retrospectively for the presentation of the service cost component in the income statement and allows a practical expedient for the estimation basis for applying the retrospective presentation requirements. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.

118
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

In February 2017, the FASB issued new guidance on derecognition of nonfinancial assets (ASU 2017-05, Other Income-Gains and Losses from the Derecognition of Nonfinancial Assets (Subtopic 610-20): Clarifying the Scope of Asset Derecognition Guidance and Accounting for Partial Sales of Nonfinancial Assets). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those years. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016. The guidance may be applied retrospectively for all periods presented or retrospectively with a cumulative-effect adjustment at the date of adoption. The new guidance clarifies the scope and accounting of a financial asset that meets the definition of an “in-substance nonfinancial asset” and defines the term, “in-substance nonfinancial asset.” The ASU also adds guidance for partial sales of nonfinancial assets. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In January 2017, the FASB issued new guidance on goodwill impairment (ASU 2017-04, Intangibles-Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied on a prospective basis. Early adoption is permitted for interim or annual goodwill impairment tests performed on testing dates after January 1, 2017. The new guidance simplifies the current two-step goodwill impairment test by eliminating Step 2 of the test. The new guidance requires a one-step impairment test in which an entity compares the fair value of a reporting unit with its carrying amount and recognizes an impairment charge for the amount by which the carrying amount exceeds the reporting unit’s fair value, if any. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In January 2017, the FASB issued new guidance on business combinations (ASU 2017-01, Business Combinations (Topic 805): Clarifying the Definition of a Business). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied on a prospective basis. Early adoption is permitted as specified in the guidance. The new guidance clarifies the definition of a business and requires that an entity apply certain criteria in order to determine when a set of assets and activities qualifies as a business. The adoption of this standard will result in fewer acquisitions qualifying as businesses and, accordingly, acquisition costs for those acquisitions that do not qualify as businesses will be capitalized rather than expensed. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In November 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on restricted cash (ASU 2016-18, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied on a retrospective basis. Early adoption is permitted. The new guidance requires that a statement of cash flows explain the change during the period in the total of cash, cash equivalents, and amounts generally described as restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. As a result, the new guidance requires that amounts generally described as restricted cash and restricted cash equivalents should be included with cash and cash equivalents when reconciling the beginning-of-period and end-of-period total amounts shown on the statement of cash flows. The new guidance does not provide a definition of restricted cash or restricted cash equivalents. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In October 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on consolidation evaluation for entities under common control (ASU 2016-17, Consolidation (Topic 810): Interests Held through Related Parties That Are under Common Control). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied on a retrospective basis. Early adoption is permitted. The new guidance does not change the characteristics of a primary beneficiary under current GAAP. It changes how a reporting entity evaluates whether it is the primary beneficiary of a VIE by changing how a reporting entity that is a single decisionmaker of a VIE handles indirect interests in the entity held through related parties that are under common control with the reporting entity. The adoption of this new guidance will not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In October 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on tax accounting for intra-entity transfers of assets (ASU 2016-16, Income Taxes (Topic 740): Intra-Entity Transfers of Assets Other Than Inventory). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied on a modified retrospective basis. Early adoption is permitted in the first interim or annual reporting period. Current guidance prohibits the recognition of current and deferred income taxes for an intra-entity asset transfer until the asset has been sold to an outside party. The new guidance requires an entity to recognize the income tax consequences of an intra-entity transfer of an asset other than inventory when the transfer occurs. Also, the guidance eliminates the exception for an intra-entity transfer of an asset other than inventory. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.

119
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

In August 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on cash flow statement presentation (ASU 2016-15, Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those fiscal years, and should be applied retrospectively to all periods presented. Early adoption is permitted in any interim or annual period. This ASU addresses diversity in how certain cash receipts and cash payments are presented and classified in the statement of cash flows. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In June 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on measurement of credit losses on financial instruments (ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments). The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018. This ASU replaces the incurred loss impairment methodology with one that reflects expected credit losses. The measurement of expected credit losses should be based on historical loss information, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts. The new guidance requires that an OTTI on a debt security will be recognized as an allowance going forward, such that improvements in expected future cash flows after an impairment will no longer be reflected as a prospective yield adjustment through net investment income, but rather a reversal of the previous impairment and recognized through realized investment gains and losses. The guidance also requires enhanced disclosures. The Company has assessed the asset classes impacted by the new guidance and is currently assessing the accounting and reporting system changes that will be required to comply with the new guidance. The Company believes that the most significant impact upon adoption will be to its mortgage loan investments. The Company is continuing to evaluate the overall impact of the new guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In February 2016, the FASB issued new guidance on leasing transactions (ASU 2016-02, Leases - Topic 842). The new guidance is effective for the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, and requires a modified retrospective transition approach. Early adoption is permitted. The new guidance requires a lessee to recognize assets and liabilities for leases with lease terms of more than 12 months. Leases would be classified as finance or operating leases and both types of leases will be recognized on the balance sheet. Lessor accounting will remain largely unchanged from current guidance except for certain targeted changes. The new guidance will also require new qualitative and quantitative disclosures. The Company’s implementation efforts are primarily focused on the review of its existing lease contracts, as well as identification of other contracts that may fall under the scope of the new guidance. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.
In January 2016, the FASB issued new guidance (ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall: Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities) on the recognition and measurement of financial instruments. The new guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted for the instrument-specific credit risk provision. The new guidance changes the current accounting guidance related to (i) the classification and measurement of certain equity investments, (ii) the presentation of changes in the fair value of financial liabilities measured under the FVO that are due to instrument-specific credit risk, and (iii) certain disclosures associated with the fair value of financial instruments. Additionally, there will no longer be a requirement to assess equity securities for impairment since such securities will be measured at fair value through net income. The Company has assessed the population of financial instruments that are subject to the new guidance and has determined that the most significant impact will be the requirement to report changes in fair value in net income each reporting period for all equity securities currently classified as available-for-sale and, to a lesser extent, other limited partnership interests and real estate joint ventures that are currently accounted for under the cost method. The population of these investments accounted for under the cost method is not material. The Company is continuing to evaluate the overall impact of this guidance on its consolidated financial statements.

120
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
1. Business, Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (continued)

In May 2014, the FASB issued a comprehensive new revenue recognition standard (ASU 2014‑09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)), effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and interim periods within those years. The guidance may be applied retrospectively for all periods presented or retrospectively with a cumulative-effect adjustment at the date of adoption. The new guidance will supersede nearly all existing revenue recognition guidance under U.S. GAAP; however, it will not impact the accounting for insurance and investment contracts within the scope of Financial Services insurance (Topic 944), leases, financial instruments and guarantees. For those contracts that are impacted, the guidance will require an entity to recognize revenue upon the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled, in exchange for those goods or services. Given the scope of the new revenue recognition guidance, the Company does not expect the adoption to have a material impact on its consolidated revenues or statements of operations, with the Company’s implementation efforts primarily focused on other revenues on the consolidated statements of operations.
Other
Effective January 3, 2017, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”) amended its rulebook, resulting in the characterization of variation margin transfers as settlement payments, as opposed to adjustments to collateral. These amendments will impact the accounting treatment of the Company’s centrally cleared derivatives, for which the CME serves as the central clearing party. The application of the amended rulebook is expected to reduce the gross derivative assets and liabilities, as well as the related collateral, recorded on the consolidated balance sheet for trades cleared through the CME. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of these amendments on its consolidated financial statements. This change is not expected to impact the tax treatment of such derivatives, although the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) is being asked to issue definitive guidance.
2. Segment Information
The Company is organized into two segments: U.S. and MetLife Holdings. In addition, the Company reports certain of its results of operations in Corporate & Other.
On January 12, 2016, MetLife, Inc. announced its plan to separate a substantial portion of its former Retail segment, as well as certain portions of its former Corporate Benefit Funding segment and Corporate & Other (the “Separation”). MetLife, Inc. subsequently re-segmented the business to be separated and rebranded it “Brighthouse Financial.”
On October 5, 2016, Brighthouse Financial, Inc., a subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. (“Brighthouse”), filed a registration statement on Form 10 (the “Form 10”) with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). On December 6, 2016, Brighthouse filed an amendment to its registration statement on Form 10 with the SEC. The information statement filed as an exhibit to the Form 10 disclosed that MetLife, Inc. intends to include Brighthouse Life Insurance Company (formerly, MetLife Insurance Company USA) (“Brighthouse Insurance”), New England Life Insurance Company (“NELICO”), a former wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Brighthouse Life Insurance Company of NY (formerly, First MetLife Investors Insurance Company) (“Brighthouse NY”), Brighthouse Investment Advisers, LLC (formerly, MetLife Advisers, LLC) and certain captive reinsurance companies in the proposed separated business and distribute at least 80.1% of the shares of Brighthouse’s common stock on a pro rata basis to the holders of MetLife, Inc. common stock.
The ultimate form and timing of the Separation will be influenced by a number of factors, including regulatory considerations and economic conditions. MetLife continues to evaluate and pursue structural alternatives for the proposed Separation. The Separation remains subject to certain conditions, including among others, obtaining final approval from the MetLife, Inc. Board of Directors, receipt of a favorable ruling from the IRS and an opinion from MetLife’s tax advisor regarding certain U.S. federal income tax matters, insurance and other regulatory approvals, and an SEC declaration of the effectiveness of the Form 10.
U.S.
The U.S. segment offers a broad range of protection products and services aimed at serving the financial needs of customers throughout their lives. These products are sold to corporations and their respective employees, other institutions and their respective members, as well as individuals. The U.S. segment is organized into two businesses: Group Benefits and Retirement and Income Solutions.

121
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
2. Segment Information (continued)

•
The Group Benefits business offers insurance products and services which include life, dental, group short- and long-term disability, individual disability, accidental death and dismemberment, critical illness, vision and accident & health coverages, as well as prepaid legal plans. This business also sells administrative services-only arrangements to some employers.
•
The Retirement and Income Solutions business offers a broad range of annuity and investment products, including guaranteed interest contracts and other stable value products, institutional income annuities and separate account contracts for the investment management of defined benefit and defined contribution plan assets. This business also includes structured settlements and certain products to fund postretirement benefits and company-, bank- or trust-owned life insurance used to finance nonqualified benefit programs for executives.
MetLife Holdings
The MetLife Holdings segment consists of operations relating to products and businesses no longer actively marketed by the Company in the United States. These products and businesses include variable, universal, term and whole life, as well as variable, fixed and index-linked annuities. The MetLife Holdings segment also includes the Company’s discontinued long-term care business.
Corporate & Other
Corporate & Other contains the excess capital, as well as certain charges and activities, not allocated to the segments, including enterprise-wide strategic initiative restructuring charges and various start-up businesses (including the investment management business through which the Company offers fee-based investment management services to institutional clients, as well as the direct to consumer portion of the U.S. Direct business). Corporate & Other also includes the Company’s ancillary international operations, the businesses of the Company that MetLife, Inc. plans to separate and include in Brighthouse Financial and interest expense related to the majority of the Company’s outstanding debt, as well as expenses associated with certain legal proceedings and income tax audit issues. In addition, Corporate & Other includes the elimination of intersegment amounts, which generally relate to intersegment loans, which bear interest rates commensurate with related borrowings.
Financial Measures and Segment Accounting Policies
Operating earnings is used by management to evaluate performance and allocate resources. Consistent with GAAP guidance for segment reporting, operating earnings is also the Company’s GAAP measure of segment performance and is reported below. Operating earnings should not be viewed as a substitute for income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax. The Company believes the presentation of operating earnings as the Company measures it for management purposes enhances the understanding of its performance by highlighting the results of operations and the underlying profitability drivers of the business. Operating earnings allows analysis of the Company’s performance and facilitates comparisons to industry results.
Operating earnings is defined as operating revenues less operating expenses, both net of income tax.
The financial measures of operating revenues and operating expenses focus on the Company’s primary businesses principally by excluding the impact of market volatility, which could distort trends, and revenues and costs related to non-core products and divested businesses and certain entities required to be consolidated under GAAP. Also, these measures exclude results of discontinued operations and other businesses that have been or will be sold or exited by MetLife and are referred to as divested businesses. Operating revenues also excludes net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses).
The following additional adjustments are made to revenues, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating revenues:
•
Universal life and investment-type product policy fees excludes the amortization of unearned revenue related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses) and certain variable annuity GMIB fees (“GMIB Fees”); and
•
Net investment income: (i) includes earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of investments or that are used to replicate certain investments, but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment, (ii) includes income from discontinued real estate operations, (iii) excludes post-tax operating earnings adjustments relating to insurance joint ventures accounted for under the equity method and (iv) excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP.

122
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
2. Segment Information (continued)

The following additional adjustments are made to expenses, in the line items indicated, in calculating operating expenses:
•
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends excludes: (i) changes in the policyholder dividend obligation related to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), (ii) amounts associated with periodic crediting rate adjustments based on the total return of a contractually referenced pool of assets, (iii) benefits and hedging costs related to GMIBs (“GMIB Costs”) and (iv) market value adjustments associated with surrenders or terminations of contracts (“Market Value Adjustments”);
•
Interest credited to policyholder account balances includes adjustments for earned income on derivatives and amortization of premium on derivatives that are hedges of policyholder account balances but do not qualify for hedge accounting treatment;
•
Amortization of DAC and VOBA excludes amounts related to: (i) net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), (ii) GMIB Fees and GMIB Costs and (iii) Market Value Adjustments;
•
Interest expense on debt excludes certain amounts related to securitization entities that are VIEs consolidated under GAAP; and
•
Other expenses excludes costs related to noncontrolling interests and goodwill impairments.
The tax impact of the adjustments mentioned above are calculated net of the U.S. or foreign statutory tax rate, which could differ from the Company’s effective tax rate.
Set forth in the tables below is certain financial information with respect to the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other, for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and at December 31, 2016 and 2015. The segment accounting policies are the same as those used to prepare the Company’s consolidated financial statements, except for operating earnings adjustments as defined above. In addition, segment accounting policies include the method of capital allocation described below.
Economic capital is an internally developed risk capital model, the purpose of which is to measure the risk in the business and to provide a basis upon which capital is deployed. The economic capital model accounts for the unique and specific nature of the risks inherent in MetLife’s and the Company’s business.
MetLife’s economic capital model, coupled with considerations of local capital requirements, aligns segment allocated equity with emerging standards and consistent risk principles. The model applies statistics-based risk evaluation principles to the material risks to which the Company is exposed. These consistent risk principles include calibrating required economic capital shock factors to a specific confidence level and time horizon while applying an industry standard method for the inclusion of diversification benefits among risk types. MetLife’s management is responsible for the ongoing production and enhancement of the economic capital model and reviews its approach periodically to ensure that it remains consistent with emerging industry practice standards.
Segment net investment income is credited or charged based on the level of allocated equity; however, changes in allocated equity do not impact the Company’s consolidated net investment income, income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax, or operating earnings.
Net investment income is based upon the actual results of each segment’s specifically identifiable investment portfolios adjusted for allocated equity. Other costs are allocated to each of the segments based upon: (i) a review of the nature of such costs; (ii) time studies analyzing the amount of employee compensation costs incurred by each segment; and (iii) cost estimates included in the Company’s product pricing.

123
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
2. Segment Information (continued)

 
 
Operating Results
 
 
 
 
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
U.S.
 
MetLife Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
Adjustments
 
Total
Consolidated
 
 
(In millions)
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums
 
$
17,921


$
4,411


$
61

 
$
22,393

 
$
—

 
$
22,393

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
 
988


1,236


216

 
2,440

 
102

 
2,542

Net investment income
 
6,075


5,606


(67
)
 
11,614

 
(531
)
 
11,083

Other revenues
 
750


110


618

 
1,478

 
—

 
1,478

Net investment gains (losses)
 
—


—


—

 
—

 
132

 
132

Net derivative gains (losses)
 
—


—


—

 
—

 
(1,138
)
 
(1,138
)
Total revenues
 
25,734

 
11,363

 
828

 
37,925

 
(1,435
)
 
36,490

Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
 
18,935

 
7,255

 
130

 
26,320

 
171

 
26,491

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
 
1,297

 
907

 
32

 
2,236

 
(3
)
 
2,233

Capitalization of DAC
 
(60
)
 
(267
)
 
(5
)
 
(332
)
 
—

 
(332
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
 
56

 
675

 
56

 
787

 
(346
)
 
441

Interest expense on debt
 
10

 
7

 
95

 
112

 
—

 
112

Other expenses
 
2,770

 
1,850

 
825

 
5,445

 
137

 
5,582

Total expenses
 
23,008

 
10,427

 
1,133

 
34,568

 
(41
)
 
34,527

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
975

 
270

 
(551
)
 
694

 
(487
)
 
207

Operating earnings
 
$
1,751

 
$
666

 
$
246

 
2,663

 
 
 
 
Adjustments to:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(1,435
)
 
 
 
 
Total expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
41

 
 
 
 
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
487

 
 
 
 
Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
 
$
1,756

 
 
 
$
1,756

At December 31, 2016
 
U.S.
 
MetLife Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
 
(In millions)
Total assets
 
$
247,314

 
$
163,048

 
$
22,199

 
$
432,561

Separate account assets
 
$
85,854

 
$
47,982

 
$
—

 
$
133,836

Separate account liabilities
 
$
85,854

 
$
47,982

 
$
—

 
$
133,836


124
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
2. Segment Information (continued)

 
 
Operating Results
 
 
 
 
Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
U.S.
 
MetLife Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
Adjustments
 
Total
Consolidated
 
 
(In millions)
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums
 
$
17,340

 
$
4,527

 
$
67

 
$
21,934

 
$
—

 
$
21,934

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
 
941

 
1,294

 
249

 
2,484

 
100

 
2,584

Net investment income
 
6,037

 
5,902

 
94

 
12,033

 
(456
)
 
11,577

Other revenues
 
729

 
135

 
672

 
1,536

 
—

 
1,536

Net investment gains (losses)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
259

 
259

Net derivative gains (losses)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
881

 
881

Total revenues
 
25,047

 
11,858

 
1,082

 
37,987

 
784

 
38,771

Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
 
18,384

 
7,218

 
125

 
25,727

 
64

 
25,791

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
 
1,212

 
933

 
34

 
2,179

 
4

 
2,183

Capitalization of DAC
 
(71
)
 
(409
)
 
(2
)
 
(482
)
 
—

 
(482
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
 
59

 
527

 
44

 
630

 
112

 
742

Interest expense on debt
 
5

 
4

 
113

 
122

 
—

 
122

Other expenses
 
2,724

 
1,825

 
1,324

 
5,873

 
3

 
5,876

Total expenses
 
22,313

 
10,098

 
1,638

 
34,049

 
183

 
34,232

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
981

 
555

 
37

 
1,573

 
209

 
1,782

Operating earnings
 
$
1,753

 
$
1,205

 
$
(593
)
 
2,365

 
 
 
 
Adjustments to:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
784

 
 
 
 
Total expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(183
)
 
 
 
 
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(209
)
 
 
 
 
Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
 
$
2,757

 
 
 
$
2,757

At December 31, 2015
 
U.S.
 
MetLife Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
 
(In millions)
Total assets
 
$
231,653

 
$
178,734

 
$
39,133

 
$
449,520

Separate account assets
 
$
79,540

 
$
48,478

 
$
7,921

 
$
135,939

Separate account liabilities
 
$
79,540

 
$
48,478

 
$
7,921

 
$
135,939


125
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
2. Segment Information (continued)

 
 
Operating Results
 
 
 
 
Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
U.S.
 
MetLife Holdings
 
Corporate
& Other
 
Total
 
Adjustments
 
Total
Consolidated
 
 
(In millions)
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums
 
$
16,771

 
$
4,523

 
$
90

 
$
21,384

 
$
—

 
$
21,384

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
 
907

 
1,257

 
248

 
2,412

 
54

 
2,466

Net investment income
 
5,927

 
6,105

 
333

 
12,365

 
(472
)
 
11,893

Other revenues
 
702

 
407

 
699

 
1,808

 
—

 
1,808

Net investment gains (losses)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
143

 
143

Net derivative gains (losses)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1,037

 
1,037

Total revenues
 
24,307

 
12,292

 
1,370

 
37,969

 
762

 
38,731

Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims and policyholder dividends
 
17,825

 
7,102

 
123

 
25,050

 
45

 
25,095

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
 
1,164

 
966

 
33

 
2,163

 
11

 
2,174

Capitalization of DAC
 
(78
)
 
(325
)
 
(21
)
 
(424
)
 
—

 
(424
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
 
54

 
467

 
58

 
579

 
116

 
695

Interest expense on debt
 
12

 
8

 
130

 
150

 
1

 
151

Other expenses
 
2,639

 
1,709

 
1,307

 
5,655

 
(6
)
 
5,649

Total expenses
 
21,616

 
9,927

 
1,630

 
33,173

 
167

 
33,340

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
954

 
762

 
(394
)
 
1,322

 
210

 
1,532

Operating earnings
 
$
1,737

 
$
1,603

 
$
134

 
3,474

 
 
 
 
Adjustments to:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
762

 
 
 
 
Total expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(167
)
 
 
 
 
Provision for income tax (expense) benefit
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(210
)
 
 
 
 
Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
 
$
3,859

 
 
 
$
3,859

The following table presents total premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues by major product groups of the Company’s segments, as well as Corporate & Other:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Life insurance
$
13,907

 
$
13,811

 
$
13,865

Accident & health insurance
7,889

 
7,475

 
7,247

Annuities
4,379

 
4,548

 
4,352

Non-insurance
238

 
220

 
194

Total
$
26,413

 
$
26,054

 
$
25,658

Substantially all of the Company’s consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues originated in the U.S.
Revenues derived from one U.S. customer were $2.8 billion, $2.7 billion and $2.8 billion for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, which represented 10%, 10% and 11%, respectively, of consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues. Revenues derived from any other customer did not exceed 10% of consolidated premiums, universal life and investment-type product policy fees and other revenues for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014.

126
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

3. Dispositions
2016 Dispositions
In December 2016, the Company distributed to MetLife, Inc. as a non-cash extraordinary dividend all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of its wholly-owned subsidiaries, NELICO and General American Life Insurance Company (“GALIC”). The net book value of NELICO and GALIC at the time of the dividend was $2.9 billion, which was recorded as a dividend of retained earnings of $2.7 billion and a decrease to other comprehensive income of $254 million, net of income tax. As of the date of the dividend payment, the Company no longer consolidates the assets, liabilities and operations of NELICO and GALIC.
2014 Disposition
In December 2014, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company distributed to MetLife, Inc., as a dividend, all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of its wholly-owned, broker-dealer subsidiary, New England Securities Corporation (“NES”). The net book value of NES at the time of the dividend was $35 million, which was recorded as a dividend of retained earnings of $35 million. As of the date of the dividend payment, the Company no longer consolidates the assets, liabilities and operations of NES.
4. Insurance
Insurance Liabilities
Insurance liabilities, including affiliated insurance liabilities on reinsurance assumed and ceded, are comprised of future policy benefits, policyholder account balances and other policy-related balances. Information regarding insurance liabilities by segment, as well as Corporate & Other, was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
U.S.
$
124,505

 
$
119,806

MetLife Holdings
89,911

 
98,346

Corporate & Other
337

 
2,383

Total
$
214,753

 
$
220,535

See Note 6 for discussion of affiliated reinsurance liabilities included in the table above.
Future policy benefits are measured as follows:
Product Type:
Measurement Assumptions:
Participating life
Aggregate of (i) net level premium reserves for death and endowment policy benefits (calculated based upon the non-forfeiture interest rate, ranging from 3% to 7%, and mortality rates guaranteed in calculating the cash surrender values described in such contracts); and (ii) the liability for terminal dividends.
Nonparticipating life
Aggregate of the present value of expected future benefit payments and related expenses less the present value of expected future net premiums. Assumptions as to mortality and persistency are based upon the Company’s experience when the basis of the liability is established. Interest rate assumptions for the aggregate future policy benefit liabilities range from 2% to 11%.
Individual and group
traditional fixed annuities
after annuitization
Present value of expected future payments. Interest rate assumptions used in establishing such liabilities range from 2% to 11%.
Non-medical health
insurance
The net level premium method and assumptions as to future morbidity, withdrawals and interest, which provide a margin for adverse deviation. Interest rate assumptions used in establishing such liabilities range from 4% to 7%.
Disabled lives
Present value of benefits method and experience assumptions as to claim terminations, expenses and interest. Interest rate assumptions used in establishing such liabilities range from 2% to 8%.

127
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Participating business represented 4% and 5% of the Company’s life insurance in-force at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Participating policies represented 26%, 27% and 27% of gross traditional life insurance premiums for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Policyholder account balances are equal to: (i) policy account values, which consist of an accumulation of gross premium payments; and (ii) credited interest, ranging from less than 1% to 13%, less expenses, mortality charges and withdrawals.
Guarantees
The Company issues variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. GMABs, the non-life-contingent portion of GMWBs and the portion of certain GMIBs that do not require annuitization are accounted for as embedded derivatives in policyholder account balances and are further discussed in Note 9. Guarantees accounted for as insurance liabilities include:
Guarantee:
 
 
Measurement Assumptions:
GMDBs
•

A return of purchase payment upon death even if the account value is reduced to zero.
 
•

Present value of expected death benefits in excess of the projected account balance recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on the present value of total expected assessments.
 
•

An enhanced death benefit may be available for an additional fee.
 
•

Assumptions are consistent with those used for amortizing DAC, and are thus subject to the same variability and risk.
 
 
 
 
•

Investment performance and volatility assumptions are consistent with the historical experience of the appropriate underlying equity index, such as the S&P 500 Index.
 
 
 
 
•

Benefit assumptions are based on the average benefits payable over a range of scenarios.
GMIBs
•

After a specified period of time determined at the time of issuance of the variable annuity contract, a minimum accumulation of purchase payments, even if the account value is reduced to zero, that can be annuitized to receive a monthly income stream that is not less than a specified amount.
 
•

Present value of expected income benefits in excess of the projected account balance at any future date of annuitization and recognizing the excess ratably over the accumulation period based on present value of total expected assessments.
 
•

Certain contracts also provide for a guaranteed lump sum return of purchase premium in lieu of the annuitization benefit.
 
•

Assumptions are consistent with those used for estimating GMDB liabilities.
 
 
 
 
•

Calculation incorporates an assumption for the percentage of the potential annuitizations that may be elected by the contractholder.
GMWBs
•

A return of purchase payment via partial withdrawals, even if the account value is reduced to zero, provided that cumulative withdrawals in a contract year do not exceed a certain limit.
 
•

Expected value of the life contingent payments and expected assessments using assumptions consistent with those used for estimating the GMDB liabilities.
 
•

Certain contracts include guaranteed withdrawals that are life contingent.
 
 
 
The Company also issues other annuity contracts that apply a lower rate on funds deposited if the contractholder elects to surrender the contract for cash and a higher rate if the contractholder elects to annuitize. These guarantees include benefits that are payable in the event of death, maturity or at annuitization. Certain other annuity contracts contain guaranteed annuitization benefits that may be above what would be provided by the current account value of the contract. Additionally, the Company issues universal and variable life contracts where the Company contractually guarantees to the contractholder a secondary guarantee or a guaranteed paid-up benefit.

128
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Information regarding the liabilities for guarantees (excluding base policy liabilities and embedded derivatives) relating to annuity and universal and variable life contracts was as follows:
 
Annuity Contracts
 
Universal and Variable
Life Contracts
 
 
 
GMDBs
 
GMIBs
 
Secondary
Guarantees
 
Paid-Up
Guarantees
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Direct:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1, 2014
$
148

 
$
390

 
$
417

 
$
74

 
$
1,029

Incurred guaranteed benefits
51

 
68

 
124

 
8

 
251

Paid guaranteed benefits
(3
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(3
)
Balance at December 31, 2014
196

 
458

 
541

 
82

 
1,277

Incurred guaranteed benefits
37

 
80

 
86

 
9

 
212

Paid guaranteed benefits
(1
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Balance at December 31, 2015
232

 
538

 
627

 
91

 
1,488

Incurred guaranteed benefits
55

 
63

 
92

 
11

 
221

Paid guaranteed benefits
(1
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Dispositions (1)
(18
)
 
(134
)
 
(99
)
 
—

 
(251
)
Balance at December 31, 2016
$
268

 
$
467

 
$
620

 
$
102

 
$
1,457

Ceded:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1, 2014
$
120

 
$
124

 
$
314

 
$
51

 
$
609

Incurred guaranteed benefits
(80
)
 
(100
)
 
(9
)
 
6

 
(183
)
Paid guaranteed benefits
(3
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(3
)
Balance at December 31, 2014
37

 
24

 
305

 
57

 
423

Incurred guaranteed benefits
14

 
2

 
49

 
6

 
71

Paid guaranteed benefits
(1
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Balance at December 31, 2015
50

 
26

 
354

 
63

 
493

Incurred guaranteed benefits
13

 
(8
)
 
(8
)
 
8

 
5

Paid guaranteed benefits
(1
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Dispositions (1)
(18
)
 
(39
)
 
(97
)
 
—

 
(154
)
Balance at December 31, 2016
$
44

 
$
(21
)
 
$
249

 
$
71

 
$
343

Net:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1, 2014
$
28

 
$
266

 
$
103

 
$
23

 
$
420

Incurred guaranteed benefits
131

 
168

 
133

 
2

 
434

Paid guaranteed benefits
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Balance at December 31, 2014
159

 
434

 
236

 
25

 
854

Incurred guaranteed benefits
23

 
78

 
37

 
3

 
141

Paid guaranteed benefits
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Balance at December 31, 2015
182

 
512

 
273

 
28

 
995

Incurred guaranteed benefits
42

 
71

 
100

 
3

 
216

Paid guaranteed benefits
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Dispositions (1)
—

 
(95
)
 
(2
)
 
—

 
(97
)
Balance at December 31, 2016
$
224

 
$
488

 
$
371

 
$
31

 
$
1,114

______________
(1)
See Note 3.

129
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Information regarding the Company’s guarantee exposure, which includes direct business, but excludes offsets from hedging or reinsurance, if any, was as follows at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
 
In the
Event of Death
 
At
Annuitization
 
In the
Event of Death
 
At
Annuitization
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
Annuity Contracts (1):
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Variable Annuity Guarantees:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total account value (2)
 
$
54,629

 
 
$
24,310

 
 
$
59,858

 
 
$
27,648

 
Separate account value
 
$
43,359

 
 
$
23,330

 
 
$
48,216

 
 
$
26,530

 
Net amount at risk
 
$
1,386

(3
)
 
$
328

(4
)
 
$
1,698

(3
)
 
$
379

(4
)
Average attained age of contractholders
 
65 years

 
 
64 years

 
 
65 years

 
 
63 years

 
Other Annuity Guarantees:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total account value (2)
 
N/A

 
 
$
141

 
 
N/A

 
 
$
406

 
Net amount at risk
 
N/A

 
 
$
92

(5
)
 
N/A

 
 
$
144

(5
)
Average attained age of contractholders
 
N/A

 
 
52 years

 
 
N/A

 
 
56 years

 
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Secondary
Guarantees
 
Paid-Up
Guarantees
 
Secondary
Guarantees
 
Paid-Up
Guarantees
 
(Dollars in millions)
Universal and Variable Life Contracts (1):
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total account value (2)
$
4,306

 
$
1,014

 
$
8,166

 
$
1,052

Net amount at risk (6)
$
49,161

 
$
7,164

 
$
75,994

 
$
7,658

Average attained age of policyholders
53 years

 
62 years

 
55 years

 
61 years

______________
(1)
The Company’s annuity and life contracts with guarantees may offer more than one type of guarantee in each contract. Therefore, the amounts listed above may not be mutually exclusive.
(2)
Includes the contractholder’s investments in the general account and separate account, if applicable.
(3)
Defined as the death benefit less the total account value, as of the balance sheet date. It represents the amount of the claim that the Company would incur if death claims were filed on all contracts on the balance sheet date and includes any additional contractual claims associated with riders purchased to assist with covering income taxes payable upon death.
(4)
Defined as the amount (if any) that would be required to be added to the total account value to purchase a lifetime income stream, based on current annuity rates, equal to the minimum amount provided under the guaranteed benefit. This amount represents the Company’s potential economic exposure to such guarantees in the event all contractholders were to annuitize on the balance sheet date, even though the contracts contain terms that allow annuitization of the guaranteed amount only after the 10th anniversary of the contract, which not all contractholders have achieved.
(5)
Defined as either the excess of the upper tier, adjusted for a profit margin, less the lower tier, as of the balance sheet date or the amount (if any) that would be required to be added to the total account value to purchase a lifetime income stream, based on current annuity rates, equal to the minimum amount provided under the guaranteed benefit. These amounts represent the Company’s potential economic exposure to such guarantees in the event all contractholders were to annuitize on the balance sheet date.
(6)
Defined as the guarantee amount less the account value, as of the balance sheet date. It represents the amount of the claim that the Company would incur if death claims were filed on all contracts on the balance sheet date.

130
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Account balances of contracts with guarantees were invested in separate account asset classes as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Fund Groupings:
 
 
 
Equity
$
19,929

 
$
23,701

Balanced
18,833

 
21,082

Bond
3,882

 
4,454

Money Market
64

 
132

Total
$
42,708

 
$
49,369

Obligations Assumed Under Structured Settlement Assignments
The Company assumes structured settlement claim obligations as an assignment company. These liabilities are measured at the present value of the periodic claims to be provided and reported as other policy-related balances. The Company receives a fee for assuming these claim obligations and, as the assignee of the claim, is legally obligated to ensure periodic payments are made to the claimant. The Company purchases annuities from affiliates to fund these periodic payment claim obligations and designates payments to be made directly to the claimant by the affiliated annuity writer. These annuities funding structured settlement claims are recorded as an investment. See Note 1.
See Note 8 for additional information on obligations assumed under structured settlement assignments.
Obligations Under Funding Agreements
The Company issues fixed and floating rate funding agreements, which are denominated in either U.S. dollars or foreign currencies, to certain unconsolidated special purpose entities (“SPEs”) that have issued either debt securities or commercial paper for which payment of interest and principal is secured by such funding agreements. During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, the Company issued $39.7 billion, $35.1 billion and $36.7 billion, respectively, and repaid $38.5 billion, $35.5 billion and $31.7 billion, respectively, of such funding agreements. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, liabilities for funding agreements outstanding, which are included in policyholder account balances, were $30.8 billion and $29.5 billion, respectively.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and GALIC, a former subsidiary, are members of regional banks in the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) system (“FHLBanks”). Holdings of common stock of FHLBanks, included in equity securities, were as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
FHLB of New York
$
748

 
 
$
666

FHLB of Des Moines
$
—

(1)
 
$
40

________________
(1)
See Note 3 for information on the disposition of GALIC.

131
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

The Company has also entered into funding agreements with FHLBanks and the Federal Agricultural Mortgage Corporation, a federally chartered instrumentality of the U.S. (“Farmer Mac”). The liability for such funding agreements is included in policyholder account balances. Information related to such funding agreements was as follows at:
 
Liability
 
Collateral
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
 
FHLB of New York (1)
$
14,445

 
$
12,570

 
$
16,828

(2)
 
$
14,085

(2)
Farmer Mac (3)
$
2,550

 
$
2,550

 
$
2,645

 
 
$
2,643

 
FHLB of Des Moines (1)
$
—

 
$
750

 
$
—

(2)
 
$
851

(2)
__________________
(1)
Represents funding agreements issued to the applicable FHLBank in exchange for cash and for which such FHLBank has been granted a lien on certain assets, some of which are in the custody of such FHLBank, including residential mortgage-backed securities (“RMBS”), to collateralize obligations under advances evidenced by funding agreements. The Company is permitted to withdraw any portion of the collateral in the custody of such FHLBank as long as there is no event of default and the remaining qualified collateral is sufficient to satisfy the collateral maintenance level. Upon any event of default by the Company, such FHLBank’s recovery on the collateral is limited to the amount of the Company’s liability to such FHLBank.
(2)
Advances are collateralized by mortgage-backed securities. The amount of collateral presented is at estimated fair value.
(3)
Represents funding agreements issued to a subsidiary of Farmer Mac, as well as certain SPEs that have issued debt securities for which payment of interest and principal is secured by such funding agreements, and such debt securities are also guaranteed as to payment of interest and principal by Farmer Mac. The obligations under these funding agreements are secured by a pledge of certain eligible agricultural mortgage loans and may, under certain circumstances, be secured by other qualified collateral. The amount of collateral presented is at carrying value.
Liabilities for Unpaid Claims and Claim Expenses
The following is information about incurred and paid claims development by segment as of December 31, 2016. Such amounts are presented net of reinsurance, and are not discounted. The tables present claims development and cumulative claim payments by incurral year. The development tables are only presented for significant short-duration product liabilities within each segment. Where practical, up to 10 years of history has been provided. The information about incurred and paid claims development prior to 2016 is presented as supplementary information, as described in Note 1.

132
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

U.S.
Group Life - Term
 
 
Incurred Claims and Allocated Claim Adjustment Expense, Net of Reinsurance
 
At December 31, 2016
 
 
For the Years Ended December 31,
 
Total IBNR
Liabilities Plus
Expected
Development on
Reported Claims
 
Cumulative
Number of
Reported
Claims
 
 
(Unaudited)
 
 
 
 
Incurral Year
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
2015
 
2016
 
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
2011
 
$
6,318

 
$
6,290

 
$
6,293

 
$
6,269

 
$
6,287

 
$
6,295

 
$
3

 
207,139

2012
 
 
 
6,503

 
6,579

 
6,569

 
6,546

 
6,568

 
3

 
208,441

2013
 
 
 
 
 
6,637

 
6,713

 
6,719

 
6,720

 
8

 
210,597

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
6,986

 
6,919

 
6,913

 
13

 
210,347

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7,040

 
7,015

 
27

 
210,838

2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
7,125

 
825

 
184,085

Total
 
40,636

 
 
 
 
Cumulative paid claims and paid allocated claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
(38,879
)
 
 
 
 
All outstanding liabilities for incurral years prior to 2011, net of reinsurance
 
12

 
 
 
 
Total unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
$
1,769

 
 
 
 
 
 
Cumulative Paid Claims and Paid Allocated Claim Adjustment Expenses, Net of Reinsurance
 
 
For the Years Ended December 31,
 
 
(Unaudited)
 
 
Incurral Year
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
2015
 
2016
 
 
(In millions)
2011
 
$
4,982

 
$
6,194

 
$
6,239

 
$
6,256

 
$
6,281

 
$
6,290

2012
 
 
 
5,132

 
6,472

 
6,518

 
6,532

 
6,558

2013
 
 
 
 
 
5,216

 
6,614

 
6,664

 
6,678

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,428

 
6,809

 
6,858

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,524

 
6,913

2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
5,582

Total cumulative paid claims and paid allocated claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
$
38,879

Average Annual Percentage Payout
The following is supplementary information about average historical claims duration as of December 31, 2016:
 
 
Average Annual Percentage Payout of Incurred Claims by Age, Net of Reinsurance
Years
 
1

 
2

 
3

 
4

 
5

 
6

Group Life - Term
 
78.4
%
 
20.0
%
 
0.7
%
 
0.2
%
 
0.4
%
 
0.2
%

133
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Group Long-Term Disability
 
 
Incurred Claims and Allocated Claim Adjustment Expense, Net of Reinsurance
 
At December 31, 2016
 
 
For the Years Ended December 31,
 
Total IBNR
Liabilities Plus
Expected
Development on
Reported Claims
 
Cumulative
Number of
Reported
Claims
 
 
(Unaudited)
 
 
 
 
Incurral Year
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
2015
 
2016
 
 
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
2011
 
$
955

 
$
916

 
$
894

 
$
914

 
$
924

 
$
923

 
$
—

 
21,187

2012
 
 
 
966

 
979

 
980

 
1,014

 
1,034

 
—

 
19,502

2013
 
 
 
 
 
1,008

 
1,027

 
1,032

 
1,049

 
—

 
20,547

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,076

 
1,077

 
1,079

 
6

 
22,233

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,082

 
1,105

 
29

 
18,172

2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,131

 
534

 
8,960

Total
 
6,321

 
 
 
 
Cumulative paid claims and paid allocated claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
(2,277
)
 
 
 
 
All outstanding liabilities for incurral years prior to 2011, net of reinsurance
 
2,933

 
 
 
 
Total unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
$
6,977

 
 
 
 
 
 
Cumulative Paid Claims and Paid Allocated Claim Adjustment Expenses, Net of Reinsurance
 
 
For the Years Ended December 31,
 
 
(Unaudited)
 
 
Incurral Year
 
2011
 
2012
 
2013
 
2014
 
2015
 
2016
 
 
(In millions)
2011
 
$
44

 
$
217

 
$
337

 
$
411

 
$
478

 
$
537

2012
 
 
 
43

 
229

 
365

 
453

 
524

2013
 
 
 
 
 
43

 
234

 
382

 
475

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
51

 
266

 
428

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
50

 
264

2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
49

Total cumulative paid claims and paid allocated claim adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
$
2,277

Average Annual Percentage Payout
The following is supplementary information about average historical claims duration as of December 31, 2016:
 
 
Average Annual Percentage Payout of Incurred Claims by Age, Net of Reinsurance
Years
 
1

 
2

 
3

 
4

 
5

 
6

Group Long-Term Disability
 
4.4
%
 
18.9
%
 
13.8
%
 
8.4
%
 
7.1
%
 
6.3
%
Significant Methodologies and Assumptions
Group Life - Term and Group Long-Term Disability incurred but not paid (“IBNP”) liabilities are developed using a combination of loss ratio and development methods. Claims in the course of settlement are then subtracted from the IBNP liabilities resulting in the IBNR liabilities. The loss ratio method is used in the period in which the claims are neither sufficient nor credible. In developing the loss ratios, any material rate increases that could change the underlying premium without affecting the estimated incurred losses are taken into account. For periods where sufficient and credible claim data exists, the development method is used based on the claim triangles which categorize claims according to both the period in which they were incurred and the period in which they were paid, adjudicated or reported. The end result is a triangle of known data that is used to develop known completion ratios and factors. Claims paid are then subtracted from the estimated ultimate incurred claims to calculate the IBNP liability.

134
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

An expense liability is held for the future expenses associated with the payment of incurred but not yet paid claims (IBNR and pending). This is expressed as a percentage of the underlying claims liability and is based on past experience and the anticipated future expense structure.
For Group Life - Term and Group Long-Term Disability, first year incurred claims and allocated loss adjustment expenses increased in 2016 compared to the 2015 incurral year due to the growth in the size of the business.
There were no significant changes in methodologies during 2016. The assumptions used in calculating the unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses for Group Life - Term and Group Long-Term Disability are updated annually to reflect emerging trends in claim experience.
No additional premiums or return premiums have been accrued as a result of the prior year development.
Liabilities for Group Life - Term unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses are not discounted.
The liabilities for Group Long-Term Disability unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses were $5.8 billion and $5.5 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. These amounts were discounted using interest rates ranging from 3% to 8%, based on the incurral year. The total discount applied to these liabilities was $1.3 billion at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The amount of interest accretion recognized was $565 million, $517 million and $481 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. These amounts were reflected in policyholder benefits and claims.
For Group Life - Term, claims were based upon individual death claims. For Group Long-Term Disability, claim frequency was determined by the number of reported claims as identified by a unique claim number assigned to individual claimants. Claim counts initially include claims that do not ultimately result in a liability. These claims are omitted from the claim counts once it is determined that there is no liability.
The Group Long-Term Disability IBNR, included in the development tables above, was developed using discounted cash flows, and is presented on a discounted basis.

135
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Reconciliation of the Disclosure of Incurred and Paid Claims Development to the Liability for Unpaid Claims and Claim Adjustment Expenses
The reconciliation of the net incurred and paid claims development tables to the liability for unpaid claims and claims adjustment expenses on the consolidated balance sheet was as follows at:
 
 
December 31, 2016
 
 
(In millions)
Short-Duration:
 
 
 
Unpaid claims and allocated claims adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance:
 
 
 
U.S.:
 
 
 
Group Life - Term
 
$
1,769

 
Group Long-Term Disability
 
6,977

 
Total
 
 
8,746

Other insurance lines - all segments combined
 
 
548

Total unpaid claims and allocated claims adjustment expenses, net of reinsurance
 
 
9,294

 
 
 
 
Reinsurance recoverables on unpaid claims:
 
 
 
U.S.:
 
 
 
Group Life - Term
 
21

 
Group Long-Term Disability
 
74

 
Total
 
 
95

Other insurance lines - all segments combined
 
 
5

Total reinsurance recoverable on unpaid claims
 
 
100

Total unpaid claims and allocated claims adjustment expense
 
 
9,394

Discounting
 
 
(1,277
)
Liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment liabilities - short-duration
 
 
8,117

Liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment liabilities - all long-duration lines
 
 
3,504

Total liability for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expense (included in future policy benefits and other policy-related balances)
 
 
$
11,621


136
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
4. Insurance (continued)

Rollforward of Claims and Claim Adjustment Expenses
Information regarding the liabilities for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses was as follows:
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015 (1)
 
2014 (1)
 
 
(In millions)
Balance at December 31 of prior period
 
$
7,527

 
$
7,310

 
$
7,022

Less: Reinsurance recoverables
 
273

 
286

 
290

Net balance at December 31 of prior period
 
7,254

 
7,024

 
6,732

Cumulative adjustment (2)
 
3,397

 
—

 
—

Net balance at January 1,
 
10,651

 
7,024

 
6,732

Incurred related to:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current year
 
16,321

 
5,316

 
5,099

Prior years (3)
 
325

 
13

 
—

Total incurred
 
16,646

 
5,329

 
5,099

Paid related to:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Current year
 
(10,461
)
 
(3,415
)
 
(3,228
)
Prior years
 
(5,638
)
 
(1,684
)
 
(1,579
)
Total paid
 
(16,099
)
 
(5,099
)
 
(4,807
)
Dispositions (4)
 
(116
)
 
—

 
—

Net balance at December 31,
 
11,082

 
7,254

 
7,024

Add: Reinsurance recoverables
 
539

 
273

 
286

Balance at December 31,
 
$
11,621

 
$
7,527

 
$
7,310

______________
(1)
Limited to group accident and non-medical health policies and contracts.
(2)
Reflects the accumulated adjustment, net of reinsurance, upon implementation of the new short-duration contracts guidance which clarified the requirement to include claim information for long-duration contracts. The accumulated adjustment primarily reflects unpaid claim liabilities, net of reinsurance, for long-duration contracts as of the beginning of the period presented. Prior periods have not been restated. See Note 1.
(3)
During 2016, as a result of changes in estimates of insured events in the respective prior year, claims and claim adjustment expenses associated with prior years increased due to the implementation of new guidance related to short-duration contracts.
(4)
See Note 3.
Separate Accounts
Separate account assets and liabilities include two categories of account types: pass-through separate accounts totaling $73.6 billion and $79.7 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, for which the policyholder assumes all investment risk, and separate accounts for which the Company contractually guarantees either a minimum return or account value to the policyholder which totaled $60.2 billion and $56.2 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The latter category consisted primarily of guaranteed interest contracts. The average interest rate credited on these contracts was 2.39% and 2.40% at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, there were no investment gains (losses) on transfers of assets from the general account to the separate accounts.

137
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

5. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles
See Note 1 for a description of capitalized acquisition costs.
Nonparticipating and Non-Dividend-Paying Traditional Contracts
The Company amortizes DAC and VOBA related to these contracts (term insurance, nonparticipating whole life insurance, traditional group life insurance, and non-medical health insurance) over the appropriate premium paying period in proportion to the actual and expected future gross premiums that were set at contract issue. The expected premiums are based upon the premium requirement of each policy and assumptions for mortality, morbidity, persistency and investment returns at policy issuance, or policy acquisition (as it relates to VOBA), include provisions for adverse deviation, and are consistent with the assumptions used to calculate future policyholder benefit liabilities. These assumptions are not revised after policy issuance or acquisition unless the DAC or VOBA balance is deemed to be unrecoverable from future expected profits. Absent a premium deficiency, variability in amortization after policy issuance or acquisition is caused only by variability in premium volumes.
Participating, Dividend-Paying Traditional Contracts
The Company amortizes DAC and VOBA related to these contracts over the estimated lives of the contracts in proportion to actual and expected future gross margins. The amortization includes interest based on rates in effect at inception or acquisition of the contracts. The future gross margins are dependent principally on investment returns, policyholder dividend scales, mortality, persistency, expenses to administer the business, creditworthiness of reinsurance counterparties and certain economic variables, such as inflation. For participating contracts within the closed block (dividend-paying traditional contracts) future gross margins are also dependent upon changes in the policyholder dividend obligation. See Note 7. Of these factors, the Company anticipates that investment returns, expenses, persistency and other factor changes, as well as policyholder dividend scales, are reasonably likely to impact significantly the rate of DAC and VOBA amortization. Each reporting period, the Company updates the estimated gross margins with the actual gross margins for that period. When the actual gross margins change from previously estimated gross margins, the cumulative DAC and VOBA amortization is re-estimated and adjusted by a cumulative charge or credit to current operations. When actual gross margins exceed those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the actual gross margins are below the previously estimated gross margins. Each reporting period, the Company also updates the actual amount of business in-force, which impacts expected future gross margins. When expected future gross margins are below those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the expected future gross margins are above the previously estimated expected future gross margins. Each period, the Company also reviews the estimated gross margins for each block of business to determine the recoverability of DAC and VOBA balances.
Fixed and Variable Universal Life Contracts and Fixed and Variable Deferred Annuity Contracts
The Company amortizes DAC and VOBA related to these contracts over the estimated lives of the contracts in proportion to actual and expected future gross profits. The amortization includes interest based on rates in effect at inception or acquisition of the contracts. The amount of future gross profits is dependent principally upon returns in excess of the amounts credited to policyholders, mortality, persistency, interest crediting rates, expenses to administer the business, creditworthiness of reinsurance counterparties, the effect of any hedges used and certain economic variables, such as inflation. Of these factors, the Company anticipates that investment returns, expenses and persistency are reasonably likely to significantly impact the rate of DAC and VOBA amortization. Each reporting period, the Company updates the estimated gross profits with the actual gross profits for that period. When the actual gross profits change from previously estimated gross profits, the cumulative DAC and VOBA amortization is re-estimated and adjusted by a cumulative charge or credit to current operations. When actual gross profits exceed those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the actual gross profits are below the previously estimated gross profits. Each reporting period, the Company also updates the actual amount of business remaining in-force, which impacts expected future gross profits. When expected future gross profits are below those previously estimated, the DAC and VOBA amortization will increase, resulting in a current period charge to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the expected future gross profits are above the previously estimated expected future gross profits. Each period, the Company also reviews the estimated gross profits for each block of business to determine the recoverability of DAC and VOBA balances.

138
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
5. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles (continued)

Factors Impacting Amortization
Separate account rates of return on variable universal life contracts and variable deferred annuity contracts affect in-force account balances on such contracts each reporting period, which can result in significant fluctuations in amortization of DAC and VOBA. Returns that are higher than the Company’s long-term expectation produce higher account balances, which increases the Company’s future fee expectations and decreases future benefit payment expectations on minimum death and living benefit guarantees, resulting in higher expected future gross profits. The opposite result occurs when returns are lower than the Company’s long-term expectation. The Company’s practice to determine the impact of gross profits resulting from returns on separate accounts assumes that long-term appreciation in equity markets is not changed by short-term market fluctuations, but is only changed when sustained interim deviations are expected. The Company monitors these events and only changes the assumption when its long-term expectation changes.
The Company also periodically reviews other long-term assumptions underlying the projections of estimated gross margins and profits. These assumptions primarily relate to investment returns, policyholder dividend scales, interest crediting rates, mortality, persistency, policyholder behavior and expenses to administer business. Management annually updates assumptions used in the calculation of estimated gross margins and profits which may have significantly changed. If the update of assumptions causes expected future gross margins and profits to increase, DAC and VOBA amortization will decrease, resulting in a current period increase to earnings. The opposite result occurs when the assumption update causes expected future gross margins and profits to decrease.
Periodically, the Company modifies product benefits, features, rights or coverages that occur by the exchange of a contract for a new contract, or by amendment, endorsement, or rider to a contract, or by election or coverage within a contract. If such modification, referred to as an internal replacement, substantially changes the contract, the associated DAC or VOBA is written off immediately through income and any new deferrable costs associated with the replacement contract are deferred. If the modification does not substantially change the contract, the DAC or VOBA amortization on the original contract will continue and any acquisition costs associated with the related modification are expensed.
Amortization of DAC and VOBA is attributed to net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses), and to other expenses for the amount of gross margins or profits originating from transactions other than investment gains and losses. Unrealized investment gains and losses represent the amount of DAC and VOBA that would have been amortized if such gains and losses had been recognized.

139
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
5. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles (continued)

Information regarding DAC and VOBA was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
DAC:
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1,
$
5,977

 
$
5,905

 
$
6,338

Capitalizations
332

 
482

 
424

Amortization related to:
 
 
 
 
 
Net investment gains (losses) and net derivative gains (losses)
353

 
(111
)
 
(104
)
Other expenses
(791
)
 
(624
)
 
(583
)
Total amortization
(438
)
 
(735
)
 
(687
)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)
(12
)
 
325

 
(170
)
Dispositions (1)
(1,145
)
 
—

 
—

Balance at December 31,
4,714

 
5,977

 
5,905

VOBA:
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1,
66

 
70

 
78

Amortization related to:
 
 
 
 
 
Other expenses
(3
)
 
(7
)
 
(8
)
Total amortization
(3
)
 
(7
)
 
(8
)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)
13

 
3

 
—

Dispositions (1)
(47
)
 
—

 
—

Balance at December 31,
29

 
66

 
70

Total DAC and VOBA:
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at December 31,
$
4,743

 
$
6,043

 
$
5,975

_________________
(1)     See Note 3.
Information regarding total DAC and VOBA by segment, as well as Corporate & Other, was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
U.S.
$
421

 
$
418

MetLife Holdings
4,317

 
5,000

Corporate & Other
5

 
625

Total
$
4,743

 
$
6,043


140
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
5. Deferred Policy Acquisition Costs, Value of Business Acquired and Other Intangibles (continued)

Information regarding other intangibles was as follows:
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
(In millions)
DSI:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1,
 
$
130

 
$
122

 
$
175

Capitalization
 
4

 
8

 
10

Amortization
 
(16
)
 
(21
)
 
(28
)
Unrealized investment gains (losses)
 
1

 
21

 
(35
)
Dispositions (1)
 
$
(14
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Balance at December 31,
 
$
105

 
$
130

 
$
122

VODA and VOCRA:
 
 
 
 
 
 
Balance at January 1,
 
$
265

 
$
295

 
$
325

Amortization
 
(30
)
 
(30
)
 
(30
)
Balance at December 31,
 
$
235

 
$
265

 
$
295

Accumulated amortization
 
$
222

 
$
192

 
$
162

______________
(1) See Note 3.
The estimated future amortization expense to be reported in other expenses for the next five years is as follows:
 
 
VOBA
 
VODA and VOCRA
 
 
(In millions)
2017
 
$
2

 
$
28

2018
 
$
2

 
$
26

2019
 
$
2

 
$
24

2020
 
$
2

 
$
22

2021
 
$
2

 
$
19

6. Reinsurance
The Company enters into reinsurance agreements primarily as a purchaser of reinsurance for its various insurance products and also as a provider of reinsurance for some insurance products issued by affiliated and unaffiliated companies. The Company participates in reinsurance activities in order to limit losses, minimize exposure to significant risks and provide additional capacity for future growth.
Accounting for reinsurance requires extensive use of assumptions and estimates, particularly related to the future performance of the underlying business and the potential impact of counterparty credit risks. The Company periodically reviews actual and anticipated experience compared to the aforementioned assumptions used to establish assets and liabilities relating to ceded and assumed reinsurance and evaluates the financial strength of counterparties to its reinsurance agreements using criteria similar to that evaluated in the security impairment process discussed in Note 8.
U.S.
For certain policies within the Group Benefits business, the Company generally retains most of the risk and only cedes particular risks on certain client arrangements. The majority of the Company’s reinsurance activity within this business relates to client agreements for employer sponsored captive programs, risk-sharing agreements and multinational pooling.

141
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
6. Reinsurance (continued)

The Company’s Retirement and Income Solutions business has periodically engaged in reinsurance activities, on an opportunistic basis. The impact of these activities on the financial results of this business has not been significant and there were no significant transactions during the periods presented.
MetLife Holdings
For its life products, the Company has historically reinsured the mortality risk primarily on an excess of retention basis or on a quota share basis. The Company currently reinsures 90% of the mortality risk in excess of $2 million for most products. In addition to reinsuring mortality risk as described above, the Company reinsures other risks, as well as specific coverages. Placement of reinsurance is done primarily on an automatic basis and also on a facultative basis for risks with specified characteristics. On a case by case basis, the Company may retain up to $20 million per life and reinsure 100% of amounts in excess of the amount the Company retains. The Company evaluates its reinsurance programs routinely and may increase or decrease its retention at any time.
For annuities, the Company reinsures 100% of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with certain variable annuities issued since 2004 to an affiliate and portions of the living and death benefit guarantees issued in connection with its variable annuities issued prior to 2004 to affiliated and unaffiliated reinsurers. Under these reinsurance agreements, the Company pays a reinsurance premium generally based on fees associated with the guarantees collected from policyholders, and receives reimbursement for benefits paid or accrued in excess of account values, subject to certain limitations. The value of embedded derivatives on the ceded risk is determined using a methodology consistent with the guarantees directly written by the Company with the exception of the input for nonperformance risk that reflects the credit of the reinsurer. The Company also assumes 100% of certain variable annuity risks issued by an affiliate.
Catastrophe Coverage
The Company has exposure to catastrophes which could contribute to significant fluctuations in the Company’s results of operations. The Company uses excess of retention and quota share reinsurance agreements to provide greater diversification of risk and minimize exposure to larger risks.
Reinsurance Recoverables
The Company reinsures its business through a diversified group of well-capitalized reinsurers. The Company analyzes recent trends in arbitration and litigation outcomes in disputes, if any, with its reinsurers. The Company monitors ratings and evaluates the financial strength of its reinsurers by analyzing their financial statements. In addition, the reinsurance recoverable balance due from each reinsurer is evaluated as part of the overall monitoring process. Recoverability of reinsurance recoverable balances is evaluated based on these analyses. The Company generally secures large reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts, funds withheld accounts, and irrevocable letters of credit. These reinsurance recoverable balances are stated net of allowances for uncollectible reinsurance, which at December 31, 2016 and 2015, were not significant.
The Company has secured certain reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts, funds withheld accounts and irrevocable letters of credit. The Company had $1.9 billion and $2.4 billion of unsecured unaffiliated reinsurance recoverable balances at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
At December 31, 2016, the Company had $3.0 billion of net unaffiliated ceded reinsurance recoverables. Of this total, $2.1 billion, or 70%, were with the Company’s five largest unaffiliated ceded reinsurers, including $1.4 billion of net unaffiliated ceded reinsurance recoverables which were unsecured. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $5.4 billion of net unaffiliated ceded reinsurance recoverables. Of this total, $4.2 billion, or 78%, were with the Company’s five largest unaffiliated ceded reinsurers, including $1.6 billion of net unaffiliated ceded reinsurance recoverables which were unsecured.
The Company has reinsured with an unaffiliated third-party reinsurer, 59% of the closed block through a modified coinsurance agreement. The Company accounts for this agreement under the deposit method of accounting. The Company, having the right of offset, has offset the modified coinsurance deposit with the deposit recoverable.

142
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
6. Reinsurance (continued)

The amounts on the consolidated statements of operations include the impact of reinsurance. Information regarding the significant effects of reinsurance was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Premiums
 
 
 
 
 
Direct premiums
$
21,931

 
$
21,497

 
$
20,963

Reinsurance assumed
1,687

 
1,679

 
1,673

Reinsurance ceded
(1,225
)
 
(1,242
)
 
(1,252
)
Net premiums
$
22,393

 
$
21,934

 
$
21,384

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
 
 
 
 
 
Direct universal life and investment-type product policy fees
$
3,006

 
$
3,050

 
$
3,029

Reinsurance assumed
60

 
58

 
48

Reinsurance ceded
(524
)
 
(524
)
 
(611
)
Net universal life and investment-type product policy fees
$
2,542

 
$
2,584

 
$
2,466

Other revenues
 
 
 
 
 
Direct other revenues
$
851

 
$
875

 
$
1,040

Reinsurance assumed
(2
)
 
5

 
2

Reinsurance ceded
629

 
656

 
766

Net other revenues
$
1,478

 
$
1,536

 
$
1,808

Policyholder benefits and claims
 
 
 
 
 
Direct policyholder benefits and claims
$
25,226

 
$
24,541

 
$
23,978

Reinsurance assumed
1,496

 
1,454

 
1,416

Reinsurance ceded
(1,431
)
 
(1,468
)
 
(1,539
)
Net policyholder benefits and claims
$
25,291

 
$
24,527

 
$
23,855

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
 
 
 
 
 
Direct interest credited to policyholder account balances
$
2,279

 
$
2,240

 
$
2,227

Reinsurance assumed
35

 
33

 
35

Reinsurance ceded
(81
)
 
(90
)
 
(88
)
Net interest credited to policyholder account balances
$
2,233


$
2,183


$
2,174

Other expenses
 
 
 
 
 
Direct other expenses
$
4,830

 
$
5,448

 
$
5,132

Reinsurance assumed
583

 
340

 
399

Reinsurance ceded
390

 
470

 
540

Net other expenses
$
5,803

 
$
6,258

 
$
6,071


143
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
6. Reinsurance (continued)

The amounts on the consolidated balance sheets include the impact of reinsurance. Information regarding the significant effects of reinsurance was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Direct
 
Assumed
 
Ceded
 
Total
Balance
Sheet
 
Direct
 
Assumed
 
Ceded
 
Total
Balance
Sheet
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums, reinsurance and other
receivables
$
2,212

 
$
620

 
$
19,551

 
$
22,383

 
$
1,957

 
$
667

 
$
21,098

 
$
23,722

Deferred policy acquisition costs and
value of business acquired
4,977

 
55

 
(289
)
 
4,743

 
5,973

 
458

 
(388
)
 
6,043

Total assets
$
7,189

 
$
675

 
$
19,262

 
$
27,126

 
$
7,930

 
$
1,125

 
$
20,710

 
$
29,765

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
$
113,920

 
$
1,640

 
$
(4
)
 
$
115,556

 
$
116,389

 
$
2,530

 
$
(5
)
 
$
118,914

Policyholder account balances
91,889

 
577

 
—

 
92,466

 
94,080

 
340

 
—

 
94,420

Other policy-related balances
6,355

 
358

 
18

 
6,731

 
6,766

 
392

 
43

 
7,201

Other liabilities
10,735

 
2,229

 
16,533

 
29,497

 
10,384

 
6,843

 
15,528

 
32,755

Total liabilities
$
222,899

 
$
4,804

 
$
16,547

 
$
244,250

 
$
227,619

 
$
10,105

 
$
15,566

 
$
253,290

Effective December 1, 2016, the Company recaptured two reinsurance agreements which covered 90% of the liabilities on certain participating whole life insurance policies issued between April 1, 2000 and December 31, 2001 which were reinsured by an unaffiliated company. This recapture resulted in an increase in DAC and VOBA of $95 million, a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of $697 million, and a decrease in other liabilities of $713 million. The Company recognized a gain of $72 million, net of income tax, as a result of this transaction.
Reinsurance agreements that do not expose the Company to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. The deposit assets on reinsurance were $14.5 billion and $13.6 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The deposit liabilities on reinsurance were $2.2 billion and $6.5 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Related Party Reinsurance Transactions
The Company has reinsurance agreements with certain of MetLife, Inc.’s subsidiaries, including Brighthouse Insurance, Brighthouse NY, MetLife Reinsurance Company of Charleston (“MRC”), MetLife Reinsurance Company of Vermont, Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company, NELICO and GALIC, all of which are related parties.

144
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
6. Reinsurance (continued)

Information regarding the significant effects of affiliated reinsurance included on the consolidated statements of operations was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Premiums
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
727

 
$
701

 
$
681

Reinsurance ceded
(45
)
 
(40
)
 
(36
)
Net premiums
$
682

 
$
661

 
$
645

Universal life and investment-type product policy fees
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
60

 
$
58

 
$
48

Reinsurance ceded
(138
)
 
(141
)
 
(240
)
Net universal life and investment-type product policy fees
$
(78
)
 
$
(83
)
 
$
(192
)
Other revenues
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
(1
)
 
$
5

 
$
2

Reinsurance ceded
575

 
607

 
713

Net other revenues
$
574

 
$
612

 
$
715

Policyholder benefits and claims
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
697

 
$
652

 
$
623

Reinsurance ceded
(110
)
 
(106
)
 
(197
)
Net policyholder benefits and claims
$
587

 
$
546

 
$
426

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
34

 
$
32

 
$
33

Reinsurance ceded
(81
)
 
(90
)
 
(88
)
Net interest credited to policyholder account balances
$
(47
)
 
$
(58
)
 
$
(55
)
Other expenses
 
 
 
 
 
Reinsurance assumed
$
490

 
$
245

 
$
298

Reinsurance ceded
570

 
578

 
680

Net other expenses
$
1,060

 
$
823

 
$
978

Information regarding the significant effects of affiliated reinsurance included on the consolidated balance sheets was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
Assumed
 
Ceded
 
Assumed
 
Ceded
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
 
$
229

 
$
13,334

 
$
280

 
$
15,466

Deferred policy acquisition costs and value of business acquired
 
38

 
(198
)
 
439

 
(193
)
Total assets
 
$
267

 
$
13,136

 
$
719

 
$
15,273

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
 
$
663

 
$
(4
)
 
$
1,436

 
$
(5
)
Policyholder account balances
 
563

 
—

 
326

 
—

Other policy-related balances
 
212

 
18

 
187

 
43

Other liabilities
 
1,853

 
13,065

 
6,463

 
13,000

Total liabilities
 
$
3,291

 
$
13,079

 
$
8,412

 
$
13,038


145
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
6. Reinsurance (continued)

The Company ceded two blocks of business to an affiliate on a 75% coinsurance with funds withheld basis. Certain contractual features of these agreements qualify as embedded derivatives, which are separately accounted for at estimated fair value on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The embedded derivatives related to the funds withheld associated with these reinsurance agreements are included within other liabilities and increased the funds withheld balance by $10 million and $8 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with these embedded derivatives were ($2) million, $12 million and ($39) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The Company ceded risks to an affiliate related to guaranteed minimum benefit guarantees written directly by the Company. These ceded reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives and changes in their estimated fair value are also included within net derivative gains (losses). The embedded derivatives associated with the cessions are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and were $460 million and $712 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were $33 million, $47 million and $497 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Certain contractual features of the closed block agreement with MRC create an embedded derivative, which is separately accounted for at estimated fair value on the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. The embedded derivative related to the funds withheld associated with this reinsurance agreement was included within other liabilities and increased the funds withheld balance by $767 million and $694 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivative were ($73) million, $404 million and ($389) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The Company assumes risks from affiliates related to guaranteed minimum benefit guarantees written directly by the affiliates. These assumed reinsurance agreements contain embedded derivatives and changes in their estimated fair value are also included within net derivative gains (losses). The embedded derivatives associated with these agreements are included within policyholder account balances and were $390 million and $126 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Net derivative gains (losses) associated with the embedded derivatives were ($32) million, ($55) million and ($42) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
In April 2016, Brighthouse Insurance recaptured risks related to certain single premium deferred annuity contracts from the Company. As a result of this recapture, the significant effects to the Company were a decrease in investments and cash and cash equivalents of $4.3 billion and a decrease in DAC of $87 million, offset by a decrease in other liabilities of $4.0 billion. The Company recognized a loss of $95 million, net of income tax, as a result of this recapture.
The Company has secured certain reinsurance recoverable balances with various forms of collateral, including secured trusts, funds withheld accounts and irrevocable letters of credit. The Company had $293 million and $2.2 billion of unsecured affiliated reinsurance recoverable balances at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Affiliated reinsurance agreements that do not expose the Company to a reasonable possibility of a significant loss from insurance risk are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. The deposit assets on affiliated reinsurance were $11.7 billion at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The deposit liabilities on affiliated reinsurance were $2.2 billion and $6.5 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
7. Closed Block
On April 7, 2000 (the “Demutualization Date”), Metropolitan Life Insurance Company converted from a mutual life insurance company to a stock life insurance company and became a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. The conversion was pursuant to an order by the New York Superintendent of Insurance approving Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s plan of reorganization, as amended (the “Plan of Reorganization”). On the Demutualization Date, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company established a closed block for the benefit of holders of certain individual life insurance policies of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Assets have been allocated to the closed block in an amount that has been determined to produce cash flows which, together with anticipated revenues from the policies included in the closed block, are reasonably expected to be sufficient to support obligations and liabilities relating to these policies, including, but not limited to, provisions for the payment of claims and certain expenses and taxes, and to provide for the continuation of policyholder dividend scales in effect for 1999, if the experience underlying such dividend scales continues, and for appropriate adjustments in such scales if the experience changes. At least annually, the Company compares actual and projected experience against the experience assumed in the then-current dividend scales. Dividend scales are adjusted periodically to give effect to changes in experience.

146
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
7. Closed Block (continued)

The closed block assets, the cash flows generated by the closed block assets and the anticipated revenues from the policies in the closed block will benefit only the holders of the policies in the closed block. To the extent that, over time, cash flows from the assets allocated to the closed block and claims and other experience related to the closed block are, in the aggregate, more or less favorable than what was assumed when the closed block was established, total dividends paid to closed block policyholders in the future may be greater than or less than the total dividends that would have been paid to these policyholders if the policyholder dividend scales in effect for 1999 had been continued. Any cash flows in excess of amounts assumed will be available for distribution over time to closed block policyholders and will not be available to stockholders. If the closed block has insufficient funds to make guaranteed policy benefit payments, such payments will be made from assets outside of the closed block. The closed block will continue in effect as long as any policy in the closed block remains in-force. The expected life of the closed block is over 100 years.
The Company uses the same accounting principles to account for the participating policies included in the closed block as it used prior to the Demutualization Date. However, the Company establishes a policyholder dividend obligation for earnings that will be paid to policyholders as additional dividends as described below. The excess of closed block liabilities over closed block assets at the Demutualization Date (adjusted to eliminate the impact of related amounts in AOCI) represents the estimated maximum future earnings from the closed block expected to result from operations attributed to the closed block after income taxes. Earnings of the closed block are recognized in income over the period the policies and contracts in the closed block remain in-force. Management believes that over time the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block will approximately equal the expected cumulative earnings due to the effect of dividend changes. If, over the period the closed block remains in existence, the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block are greater than the expected cumulative earnings of the closed block, the Company will pay the excess of the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block over the expected cumulative earnings to closed block policyholders as additional policyholder dividends unless offset by future unfavorable experience of the closed block and, accordingly, will recognize only the expected cumulative earnings in income with the excess recorded as a policyholder dividend obligation. If over such period, the actual cumulative earnings of the closed block are less than the expected cumulative earnings of the closed block, the Company will recognize only the actual earnings in income. However, the Company may change policyholder dividend scales in the future, which would be intended to increase future actual earnings until the actual cumulative earnings equal the expected cumulative earnings.
Experience within the closed block, in particular mortality and investment yields, as well as realized and unrealized gains and losses, directly impact the policyholder dividend obligation. Amortization of the closed block DAC, which resides outside of the closed block, is based upon cumulative actual and expected earnings within the closed block. Accordingly, the Company’s net income continues to be sensitive to the actual performance of the closed block.

147
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
7. Closed Block (continued)

Closed block assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses are combined on a line-by-line basis with the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses outside the closed block based on the nature of the particular item.
Information regarding the closed block liabilities and assets designated to the closed block was as follows at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
(In millions)
Closed Block Liabilities
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
 
$
40,834

 
$
41,278

Other policy-related balances
 
257

 
249

Policyholder dividends payable
 
443

 
468

Policyholder dividend obligation
 
1,931

 
1,783

Current income tax payable
 
4

 
—

Other liabilities
 
196

 
380

Total closed block liabilities
 
43,665

 
44,158

Assets Designated to the Closed Block
 
 
 
 
Investments:
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value
 
27,220

 
27,556

Equity securities available-for-sale, at estimated fair value
 
100

 
111

Mortgage loans
 
5,935

 
6,022

Policy loans
 
4,553

 
4,642

Real estate and real estate joint ventures
 
655

 
462

Other invested assets
 
1,246

 
1,066

Total investments
 
39,709

 
39,859

Cash and cash equivalents
 
18

 
236

Accrued investment income
 
467

 
474

Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
 
68

 
56

Current income tax recoverable
 
—

 
11

Deferred income tax assets
 
177

 
234

Total assets designated to the closed block
 
40,439

 
40,870

Excess of closed block liabilities over assets designated to the closed block
 
3,226

 
3,288

Amounts included in AOCI:
 
 
 
 
Unrealized investment gains (losses), net of income tax
 
1,517

 
1,382

Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives, net of income tax
 
95

 
76

Allocated to policyholder dividend obligation, net of income tax
 
(1,255
)
 
(1,159
)
Total amounts included in AOCI
 
357

 
299

Maximum future earnings to be recognized from closed block assets and liabilities
 
$
3,583

 
$
3,587

Information regarding the closed block policyholder dividend obligation was as follows:
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
 
$
1,783

 
$
3,155

 
$
1,771

Change in unrealized investment and derivative gains (losses)
 
148

 
(1,372
)
 
1,384

Balance at December 31,
 
$
1,931

 
$
1,783

 
$
3,155


148
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
7. Closed Block (continued)

Information regarding the closed block revenues and expenses was as follows:
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
(In millions)
Revenues
 
 
 
 
 
 
Premiums
 
$
1,804

 
$
1,850

 
$
1,918

Net investment income
 
1,902

 
1,982

 
2,093

Net investment gains (losses)
 
(10
)
 
(23
)
 
7

Net derivative gains (losses)
 
25

 
27

 
20

Total revenues
 
3,721

 
3,836

 
4,038

Expenses
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder benefits and claims
 
2,563

 
2,564

 
2,598

Policyholder dividends
 
953

 
1,015

 
988

Other expenses
 
133

 
143

 
155

Total expenses
 
3,649

 
3,722

 
3,741

Revenues, net of expenses before provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
72

 
114

 
297

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
24

 
41

 
104

Revenues, net of expenses and provision for income tax expense (benefit)
 
$
48

 
$
73

 
$
193

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company charges the closed block with federal income taxes, state and local premium taxes and other state or local taxes, as well as investment management expenses relating to the closed block as provided in the Plan of Reorganization. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company also charges the closed block for expenses of maintaining the policies included in the closed block.
8. Investments
See Note 10 for information about the fair value hierarchy for investments and the related valuation methodologies.
Investment Risks and Uncertainties
Investments are exposed to the following primary sources of risk: credit, interest rate, liquidity, market valuation, currency and real estate risk. The financial statement risks, stemming from such investment risks, are those associated with the determination of estimated fair values, the diminished ability to sell certain investments in times of strained market conditions, the recognition of impairments, the recognition of income on certain investments and the potential consolidation of VIEs. The use of different methodologies, assumptions and inputs relating to these financial statement risks may have a material effect on the amounts presented within the consolidated financial statements.
The determination of valuation allowances and impairments is highly subjective and is based upon periodic evaluations and assessments of known and inherent risks associated with the respective asset class. Such evaluations and assessments are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.
The recognition of income on certain investments (e.g. structured securities, including mortgage-backed securities, asset-backed securities (“ABS”), certain structured investment transactions and FVO and trading securities) is dependent upon certain factors such as prepayments and defaults, and changes in such factors could result in changes in amounts to be earned.

149
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS
Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS by Sector
The following table presents the fixed maturity and equity securities AFS by sector. Redeemable preferred stock is reported within U.S. corporate and foreign corporate fixed maturity securities and non-redeemable preferred stock is reported within equity securities. Included within fixed maturity securities are structured securities including RMBS, ABS and commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”) (collectively, “Structured Securities”).
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
Cost or
Amortized
Cost
 
Gross Unrealized
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Cost or
Amortized
Cost
 
Gross Unrealized
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
 
Gains
 
Temporary
Losses
 
OTTI
Losses
 
Gains
 
Temporary
Losses
 
OTTI
Losses
 
 
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
52,665

 
$
4,079

 
$
586

 
$
—

 
$
56,158

 
$
59,305

 
$
3,763

 
$
1,511

 
$
—

 
$
61,557

U.S. government and agency
32,834

 
3,238

 
457

 
—

 
35,615

 
36,183

 
3,638

 
128

 
—

 
39,693

Foreign corporate
24,596

 
957

 
1,196

 
—

 
24,357

 
27,218

 
1,005

 
1,427

 
1

 
26,795

RMBS (1)
22,786

 
911

 
290

 
(10
)
 
23,417

 
23,195

 
1,008

 
252

 
36

 
23,915

ABS
7,567

 
32

 
95

 
—

 
7,504

 
6,665

 
40

 
138

 
—

 
6,567

State and political subdivision
6,252

 
928

 
44

 
—

 
7,136

 
6,070

 
935

 
29

 
2

 
6,974

CMBS
4,876

 
118

 
59

 
—

 
4,935

 
6,547

 
114

 
82

 
—

 
6,579

Foreign government
3,565

 
507

 
74

 
—

 
3,998

 
3,178

 
536

 
108

 
—

 
3,606

Total fixed maturity securities
$
155,141

 
$
10,770

 
$
2,801

 
$
(10
)
 
$
163,120

 
$
168,361

 
$
11,039

 
$
3,675

 
$
39

 
$
175,686

Equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock
$
1,220

 
$
91

 
$
12

 
$
—

 
$
1,299

 
$
1,298

 
$
46

 
$
101

 
$
—

 
$
1,243

Non-redeemable preferred
   stock
565

 
14

 
39

 
—

 
540

 
687

 
59

 
40

 
—

 
706

Total equity securities
$
1,785

 
$
105

 
$
51

 
$
—

 
$
1,839

 
$
1,985

 
$
105

 
$
141

 
$
—

 
$
1,949

__________________
(1)
The noncredit loss component of OTTI losses for RMBS was in an unrealized gain position of $10 million at December 31, 2016 due to increases in estimated fair value subsequent to initial recognition of noncredit losses on such securities. See also “— Net Unrealized Investment Gains (Losses).”
The Company held non-income producing fixed maturity securities with an estimated fair value of less than $1 million and $3 million with unrealized gains (losses) of less than $1 million and less than $1 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Methodology for Amortization of Premium and Accretion of Discount on Structured Securities
Amortization of premium and accretion of discount on Structured Securities considers the estimated timing and amount of prepayments of the underlying loans. Actual prepayment experience is periodically reviewed and effective yields are recalculated when differences arise between the originally anticipated and the actual prepayments received and currently anticipated. Prepayment assumptions for Structured Securities are estimated using inputs obtained from third-party specialists and based on management’s knowledge of the current market. For credit-sensitive Structured Securities and certain prepayment-sensitive securities, the effective yield is recalculated on a prospective basis. For all other Structured Securities, the effective yield is recalculated on a retrospective basis.

150
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Maturities of Fixed Maturity Securities
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities, by contractual maturity date, were as follows at December 31, 2016:
 
Due in One
Year or Less
 
Due After One
Year Through
Five Years
 
Due After Five
Years Through Ten
Years
 
Due After Ten
Years
 
Structured
Securities
 
Total Fixed
Maturity
Securities
 
(In millions)
Amortized cost
$
6,680

 
$
32,992

 
$
28,612

 
$
51,628

 
$
35,229

 
$
155,141

Estimated fair value
$
6,664

 
$
34,150

 
$
29,298

 
$
57,152

 
$
35,856

 
$
163,120

Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities due to the exercise of call or prepayment options. Fixed maturity securities not due at a single maturity date have been presented in the year of final contractual maturity. Structured Securities are shown separately, as they are not due at a single maturity.
Continuous Gross Unrealized Losses for Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities AFS by Sector
The following table presents the estimated fair value and gross unrealized losses of fixed maturity and equity securities AFS in an unrealized loss position, aggregated by sector and by length of time that the securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
Less than 12 Months
 
Equal to or Greater
than 12 Months
 
Less than 12 Months
 
Equal to or Greater
than 12 Months
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
 
(Dollars in millions)
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
8,406

 
$
337

 
$
2,260

 
$
249

 
$
17,480

 
$
1,078

 
$
2,469

 
$
433

U.S. government and agency
6,032

 
457

 
—

 
—

 
11,683

 
125

 
248

 
3

Foreign corporate
5,343

 
336

 
4,523

 
860

 
8,823

 
669

 
4,049

 
759

RMBS
6,662

 
187

 
1,707

 
93

 
6,065

 
158

 
1,769

 
130

ABS
1,482

 
12

 
1,714

 
83

 
3,211

 
54

 
1,817

 
84

State and political subdivision
943

 
43

 
17

 
1

 
767

 
26

 
15

 
5

CMBS
922

 
15

 
432

 
44

 
2,266

 
42

 
509

 
40

Foreign government
581

 
26

 
309

 
48

 
961

 
91

 
87

 
17

Total fixed maturity securities
$
30,371

 
$
1,413

 
$
10,962

 
$
1,378

 
$
51,256

 
$
2,243

 
$
10,963

 
$
1,471

Equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock
$
58

 
$
12

 
$
10

 
$
—

 
$
182

 
$
99

 
$
19

 
$
2

Non-redeemable preferred stock
139

 
6

 
120

 
33

 
56

 
2

 
132

 
38

Total equity securities
$
197

 
$
18

 
$
130

 
$
33

 
$
238

 
$
101

 
$
151

 
$
40

Total number of securities in an
unrealized loss position
3,076

 
 
 
940

 
 
 
4,167

 
 
 
807

 
 

151
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Evaluation of AFS Securities for OTTI and Evaluating Temporarily Impaired AFS Securities
Evaluation and Measurement Methodologies
Management considers a wide range of factors about the security issuer and uses its best judgment in evaluating the cause of the decline in the estimated fair value of the security and in assessing the prospects for near-term recovery. Inherent in management’s evaluation of the security are assumptions and estimates about the operations of the issuer and its future earnings potential. Considerations used in the impairment evaluation process include, but are not limited to: (i) the length of time and the extent to which the estimated fair value has been below cost or amortized cost; (ii) the potential for impairments when the issuer is experiencing significant financial difficulties; (iii) the potential for impairments in an entire industry sector or sub-sector; (iv) the potential for impairments in certain economically depressed geographic locations; (v) the potential for impairments where the issuer, series of issuers or industry has suffered a catastrophic loss or has exhausted natural resources; (vi) with respect to fixed maturity securities, whether the Company has the intent to sell or will more likely than not be required to sell a particular security before the decline in estimated fair value below amortized cost recovers; (vii) with respect to Structured Securities, changes in forecasted cash flows after considering the quality of underlying collateral, expected prepayment speeds, current and forecasted loss severity, consideration of the payment terms of the underlying assets backing a particular security, and the payment priority within the tranche structure of the security; (viii) the potential for impairments due to weakening of foreign currencies on non-functional currency denominated fixed maturity securities that are near maturity; and (ix) other subjective factors, including concentrations and information obtained from regulators and rating agencies.
The methodology and significant inputs used to determine the amount of credit loss on fixed maturity securities are as follows:
•
The Company calculates the recovery value by performing a discounted cash flow analysis based on the present value of future cash flows. The discount rate is generally the effective interest rate of the security prior to impairment.
•
When determining collectability and the period over which value is expected to recover, the Company applies considerations utilized in its overall impairment evaluation process which incorporates information regarding the specific security, fundamentals of the industry and geographic area in which the security issuer operates, and overall macroeconomic conditions. Projected future cash flows are estimated using assumptions derived from management’s best estimates of likely scenario-based outcomes after giving consideration to a variety of variables that include, but are not limited to: payment terms of the security; the likelihood that the issuer can service the interest and principal payments; the quality and amount of any credit enhancements; the security’s position within the capital structure of the issuer; possible corporate restructurings or asset sales by the issuer; and changes to the rating of the security or the issuer by rating agencies.
•
Additional considerations are made when assessing the unique features that apply to certain Structured Securities including, but not limited to: the quality of underlying collateral, expected prepayment speeds, current and forecasted loss severity, consideration of the payment terms of the underlying loans or assets backing a particular security, and the payment priority within the tranche structure of the security.
•
When determining the amount of the credit loss for U.S. and foreign corporate securities, foreign government securities and state and political subdivision securities, the estimated fair value is considered 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 considerations utilized in its overall impairment evaluation process as described above, as well as any private and public sector programs to restructure such securities.
With respect to securities that have attributes of debt and equity (“perpetual hybrid securities”), consideration is given in the OTTI analysis as to whether there has been any deterioration in the credit of the issuer and the likelihood of recovery in value of the securities that are in a severe and extended unrealized loss position. Consideration is also given as to whether any perpetual hybrid securities, with an unrealized loss, regardless of credit rating, have deferred any dividend payments. When an OTTI loss has occurred, the OTTI loss is the entire difference between the perpetual hybrid security’s cost and its estimated fair value with a corresponding charge to earnings.

152
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

The cost or amortized cost of fixed maturity and equity securities is adjusted for OTTI in the period in which the determination is made. The Company does not change the revised cost basis for subsequent recoveries in value.
In periods subsequent to the recognition of OTTI on a fixed maturity security, the Company accounts for the impaired security as if it had been purchased on the measurement date of the impairment. Accordingly, the discount (or reduced premium) based on the new cost basis is accreted over the remaining term of the fixed maturity security in a prospective manner based on the amount and timing of estimated future cash flows.
Current Period Evaluation
Based on the Company’s current evaluation of its AFS securities in an unrealized loss position in accordance with its impairment policy, and the Company’s current intentions and assessments (as applicable to the type of security) about holding, selling and any requirements to sell these securities, the Company concluded that these securities were not other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2016. Future OTTI will depend primarily on economic fundamentals, issuer performance (including changes in the present value of future cash flows expected to be collected), changes in credit ratings, collateral valuation, interest rates and credit spreads. If economic fundamentals deteriorate or if there are adverse changes in the above factors, OTTI may be incurred in upcoming periods.
Gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities decreased $923 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 to $2.8 billion. The decrease in gross unrealized losses for the year ended December 31, 2016 was primarily attributable to narrowing credit spreads, partially offset by an increase in interest rates and, to a lesser extent, the impact of weakening foreign currencies on non-functional currency denominated fixed maturity securities.
At December 31, 2016, $178 million of the total $2.8 billion of gross unrealized losses were from 41 fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss position of 20% or more of amortized cost for six months or greater.
Investment Grade Fixed Maturity Securities
Of the $178 million of gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss of 20% or more of amortized cost for six months or greater, $136 million, or 76%, were related to gross unrealized losses on 20 investment grade fixed maturity securities. Unrealized losses on investment grade fixed maturity securities are principally related to widening credit spreads since purchase and, with respect to fixed-rate fixed maturity securities, rising interest rates since purchase.
Below Investment Grade Fixed Maturity Securities
Of the $178 million of gross unrealized losses on fixed maturity securities with an unrealized loss of 20% or more of amortized cost for six months or greater, $42 million, or 24%, were related to gross unrealized losses on 21 below investment grade fixed maturity securities. Unrealized losses on below investment grade fixed maturity securities are principally related to U.S. and foreign corporate securities (primarily industrial and utility securities) and are the result of significantly wider credit spreads resulting from higher risk premiums since purchase, largely due to economic and market uncertainties including concerns over lower oil prices in the energy sector. Management evaluates U.S. and foreign corporate securities based on factors such as expected cash flows and the financial condition and near-term and long-term prospects of the issuers.
Equity Securities
Gross unrealized losses on equity securities decreased $90 million during the year ended December 31, 2016 to $50 million. Of the $50 million, $29 million were from six securities with gross unrealized losses of 20% or more of cost for 12 months or greater. Of the $29 million, 64% were rated A or better, and all were from financial services industry investment grade non-redeemable preferred stock.

153
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Mortgage Loans
Mortgage Loans by Portfolio Segment
Mortgage loans are summarized as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Carrying
Value
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Mortgage loans
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Commercial
$
34,008

 
60.1
 %
 
$
33,440

 
62.3
 %
Agricultural
12,358

 
21.9

 
11,663

 
21.7

Residential
9,895

 
17.5

 
8,562

 
15.9

Subtotal
56,261

 
99.5

 
53,665

 
99.9

Valuation allowances
(267
)
 
(0.5
)
 
(257
)
 
(0.5
)
Subtotal mortgage loans, net
55,994

 
99.0

 
53,408

 
99.4

Residential — FVO
566

 
1.0

 
314

 
0.6

Total mortgage loans, net
$
56,560

 
100.0
 %
 
$
53,722

 
100.0
 %
The Company originates and acquires unaffiliated mortgage loans and simultaneously sells a portion to affiliates under master participation agreements. The aggregate amount of unaffiliated mortgage loan participation interests sold by the Company to affiliates during the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 were $3.6 billion, $3.0 billion and $1.9 billion, respectively. In connection with the mortgage loan participations, the Company collected mortgage loan principal and interest payments from unaffiliated borrowers on behalf of affiliates and remitted such receipts to the affiliates in the amount of $2.1 billion, $1.8 billion and $1.3 billion during the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Purchases of mortgage loans were $2.9 billion and $3.9 billion for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and were primarily comprised of residential mortgage loans.
Information on commercial, agricultural and residential mortgage loans is presented in the tables below. Information on residential — FVO is presented in Note 10. The Company elects the FVO for certain residential mortgage loans that are managed on a total return basis.

154
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Mortgage Loans, Valuation Allowance and Impaired Loans by Portfolio Segment
Mortgage loans by portfolio segment, by method of evaluation of credit loss, impaired mortgage loans including those modified in a troubled debt restructuring, and the related valuation allowances, were as follows at and for the years ended:
 
Evaluated Individually for Credit Losses
 
Evaluated Collectively for
Credit Losses
 
Impaired
 Loans
 
Impaired Loans with a
Valuation Allowance
 
Impaired Loans without a
Valuation Allowance
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
 
Recorded
Investment
 
Valuation
Allowances
 
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
 
Recorded
Investment
 
Recorded
Investment
 
Valuation
Allowances
 
Carrying
Value
 
Average
Recorded
Investment
 
(In millions)
 
 
December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Commercial
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
12

 
$
12

 
$
33,996

 
$
167

 
$
12

 
$
30

Agricultural
11

 
9

 
1

 
27

 
27

 
12,322

 
37

 
35

 
49

Residential
—

 
—

 
—

 
265

 
241

 
9,654

 
62

 
241

 
188

Total
$
11

 
$
9

 
$
1

 
$
304

 
$
280

 
$
55,972

 
$
266

 
$
288

 
$
267

December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Commercial
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
57

 
$
57

 
$
33,383

 
$
165

 
$
57

 
$
120

Agricultural
45

 
43

 
3

 
22

 
21

 
11,599

 
34

 
61

 
60

Residential
—

 
—

 
—

 
141

 
131

 
8,431

 
55

 
131

 
84

Total
$
45

 
$
43

 
$
3

 
$
220

 
$
209

 
$
53,413

 
$
254

 
$
249

 
$
264

The average recorded investment for impaired commercial, agricultural and residential mortgage loans was $298 million, $76 million and $17 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2014.
Valuation Allowance Rollforward by Portfolio Segment
The changes in the valuation allowance, by portfolio segment, were as follows:
 
Commercial
 
Agricultural
 
Residential
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1, 2014
$
213

 
$
40

 
$
19

 
$
272

Provision (release)
(8
)
 
(4
)
 
27

 
15

Charge-offs, net of recoveries
(23
)
 
(1
)
 
(5
)
 
(29
)
Balance at December 31, 2014
182

 
35

 
41

 
258

Provision (release)
2

 
2

 
30

 
34

Charge-offs, net of recoveries
(19
)
 
—

 
(16
)
 
(35
)
Balance at December 31, 2015
165

 
37

 
55

 
257

Provision (release)
6

 
1

 
23

 
30

Charge-offs, net of recoveries
—

 
—

 
(16
)
 
(16
)
Dispositions (1)
$
(4
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
(4
)
Balance at December 31, 2016
$
167

 
$
38

 
$
62

 
$
267

_________________
(1)See Note 3.

155
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Valuation Allowance Methodology
Mortgage loans are considered to be impaired when it is probable that, based upon current information and events, the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due under the loan agreement. Specific valuation allowances are established using the same methodology for all three portfolio segments as the excess carrying value of a loan over either (i) the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s original effective interest rate, (ii) the estimated fair value of the loan’s underlying collateral if the loan is in the process of foreclosure or otherwise collateral dependent, or (iii) the loan’s observable market price. A common evaluation framework is used for establishing non-specific valuation allowances for all loan portfolio segments; however, a separate non-specific valuation allowance is calculated and maintained for each loan portfolio segment that is based on inputs unique to each loan portfolio segment. Non-specific valuation allowances are established for pools of loans with similar risk characteristics where a property-specific or market-specific risk has not been identified, but for which the Company expects to incur a credit loss. These evaluations are based upon several loan portfolio segment-specific factors, including the Company’s experience for loan losses, defaults and loss severity, and loss expectations for loans with similar risk characteristics. These evaluations are revised as conditions change and new information becomes available.
Commercial and Agricultural Mortgage Loan Portfolio Segments
The Company typically uses several years of historical experience in establishing non-specific valuation allowances which captures multiple economic cycles. For evaluations of commercial mortgage loans, in addition to historical experience, management considers factors that include the impact of a rapid change to the economy, which may not be reflected in the loan portfolio, and recent loss and recovery trend experience as compared to historical loss and recovery experience. For evaluations of agricultural mortgage loans, in addition to historical experience, management considers factors that include increased stress in certain sectors, which may be evidenced by higher delinquency rates, or a change in the number of higher risk loans. On a quarterly basis, management incorporates the impact of these current market events and conditions on historical experience in determining the non-specific valuation allowance established for commercial and agricultural mortgage loans.
All commercial mortgage loans are reviewed on an ongoing basis which may include an analysis of the property financial statements and rent roll, lease rollover analysis, property inspections, market analysis, estimated valuations of the underlying collateral, loan-to-value ratios, debt service coverage ratios, and tenant creditworthiness. The monitoring process focuses on higher risk loans, which include those that are classified as restructured, delinquent or in foreclosure, as well as loans with higher loan-to-value ratios and lower debt service coverage ratios. All agricultural mortgage loans are monitored on an ongoing basis. The monitoring process for agricultural mortgage loans is generally similar to the commercial mortgage loan monitoring process, with a focus on higher risk loans, including reviews on a geographic and property-type basis. Higher risk loans are reviewed individually on an ongoing basis for potential credit loss and specific valuation allowances are established using the methodology described above. Quarterly, the remaining loans are reviewed on a pool basis by aggregating groups of loans that have similar risk characteristics for potential credit loss, and non-specific valuation allowances are established as described above using inputs that are unique to each segment of the loan portfolio.
For commercial mortgage loans, the primary credit quality indicator is the debt service coverage ratio, which compares a property’s net operating income to amounts needed to service the principal and interest due under the loan. Generally, the lower the debt service coverage ratio, the higher the risk of experiencing a credit loss. The Company also reviews the loan-to-value ratio of its commercial mortgage loan portfolio. Loan-to-value ratios compare the unpaid principal balance of the loan to the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral. Generally, the higher the loan-to-value ratio, the higher the risk of experiencing a credit loss. The debt service coverage ratio and the values utilized in calculating the ratio are updated annually on a rolling basis, with a portion of the portfolio updated each quarter. In addition, the loan-to-value ratio is routinely updated for all but the lowest risk loans as part of the Company’s ongoing review of its commercial mortgage loan portfolio.
For agricultural mortgage loans, the Company’s primary credit quality indicator is the loan-to-value ratio. The values utilized in calculating this ratio are developed in connection with the ongoing review of the agricultural mortgage loan portfolio and are routinely updated.

156
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Residential Mortgage Loan Portfolio Segment
The Company’s residential mortgage loan portfolio is comprised primarily of closed end, amortizing residential mortgage loans. For evaluations of residential mortgage loans, the key inputs of expected frequency and expected loss reflect current market conditions, with expected frequency adjusted, when appropriate, for differences from market conditions and the Company’s historical experience. In contrast to the commercial and agricultural mortgage loan portfolios, residential mortgage loans are smaller-balance homogeneous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment. Non-specific valuation allowances are established using the evaluation framework described above for pools of loans with similar risk characteristics from inputs that are unique to the residential segment of the loan portfolio. Loan specific valuation allowances are only established on residential mortgage loans when they have been restructured and are established using the methodology described above for all loan portfolio segments.
For residential mortgage loans, the Company’s primary credit quality indicator is whether the loan is performing or nonperforming. The Company generally defines nonperforming residential mortgage loans as those that are 60 or more days past due and/or in nonaccrual status which is assessed monthly. Generally, nonperforming residential mortgage loans have a higher risk of experiencing a credit loss.
Credit Quality of Commercial Mortgage Loans
The credit quality of commercial mortgage loans was as follows at:
 
Recorded Investment
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
% of
Total
 
Debt Service Coverage Ratios
 
Total
 
% of
Total
 
 
> 1.20x
 
1.00x - 1.20x
 
< 1.00x
 
 
(Dollars in millions)
December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Loan-to-value ratios:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Less than 65%
$
29,352

 
$
1,036

 
$
564

 
$
30,952

 
91.0
%
 
$
31,320

 
91.2
%
65% to 75%
2,522

 
—

 
198

 
2,720

 
8.0

 
2,694

 
7.9

76% to 80%
116

 
—

 
—

 
116

 
0.3

 
115

 
0.3

Greater than 80%
118

 
27

 
75

 
220

 
0.7

 
214

 
0.6

Total
$
32,108

 
$
1,063

 
$
837

 
$
34,008

 
100.0
%
 
$
34,343

 
100.0
%
December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Loan-to-value ratios:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Less than 65%
$
28,828

 
$
909

 
$
408

 
$
30,145

 
90.2
%
 
$
30,996

 
90.5
%
65% to 75%
2,550

 
138

 
61

 
2,749

 
8.2

 
2,730

 
8.0

76% to 80%
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Greater than 80%
208

 
115

 
223

 
546

 
1.6

 
519

 
1.5

Total
$
31,586

 
$
1,162

 
$
692

 
$
33,440

 
100.0
%
 
$
34,245

 
100.0
%

157
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Credit Quality of Agricultural Mortgage Loans
The credit quality of agricultural mortgage loans was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Loan-to-value ratios:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Less than 65%
$
11,829

 
95.7
%
 
$
10,975

 
94.1
%
65% to 75%
424

 
3.4

 
609

 
5.2

76% to 80%
17

 
0.2

 
21

 
0.2

Greater than 80%
88

 
0.7

 
58

 
0.5

Total
$
12,358

 
100.0
%
 
$
11,663

 
100.0
%
The estimated fair value of agricultural mortgage loans was $12.5 billion and $11.9 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Credit Quality of Residential Mortgage Loans
The credit quality of residential mortgage loans was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
Recorded
Investment
 
% of
Total
 
(Dollars in millions)
Performance indicators:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Performing
$
9,563

 
96.6
%
 
$
8,261

 
96.5
%
Nonperforming
332

 
3.4

 
301

 
3.5

Total
$
9,895

 
100.0
%
 
$
8,562

 
100.0
%
The estimated fair value of residential mortgage loans was $10.3 billion and $8.8 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Past Due and Nonaccrual Mortgage Loans
The Company has a high quality, well performing mortgage loan portfolio, with 99% of all mortgage loans classified as performing at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The Company defines delinquency consistent with industry practice, when mortgage loans are past due as follows: commercial and residential mortgage loans — 60 days and agricultural mortgage loans — 90 days. The past due and nonaccrual mortgage loans at recorded investment, prior to valuation allowances, by portfolio segment, were as follows at:
 
Past Due
 
Greater than 90 Days Past Due and Still Accruing Interest
 
Nonaccrual
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
(In millions)
Commercial
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

Agricultural
127

 
103

 
104

 
73

 
23

 
46

Residential
332

 
301

 
—

 
—

 
332

 
301

Total
$
459

 
$
404

 
$
104

 
$
73

 
$
355

 
$
347


158
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Mortgage Loans Modified in a Troubled Debt Restructuring
The Company may grant concessions related to borrowers experiencing financial difficulties, which are classified as troubled debt restructurings. Generally, the types of concessions include: reduction of the contractual interest rate, extension of the maturity date at an interest rate lower than current market interest rates, and/or a reduction of accrued interest. The amount, timing and extent of the concessions granted are considered in determining any impairment or changes in the specific valuation allowance recorded with the restructuring. Through the continuous monitoring process, a specific valuation allowance may have been recorded prior to the quarter when the mortgage loan is modified in a troubled debt restructuring.
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company had 557 residential mortgage loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring with carrying value after specific valuation allowance of $136 million and $122 million pre-modification and post-modification, respectively. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company had 460 residential mortgage loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring with carrying value after specific valuation allowance of $108 million and $96 million pre-modification and post-modification, respectively. There were no commercial or agricultural mortgage loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring for both the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
During the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company did not have a significant amount of mortgage loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring with subsequent payment default.
Other Invested Assets
Other invested assets is comprised primarily of freestanding derivatives with positive estimated fair values (see Note 9) tax credit and renewable energy partnerships, loans to affiliates, leveraged leases, annuities funding structured settlement claims and direct financing leases. See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for information regarding loans to affiliates and annuities funding structured settlement claims.
Tax Credit Partnerships
The carrying value of tax credit partnerships was $1.7 billion and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Losses from tax credit partnerships included within net investment income were $166 million, $163 million, and $152 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Leveraged and Direct Financing Leases
Investment in leveraged and direct financing leases consisted of the following at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Leveraged
Leases
 
Direct
Financing
Leases
 
Leveraged
Leases
 
Direct
Financing
Leases
 
(In millions)
Rental receivables, net
$
1,171

 
$
300

 
$
1,238

 
$
376

Estimated residual values
690

 
42

 
755

 
57

Subtotal
1,861

 
342

 
1,993

 
433

Unearned income
(572
)
 
(127
)
 
(615
)
 
(159
)
Investment in leases, net of non-recourse debt
$
1,289

 
$
215

 
$
1,378

 
$
274

Rental receivables are generally due in periodic installments. The payment periods for leveraged leases generally range from one to 15 years but in certain circumstances can be over 25 years, while the payment periods for direct financing leases range from one to 20 years. For rental receivables, the primary credit quality indicator is whether the rental receivable is performing or nonperforming, which is assessed monthly. The Company generally defines nonperforming rental receivables as those that are 90 days or more past due. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, all leveraged lease receivables and direct financing rental receivables were performing.
The deferred income tax liability related to leveraged leases was $1.3 billion at both December 31, 2016 and 2015.


159
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Cash Equivalents
The carrying value of cash equivalents, which includes securities and other investments with an original or remaining maturity of three months or less at the time of purchase, was $4.7 billion and $3.9 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Net Unrealized Investment Gains (Losses)
Unrealized investment gains (losses) on fixed maturity and equity securities AFS and the effect on DAC, VOBA, DSI, future policy benefits and the policyholder dividend obligation, that would result from the realization of the unrealized gains (losses), are included in net unrealized investment gains (losses) in AOCI.
The components of net unrealized investment gains (losses), included in AOCI, were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities
$
7,912

 
$
7,331

 
$
15,374

Fixed maturity securities with noncredit OTTI losses included in AOCI
10

 
(39
)
 
(66
)
Total fixed maturity securities
7,922

 
7,292

 
15,308

Equity securities
72

 
27

 
173

Derivatives
2,244

 
2,208

 
1,649

Other
16

 
137

 
87

Subtotal
10,254

 
9,664

 
17,217

Amounts allocated from:
 
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
(9
)
 
(7
)
 
(1,964
)
DAC and VOBA related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in AOCI
(1
)
 
—

 
(3
)
DAC, VOBA and DSI
(569
)
 
(572
)
 
(918
)
Policyholder dividend obligation
(1,931
)
 
(1,783
)
 
(3,155
)
Subtotal
(2,510
)
 
(2,362
)
 
(6,040
)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense) related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in AOCI
(3
)
 
14

 
25

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(2,690
)
 
(2,542
)
 
(3,928
)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)
5,051

 
4,774

 
7,274

Net unrealized investment gains (losses) attributable to noncontrolling interests
—

 
(1
)
 
(1
)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses) attributable to Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company
$
5,051

 
$
4,773

 
$
7,273

The changes in fixed maturity securities with noncredit OTTI losses included in AOCI were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
$
(39
)
 
$
(66
)
Noncredit OTTI losses and subsequent changes recognized
10

 
5

Securities sold with previous noncredit OTTI loss
39

 
105

Subsequent changes in estimated fair value
—

 
(83
)
Balance at December 31,
$
10

 
$
(39
)

160
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

The changes in net unrealized investment gains (losses) were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
$
4,773

 
$
7,273

 
$
3,704

Fixed maturity securities on which noncredit OTTI losses have been recognized
49

 
27

 
83

Unrealized investment gains (losses) during the year
541

 
(7,580
)
 
8,313

Unrealized investment gains (losses) relating to:
 
 
 
 
 
Future policy benefits
(2
)
 
1,957

 
(1,354
)
DAC and VOBA related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in AOCI
(1
)
 
3

 
(8
)
DAC, VOBA and DSI
3

 
346

 
(197
)
Policyholder dividend obligation
(148
)
 
1,372

 
(1,384
)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense) related to noncredit OTTI losses recognized in AOCI
(17
)
 
(11
)
 
(26
)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(148
)
 
1,386

 
(1,858
)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)
5,050

 
4,773

 
7,273

Net unrealized investment gains (losses) attributable to noncontrolling interests
1

 
—

 
—

Balance at December 31,
$
5,051

 
$
4,773

 
$
7,273

Change in net unrealized investment gains (losses)
$
277

 
$
(2,500
)
 
$
3,569

Change in net unrealized investment gains (losses) attributable to noncontrolling interests
1

 
—

 
—

Change in net unrealized investment gains (losses) attributable to Metropolitan Life
Insurance Company
$
278

 
$
(2,500
)
 
$
3,569

Concentrations of Credit Risk
There were no investments in any counterparty that were greater than 10% of the Company’s equity, other than the U.S. government and its agencies, at both December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Securities Lending
Elements of the securities lending program are presented below at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Securities on loan: (1)
 
 
 
Amortized cost
$
15,694

 
$
16,257

Estimated fair value
$
16,496

 
$
17,700

Cash collateral on deposit from counterparties (2)
$
16,807

 
$
18,053

Security collateral on deposit from counterparties (3)
$
14

 
$
22

Reinvestment portfolio — estimated fair value
$
16,821

 
$
18,138

__________________
(1)
Included within fixed maturity securities and short-term investments.
(2)
Included within payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions.
(3)
Security collateral on deposit from counterparties may not be sold or re-pledged, unless the counterparty is in default, and is not reflected on the consolidated financial statements.

161
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

The cash collateral liability by loaned security type and remaining tenor of the agreements were as follows at:
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
Remaining Tenor of Securities Lending Agreements
 
 
 
Remaining Tenor of Securities Lending Agreements
 
 
 
Open (1)
 
1 Month or Less
 
1 to 6 Months
 
Total
 
Open (1)
 
1 Month or Less
 
1 to 6 Months
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Cash collateral liability by loaned security type:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. government and agency
$
4,033

 
$
5,640

 
$
7,134

 
$
16,807

 
$
6,260

 
$
7,421

 
$
4,303

 
$
17,984

All other securities
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1

 
47

 
21

 
69

Total
$
4,033

 
$
5,640

 
$
7,134

 
$
16,807

 
$
6,261

 
$
7,468

 
$
4,324

 
$
18,053

__________________
(1)
The related loaned security could be returned to the Company on the next business day which would require the Company to immediately return the cash collateral.
If the Company is required to return significant amounts of cash collateral on short notice and is forced to sell securities to meet the return obligation, it may have difficulty selling such collateral that is invested in securities in a timely manner, be forced to sell securities in a volatile or illiquid market for less than what otherwise would have been realized under normal market conditions, or both. The estimated fair value of the securities on loan related to the cash collateral on open at December 31, 2016 was $4.0 billion, all of which were U.S. government and agency securities which, if put back to the Company, could be immediately sold to satisfy the cash requirement.
The reinvestment portfolio acquired with the cash collateral consisted principally of fixed maturity securities (including agency RMBS, U.S. government and agency securities, cash equivalents, short-term investments and ABS) with 66% invested in agency RMBS, U.S. government and agency securities, cash equivalents, short-term investments or held in cash. If the securities on loan or the reinvestment portfolio become less liquid, the Company has the liquidity resources of most of its general account available to meet any potential cash demands when securities on loan are put back to the Company.
Invested Assets on Deposit and Pledged as Collateral
Invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral are presented below at estimated fair value for all asset classes, except mortgage loans, which are presented at carrying value at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Invested assets on deposit (regulatory deposits)
$
47

 
$
1,245

Invested assets pledged as collateral (1)
20,750

 
19,011

Total invested assets on deposit and pledged as collateral
$
20,797

 
$
20,256

__________________
(1)
The Company has pledged invested assets in connection with various agreements and transactions, including funding agreements (see Note 4), and derivative transactions (see Note 9).
See “— Securities Lending” for information regarding securities on loan and Note 7 for information regarding investments designated to the closed block.

162
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Purchased Credit Impaired Investments
Investments acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination and for which it is probable at the acquisition date that the Company will be unable to collect all contractually required payments are classified as purchased credit impaired (“PCI”) investments. For each investment, the excess of the cash flows expected to be collected as of the acquisition date over its acquisition date fair value is referred to as the accretable yield and is recognized as net investment income on an effective yield basis. If subsequently, based on current information and events, it is probable that there is a significant increase in cash flows previously expected to be collected or if actual cash flows are significantly greater than cash flows previously expected to be collected, the accretable yield is adjusted prospectively. The excess of the contractually required payments (including interest) as of the acquisition date over the cash flows expected to be collected as of the acquisition date is referred to as the nonaccretable difference, and this amount is not expected to be realized as net investment income. Decreases in cash flows expected to be collected can result in OTTI.
The Company’s PCI fixed maturity securities were as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Outstanding principal and interest balance (1)
$
5,859

 
$
5,139

Carrying value (2)
$
4,598

 
$
3,937

__________________
(1)
Represents the contractually required payments, which is the sum of contractual principal, whether or not currently due, and accrued interest.
(2)
Estimated fair value plus accrued interest.
The following table presents information about PCI fixed maturity securities acquired during the periods indicated:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Contractually required payments (including interest)
$
1,831

 
$
1,401

Cash flows expected to be collected (1)
$
1,644

 
$
1,222

Fair value of investments acquired
$
1,206

 
$
905

__________________
(1)
Represents undiscounted principal and interest cash flow expectations, at the date of acquisition.
The following table presents activity for the accretable yield on PCI fixed maturity securities for:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Accretable yield, January 1,
$
1,784

 
$
1,883

Investments purchased
438

 
317

Accretion recognized in earnings
(277
)
 
(276
)
Disposals
(138
)
 
(48
)
Reclassification (to) from nonaccretable difference
(129
)
 
(92
)
Accretable yield, December 31,
$
1,678

 
$
1,784




163
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Collectively Significant Equity Method Investments
The Company holds investments in real estate joint ventures, real estate funds and other limited partnership interests consisting of leveraged buy-out funds, hedge funds, private equity funds, joint ventures and other funds. The portion of these investments accounted for under the equity method had a carrying value of $10.8 billion at December 31, 2016. The Company’s maximum exposure to loss related to these equity method investments is limited to the carrying value of these investments plus unfunded commitments of $3.4 billion at December 31, 2016. Except for certain real estate joint ventures, the Company’s investments in real estate funds and other limited partnership interests are generally of a passive nature in that the Company does not participate in the management of the entities.
As described in Note 1, the Company generally records its share of earnings in its equity method investments using a three-month lag methodology and within net investment income. Aggregate net investment income from these equity method investments exceeded 10% of the Company’s consolidated pre-tax income (loss) from continuing operations for one of the three most recent annual periods: 2016. The Company is providing the following aggregated summarized financial data for such equity method investments, for the most recent annual periods, in order to provide comparative information. This aggregated summarized financial data does not represent the Company’s proportionate share of the assets, liabilities, or earnings of such entities.
The aggregated summarized financial data presented below reflects the latest available financial information and is as of, and for, the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014. Aggregate total assets of these entities totaled $385.3 billion and $397.9 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Aggregate total liabilities of these entities totaled $48.5 billion and $64.1 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Aggregate net income (loss) of these entities totaled $27.6 billion, $23.4 billion and $33.7 billion for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Aggregate net income (loss) from the underlying entities in which the Company invests is primarily comprised of investment income, including recurring investment income and realized and unrealized investment gains (losses).
Variable Interest Entities
The Company has invested in legal entities that are VIEs. In certain instances, the Company holds both the power to direct the most significant activities of the entity, as well as an economic interest in the entity and, as such, is deemed to be the primary beneficiary or consolidator of the entity. The determination of the VIE’s primary beneficiary requires an evaluation of the contractual and implied rights and obligations associated with each party’s relationship with or involvement in the entity, an estimate of the entity’s expected losses and expected residual returns and the allocation of such estimates to each party involved in the entity.
Consolidated VIEs
Creditors or beneficial interest holders of VIEs where the Company is the primary beneficiary have no recourse to the general credit of the Company, as the Company’s obligation to the VIEs is limited to the amount of its committed investment.
The following table presents the total assets and total liabilities relating to VIEs for which the Company has concluded that it is the primary beneficiary and which are consolidated at December 31, 2016 and 2015.
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Total
Assets
 
Total
Liabilities
 
Total
Assets
 
Total
Liabilities
 
(In millions)
Real estate joint ventures (1)
$
1,124

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

Fixed maturity securities (2)
—

 
—

 
104

 
50

Other investments (3)
62

 
12

 
89

 
13

Total
$
1,186

 
$
12

 
$
193

 
$
63

__________________
(1)
The Company consolidates certain affiliated real estate joint ventures. At December 31, 2016, the Company and its affiliates invested $1.0 billion and $85 million, respectively, in these affiliated real estate joint ventures.

164
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

(2)
The Company consolidates certain fixed maturity securities purchased in an investment structure which was partially funded with affiliated long-term debt. These investments were sold in June 2016.
(3)
Other investments is comprised primarily of other invested assets and other limited partnership interests. The Company consolidates entities that are structured as collateralized debt obligations. The assets of these entities can only be used to settle their respective liabilities, and under no circumstances is the Company liable for any principal or interest shortfalls should any arise. The Company’s exposure was limited to that of its remaining investment in these entities of less than $1 million at estimated fair value at both December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Unconsolidated VIEs
The carrying amount and maximum exposure to loss relating to VIEs in which the Company holds a significant variable interest but is not the primary beneficiary and which have not been consolidated were as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Carrying
Amount
 
Maximum
Exposure
to Loss (1)
 
Carrying
Amount
 
Maximum
Exposure
to Loss (1)
 
(In millions)
Fixed maturity securities AFS:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Structured Securities (2)
$
34,912

 
$
34,912

 
$
37,061

 
$
37,061

U.S. and foreign corporate
1,167

 
1,167

 
1,593

 
1,593

Other limited partnership interests
3,383

 
5,674

 
2,874

 
3,672

Other invested assets
2,089

 
2,666

 
1,564

 
2,116

Real estate joint ventures
81

 
95

 
31

 
44

Total
$
41,632

 
$
44,514

 
$
43,123

 
$
44,486

__________________
(1)
The maximum exposure to loss relating to fixed maturity securities AFS is equal to their carrying amounts or the carrying amounts of retained interests. The maximum exposure to loss relating to other limited partnership interests and real estate joint ventures is equal to the carrying amounts plus any unfunded commitments. For certain of its investments in other invested assets, the Company’s return is in the form of income tax credits which are guaranteed by creditworthy third parties. For such investments, the maximum exposure to loss is equal to the carrying amounts plus any unfunded commitments, reduced by income tax credits guaranteed by third parties of $150 million and $179 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. Such a maximum loss would be expected to occur only upon bankruptcy of the issuer or investee.
(2)
For these variable interests, the Company’s involvement is limited to that of a passive investor in mortgage-backed or asset-backed securities issued by trusts that do not have substantial equity.
As described in Note 16, the Company makes commitments to fund partnership investments in the normal course of business. Excluding these commitments, the Company did not provide financial or other support to investees designated as VIEs during each of the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014.

165
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Net Investment Income
The components of net investment income were as follows:

Years Ended December 31,

2016

2015

2014
 
(In millions)
Investment income:
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
$
7,653

 
$
7,930

 
$
8,260

Equity securities
90

 
91

 
86

FVO and trading securities — FVO general account and Actively traded securities (1)
3

 
(15
)
 
23

Mortgage loans
2,539

 
2,514

 
2,378

Policy loans
404

 
435

 
448

Real estate and real estate joint ventures
488

 
743

 
725

Other limited partnership interests
413

 
519

 
721

Cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments
43

 
25

 
26

Operating joint venture
9

 
9

 
2

Other
204

 
202

 
61

Subtotal
11,846

 
12,453

 
12,730

Less: Investment expenses
763

 
876

 
838

Subtotal, net
11,083

 
11,577

 
11,892

FVO CSEs — interest income:
 
 
 
 
 
Securities
—

 
—

 
1

Subtotal
—

 
—

 
1

Net investment income
$
11,083

 
$
11,577

 
$
11,893

__________________
(1)
Changes in estimated fair value subsequent to purchase for securities still held as of the end of the respective years included in net investment income were less than $1 million, ($18) million and ($14) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
See “— Variable Interest Entities” for discussion of CSEs.
See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for discussion of affiliated net investment income and investment expenses.



166
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Net Investment Gains (Losses)
Components of Net Investment Gains (Losses)
The components of net investment gains (losses) were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
Total OTTI losses recognized — by sector and industry:
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. and foreign corporate securities — by industry:
 
 
 
 
 
Industrial
$
(58
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Utility
(20
)
 
(15
)
 
—

Communications
(3
)
 
—

 
—

Consumer
—

 
(21
)
 
(6
)
Total U.S. and foreign corporate securities
(81
)
 
(36
)
 
(6
)
RMBS
(16
)
 
(17
)
 
(20
)
State and political subdivision
—

 
(1
)
 
—

OTTI losses on fixed maturity securities recognized in earnings
(97
)
 
(54
)
 
(26
)
Fixed maturity securities — net gains (losses) on sales and disposals
169

 
(114
)
 
(99
)
Total gains (losses) on fixed maturity securities
72

 
(168
)
 
(125
)
Total gains (losses) on equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
Total OTTI losses recognized — by sector:
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock
(75
)
 
(37
)
 
(5
)
Non-redeemable preferred stock
—

 
—

 
(16
)
OTTI losses on equity securities recognized in earnings
(75
)
 
(37
)
 
(21
)
Equity securities — net gains (losses) on sales and disposals
19

 
—

 
42

Total gains (losses) on equity securities
(56
)
 
(37
)

21

FVO and trading securities — FVO general account securities
—

 
—

 
1

Mortgage loans
(20
)
 
(90
)
 
(36
)
Real estate and real estate joint ventures
142

 
430

 
252

Other limited partnership interests
(59
)
 
(66
)
 
(69
)
Other
(33
)
 
(18
)
 
(108
)
Subtotal
46

 
51

 
(64
)
FVO CSEs:
 
 
 
 
 
Securities
1

 
—

 
—

Long-term debt — related to securities
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Non-investment portfolio gains (losses)
85

 
208

 
208

Subtotal
86

 
208

 
207

Total net investment gains (losses)
$
132

 
$
259

 
$
143

See “— Variable Interest Entities” for discussion of CSEs.
See “— Related Party Investment Transactions” for discussion of affiliated net investment gains (losses) related to transfers of invested assets to affiliates.
Gains (losses) from foreign currency transactions included within net investment gains (losses) were $89 million, $125 million and $132 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.

167
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

Sales or Disposals and Impairments of Fixed Maturity and Equity Securities
Investment gains and losses on sales of securities are determined on a specific identification basis. Proceeds from sales or disposals of fixed maturity and equity securities and the components of fixed maturity and equity securities net investment gains (losses) were as shown in the table below.
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
Fixed Maturity Securities
 
Equity Securities
 
(In millions)
Proceeds
$
58,812

 
$
60,957

 
$
44,906

 
$
146

 
$
105

 
$
128

Gross investment gains
$
755

 
$
584

 
$
260

 
$
28

 
$
28

 
$
46

Gross investment losses
(586
)
 
(698
)
 
(359
)
 
(9
)
 
(28
)
 
(4
)
OTTI losses
(97
)
 
(54
)
 
(26
)
 
(75
)
 
(37
)
 
(21
)
Net investment gains (losses)
$
72

 
$
(168
)
 
$
(125
)
 
$
(56
)
 
$
(37
)
 
$
21

Credit Loss Rollforward
The table below presents a rollforward of the cumulative credit loss component of OTTI loss recognized in earnings on fixed maturity securities still held for which a portion of the OTTI loss was recognized in OCI:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
$
188

 
$
263

Additions:
 
 
 
Initial impairments — credit loss OTTI on securities not previously impaired
1

 
14

Additional impairments — credit loss OTTI on securities previously impaired
13

 
15

Reductions:
 
 
 
Sales (maturities, pay downs or prepayments) of securities previously impaired as credit loss OTTI
(43
)
 
(102
)
    Securities impaired to net present value of expected future cash flows
(1
)
 
—

Increase in cash flows — accretion of previous credit loss OTTI
(1
)
 
(2
)
Balance at December 31,
$
157

 
$
188

Related Party Investment Transactions
The Company transfers invested assets, primarily consisting of fixed maturity securities, to and from affiliates. Invested assets transferred to and from affiliates were as follows:
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
(In millions)
Estimated fair value of invested assets transferred to affiliates
 
$
5,678

 
$
1,003

 
$
97

Amortized cost of invested assets transferred to affiliates
 
$
5,338

 
$
941

 
$
89

Net investment gains (losses) recognized on transfers
 
$
340

 
$
62

 
$
8

Estimated fair value of invested assets transferred from affiliates
 
$
1,583

 
$
237

 
$
882


168
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
8. Investments (continued)

In April 2016, the Company transferred investments and cash and cash equivalents with an amortized cost and estimated fair value of $4.0 billion and $4.3 billion, respectively, for the recapture of risks related to certain single premium deferred annuity contracts previously reinsured to Brighthouse Insurance, an affiliate, which are included in the table above. See Note 6 for additional information related to the transfer. Also, in November 2016, the Company transferred investments and cash and cash equivalents with an amortized cost and estimated fair value of $863 million and $933 million, respectively, for the recapture of risks related to certain single premium deferred annuity contracts previously reinsured to Brighthouse NY, an affiliate, which are included in the table above.
In July 2014, the Company purchased from certain affiliates MetLife, Inc. affiliated loans with an unpaid principal balance of $400 million and estimated fair value of $437 million, which are included in the table above. The unpaid principal balance of MetLife, Inc. affiliated loans held by the Company totals $1.8 billion, bear interest at the following fixed rates, payable semiannually, and are due as follows: $500 million at 3.54% due on June 30, 2019, $250 million at 3.57% due on October 1, 2019, $358 million at 5.64% due on July 15, 2021 and $467 million at 5.86% due on December 16, 2021. In September 2016, an affiliated loan for $250 million matured and, subsequently, a new loan was issued for $250 million, which bears interest, payable semiannually, at a fixed rate of 3.03% and matures on September 30, 2020. The carrying value of these MetLife, Inc. affiliated loans totaled $1.8 billion and $2.0 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and are included in other invested assets. Net investment income from these affiliated loans was $91 million, $95 million and $92 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
As a structured settlements assignment company, the Company purchases annuities from affiliates to fund the periodic structured settlement claim payment obligations it assumes. Each annuity purchased is contractually designated to the assumed claim obligation it funds. The aggregate contract values of annuities funding structured settlement claims are recorded as an asset for which the Company has also recorded an unpaid claim obligation of equal amount. Such aggregated contract values were $1.3 billion at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The related net investment income and corresponding policyholder benefits and claims recognized were $64 million and $63 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The Company had a surplus note outstanding from American Life Insurance Company, an affiliate, which was included in other invested assets, with a carrying value of $100 million at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The loan, which bears interest at a fixed rate of 3.17%, payable semiannually, is due on June 30, 2020. Net investment income from this surplus note was $3 million, $3 million and less than $1 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The Company held preferred stock of Metropolitan Property and Casualty Insurance Company, an affiliate, which was included in other invested assets, with a carrying value of $315 million at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. Dividends are payable quarterly at a variable rate. Net investment income from the affiliated preferred stock dividends was $5 million, $4 million and $4 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The Company provides investment administrative services to certain affiliates. The related investment administrative service charges to these affiliates were $172 million, $157 million and $179 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
See “— Variable Interest Entities” for information on investments in affiliated real estate joint ventures.
See “— Mortgage Loans — Mortgage Loans by Portfolio Segment” for discussion of mortgage loan participation agreements with affiliates.

169
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

9. Derivatives
Accounting for Derivatives
See Note 1 for a description of the Company’s accounting policies for derivatives and Note 10 for information about the fair value hierarchy for derivatives.
Derivative Strategies
The Company is exposed to various risks relating to its ongoing business operations, including interest rate, foreign currency exchange rate, credit and equity market. The Company uses a variety of strategies to manage these risks, including the use of derivatives.
Derivatives are financial instruments with values derived from interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, credit spreads and/or other financial indices. Derivatives may be exchange-traded or contracted in the over-the-counter (“OTC”) market. Certain of the Company’s OTC derivatives are cleared and settled through central clearing counterparties (“OTC-cleared”), while others are bilateral contracts between two counterparties (“OTC-bilateral”). The types of derivatives the Company uses include swaps, forwards, futures and option contracts. To a lesser extent, the Company uses credit default swaps and structured interest rate swaps to synthetically replicate investment risks and returns which are not readily available in the cash markets.
Interest Rate Derivatives
The Company uses a variety of interest rate derivatives to reduce its exposure to changes in interest rates, including interest rate swaps, interest rate total return swaps, caps, floors, swaptions, futures and forwards.
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 liabilities (duration mismatches). In an interest rate swap, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between fixed rate and floating rate interest amounts as calculated by reference to an agreed notional amount. The Company utilizes interest rate swaps in fair value, cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships.
The Company uses structured interest rate swaps to synthetically create investments that are either more expensive to acquire or otherwise unavailable in the cash markets. These transactions are a combination of a derivative and a cash instrument such as a U.S. government and agency, or other fixed maturity security. Structured interest rate swaps are included in interest rate swaps and are not designated as hedging instruments.
Interest rate total return swaps are swaps whereby the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between the economic risk and reward of an asset or a market index and the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”), calculated by reference to an agreed notional amount. No cash is exchanged at the outset of the contract. Cash is paid and received over the life of the contract based on the terms of the swap. These transactions are entered into pursuant to master agreements that provide for a single net payment to be made by the counterparty at each due date. Interest rate total return swaps are used by the Company to reduce market risks from changes in interest rates and to alter interest rate exposure arising from mismatches between assets and liabilities (duration mismatches). The Company utilizes interest rate total return swaps in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
The Company purchases interest rate caps and floors primarily to protect its floating rate liabilities against rises in interest rates above a specified level, and against interest rate exposure arising from mismatches between assets and liabilities, as well as to protect its minimum rate guarantee liabilities against declines in interest rates below a specified level, respectively. In certain instances, the Company locks in the economic impact of existing purchased caps and floors by entering into offsetting written caps and floors. The Company utilizes interest rate caps and floors in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
Swaptions are used by the Company to hedge interest rate risk associated with the Company’s long-term liabilities and invested assets. A swaption is an option to enter into a swap with a forward starting effective date. 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 for purchased swaptions and receives a premium for written swaptions. The Company utilizes swaptions in nonqualifying hedging relationships. Swaptions are included in interest rate options.
The Company enters into interest rate forwards to buy and sell securities. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for such a contract is made at a specified future date. The Company utilizes interest rate forwards in cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships.
To a lesser extent, the Company uses exchange-traded interest rate futures in nonqualifying hedging relationships.

170
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Foreign Currency Exchange Rate Derivatives
The Company uses foreign currency exchange rate derivatives, including foreign currency swaps and foreign currency forwards, to reduce the risk from fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates associated with its assets and liabilities denominated in foreign currencies.
In a foreign currency swap transaction, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between one currency and another at a fixed exchange rate, generally set at inception, calculated by reference to an agreed upon notional amount. The notional amount of each currency is exchanged at the inception and termination of the currency swap by each party. The Company utilizes foreign currency swaps in fair value, cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships.
In a foreign currency forward transaction, the Company agrees with another party to deliver a specified amount of an identified currency at a specified future date. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for such a contract is made at the specified future date. The Company utilizes foreign currency forwards in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
Credit Derivatives
The Company enters into purchased credit default swaps to hedge against credit-related changes in the value of its investments. In a credit default swap transaction, the Company agrees with another party to pay, at specified intervals, a premium to hedge credit risk. If a credit event occurs, as defined by the contract, the contract may be cash settled or it may be settled gross by the delivery of par quantities of the referenced investment equal to the specified swap notional amount in exchange for the payment of cash amounts by the counterparty equal to the par value of the investment surrendered. Credit events vary by type of issuer but typically include bankruptcy, failure to pay debt obligations, repudiation, moratorium, involuntary restructuring or governmental intervention. In each case, payout on a credit default swap is triggered only after the Credit Derivatives Determinations Committee of the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (“ISDA”) deems that a credit event has occurred. The Company utilizes credit default swaps in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
The Company enters into written credit default swaps to synthetically create credit investments that are either more expensive to acquire or otherwise unavailable in the cash markets. These transactions are a combination of a derivative and one or more cash instruments, such as U.S. government and agency securities, or other fixed maturity securities. These credit default swaps are not designated as hedging instruments.
The Company also enters into certain purchased and written credit default swaps held in relation to trading portfolios for the purpose of generating profits on short-term differences in price. These credit default swaps are not designated as hedging instruments. At December 31, 2016, the Company no longer maintained a trading portfolio for derivatives.
The Company enters into forwards to lock in the price to be paid for forward purchases of certain securities. The price is agreed upon at the time of the contract and payment for the contract is made at a specified future date. When the primary purpose of entering into these transactions is to hedge against the risk of changes in purchase price due to changes in credit spreads, the Company designates these transactions as credit forwards. The Company utilizes credit forwards in cash flow hedging relationships.

171
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Equity Derivatives
The Company uses a variety of equity derivatives to reduce its exposure to equity market risk, including equity index options, equity variance swaps, exchange-traded equity futures and equity total return swaps.
Equity index options are used by the Company primarily to hedge minimum guarantees embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. To hedge against adverse changes in equity indices, the Company enters into contracts to sell the equity index within a limited time at a contracted price. The contracts will be net settled in cash based on differentials in the indices at the time of exercise and the strike price. Certain of these contracts may also contain settlement provisions linked to interest rates. In certain instances, the Company may enter into a combination of transactions to hedge adverse changes in equity indices within a pre-determined range through the purchase and sale of options. The Company utilizes equity index options in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
Equity variance swaps are used by the Company primarily to hedge minimum guarantees embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. In an equity variance swap, the Company agrees with another party to exchange amounts in the future, based on changes in equity volatility over a defined period. The Company utilizes equity variance swaps in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
In exchange-traded equity futures transactions, the Company agrees to purchase or sell a specified number of contracts, the value of which is determined by the different classes of equity securities, and to post variation margin on a daily basis in an amount equal to the difference in the daily market values of those contracts. The Company enters into exchange-traded futures with regulated futures commission merchants that are members of the exchange. Exchange-traded equity futures are used primarily to hedge minimum guarantees embedded in certain variable annuity products offered by the Company. The Company utilizes exchange-traded equity futures in nonqualifying hedging relationships.
In an equity total return swap, the Company agrees with another party to exchange, at specified intervals, the difference between the economic risk and reward of an asset or a market index and LIBOR, calculated by reference to an agreed notional amount. No cash is exchanged at the outset of the contract. Cash is paid and received over the life of the contract based on the terms of the swap. The Company uses equity total return swaps to hedge its equity market guarantees in certain of its insurance products. Equity total return swaps can be used as hedges or to synthetically create investments. The Company utilizes equity total return swaps in nonqualifying hedging relationships.

172
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Primary Risks Managed by Derivatives
The following table presents the gross notional amount, estimated fair value and primary underlying risk exposure of the Company’s derivatives, excluding embedded derivatives, held at:
 
Primary Underlying Risk Exposure
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
 
Estimated Fair Value
 
 
 
Estimated Fair Value
 
Gross
Notional
Amount
 
Assets
 
Liabilities
 
Gross
Notional
Amount
 
Assets
 
Liabilities
 
 
 
(In millions)
Derivatives Designated as Hedging Instruments:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fair value hedges:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
Interest rate
 
$
4,993

 
$
2,221

 
$
6

 
$
5,089

 
$
2,177

 
$
11

Foreign currency swaps
Foreign currency exchange rate
 
1,200

 
29

 
224

 
2,133

 
61

 
159

Subtotal
 
6,193

 
2,250

 
230

 
7,222

 
2,238

 
170

Cash flow hedges:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
Interest rate
 
1,793

 
325

 
26

 
1,960

 
426

 
—

Interest rate forwards
Interest rate
 
4,033

 
—

 
370

 
70

 
15

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
Foreign currency exchange rate
 
20,080

 
1,435

 
1,604

 
18,743

 
1,132

 
1,376

Subtotal
 
25,906

 
1,760

 
2,000

 
20,773

 
1,573

 
1,376

Total qualifying hedges
 
32,099

 
4,010

 
2,230

 
27,995

 
3,811

 
1,546

Derivatives Not Designated or Not Qualifying as Hedging Instruments:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
Interest rate
 
32,662

 
2,514

 
879

 
51,489

 
2,613

 
1,197

Interest rate floors
Interest rate
 
9,001

 
173

 
2

 
13,701

 
252

 
10

Interest rate caps
Interest rate
 
78,358

 
112

 
3

 
55,136

 
67

 
2

Interest rate futures
Interest rate
 
2,342

 
3

 
—

 
2,023

 
—

 
2

Interest rate options
Interest rate
 
850

 
144

 
1

 
2,295

 
227

 
4

Interest rate forwards
Interest rate
 
396

 
—

 
3

 
—

 
—

 
—

Interest rate total return swaps
Interest rate
 
1,549

 
2

 
127

 
—

 
—

 
—

Synthetic GICs
Interest rate
 
5,566

 
—

 
—

 
4,216

 
—

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
Foreign currency exchange rate
 
8,175

 
1,247

 
58

 
8,095

 
600

 
94

Foreign currency forwards
Foreign currency exchange rate
 
1,396

 
52

 
18

 
3,014

 
83

 
36

Credit default swaps — purchased
Credit
 
961

 
12

 
6

 
819

 
28

 
8

Credit default swaps — written
Credit
 
8,025

 
119

 
8

 
6,577

 
51

 
11

Equity futures
Equity market
 
1,851

 
10

 
—

 
1,452

 
15

 
—

Equity index options
Equity market
 
11,119

 
260

 
426

 
7,364

 
326

 
349

Equity variance swaps
Equity market
 
5,579

 
69

 
193

 
5,676

 
62

 
160

Equity total return swaps
Equity market
 
1,013

 
1

 
42

 
952

 
11

 
9

Total non-designated or nonqualifying derivatives
 
168,843

 
4,718

 
1,766

 
162,809

 
4,335

 
1,882

Total
 
$
200,942

 
$
8,728

 
$
3,996

 
$
190,804

 
$
8,146

 
$
3,428


173
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Based on gross notional amounts, a substantial portion of the Company’s derivatives was not designated or did not qualify as part of a hedging relationship at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. The Company’s use of derivatives includes (i) derivatives that serve as macro hedges of the Company’s exposure to various risks and that generally do not qualify for hedge accounting due to the criteria required under the portfolio hedging rules; (ii) derivatives that economically hedge insurance liabilities that contain mortality or morbidity risk and that generally do not qualify for hedge accounting because the lack of these risks in the derivatives cannot support an expectation of a highly effective hedging relationship; (iii) derivatives that economically hedge embedded derivatives that do not qualify for hedge accounting because the changes in estimated fair value of the embedded derivatives are already recorded in net income; and (iv) written credit default swaps that are used to synthetically create credit investments and that do not qualify for hedge accounting because they do not involve a hedging relationship. For these nonqualified derivatives, changes in market factors can lead to the recognition of fair value changes on the statement of operations without an offsetting gain or loss recognized in earnings for the item being hedged.
Net Derivative Gains (Losses)
The components of net derivative gains (losses) were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Freestanding derivatives and hedging gains (losses) (1)
$
(715
)
 
$
463

 
$
1,207

Embedded derivatives gains (losses)
(423
)
 
418

 
(170
)
Total net derivative gains (losses)
$
(1,138
)
 
$
881

 
$
1,037

__________________
(1)
Includes foreign currency transaction gains (losses) on hedged items in cash flow and nonqualifying hedging relationships, which are not presented elsewhere in this note.
The following table presents earned income on derivatives:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Qualifying hedges:
 
 
 
 
 
Net investment income
$
280

 
$
227

 
$
162

Interest credited to policyholder account balances
(1
)
 
28

 
106

Nonqualifying hedges:
 
 
 
 
 
Net investment income
(1
)
 
(5
)
 
(4
)
Net derivative gains (losses)
577

 
518

 
484

Policyholder benefits and claims
4

 
2

 
8

Total
$
859

 
$
770

 
$
756


174
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Nonqualifying Derivatives and Derivatives for Purposes Other Than Hedging
The following table presents the amount and location of gains (losses) recognized in income for derivatives that were not designated or not qualifying as hedging instruments:
 
Net
Derivative
Gains (Losses)
 
Net
Investment
Income (1)
 
Policyholder
Benefits and
Claims (2)
 
(In millions)
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate derivatives
$
(1,088
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives
726

 
—

 
—

Credit derivatives — purchased
(23
)
 
—

 
—

Credit derivatives — written
48

 
—

 
—

Equity derivatives
(457
)
 
(14
)
 
(94
)
Total
$
(794
)
 
$
(14
)
 
$
(94
)
Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate derivatives
$
(243
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives
678

 
—

 
—

Credit derivatives — purchased
17

 
(3
)
 
—

Credit derivatives — written
(57
)
 
—

 
—

Equity derivatives
(152
)
 
(11
)
 
—

Total
$
243

 
$
(14
)
 
$
—

Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate derivatives
$
314

 
$
—

 
$
—

Foreign currency exchange rate derivatives
554

 
—

 
—

Credit derivatives — purchased
(2
)
 
—

 
—

Credit derivatives — written
(1
)
 
—

 
—

Equity derivatives
11

 
(10
)
 
(10
)
Total
$
876

 
$
(10
)
 
$
(10
)
__________________
(1)
Changes in estimated fair value related to economic hedges of equity method investments in joint ventures and derivatives held in relation to trading portfolios.
(2)
Changes in estimated fair value related to economic hedges of variable annuity guarantees included in future policy benefits.
Fair Value Hedges
The Company designates and accounts for the following as fair value hedges when they have met the requirements of fair value hedging: (i) interest rate swaps to convert fixed rate assets and liabilities to floating rate assets and liabilities; and (ii) foreign currency swaps to hedge the foreign currency fair value exposure of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities.

175
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

The Company recognizes gains and losses on derivatives and the related hedged items in fair value hedges within net derivative gains (losses). The following table presents the amount of such net derivative gains (losses):
Derivatives in Fair Value
Hedging Relationships
 
Hedged Items in Fair Value
Hedging Relationships
 
Net Derivative
Gains (Losses)
Recognized
for Derivatives
 
Net Derivative
Gains (Losses)
Recognized for
Hedged Items
 
Ineffectiveness
Recognized in
Net Derivative
Gains (Losses)
 
 
 
 
(In millions)
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps:
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
$
8

 
$
(9
)
 
$
(1
)
 
 
Policyholder liabilities (1)
 
(109
)
 
90

 
(19
)
Foreign currency swaps:
 
Foreign-denominated fixed maturity securities
 
10

 
(9
)
 
1

 
 
Foreign-denominated policyholder account
balances (2)
 
(95
)
 
92

 
(3
)
Total
 
$
(186
)
 
$
164

 
$
(22
)
Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps:
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
$
4

 
$
—

 
$
4

 
 
Policyholder liabilities (1)
 
(4
)
 
(6
)
 
(10
)
Foreign currency swaps:
 
Foreign-denominated fixed maturity securities
 
14

 
(5
)
 
9

 
 
Foreign-denominated policyholder account
balances (2)
 
(240
)
 
231

 
(9
)
Total
 
$
(226
)
 
$
220

 
$
(6
)
Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps:
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
$
4

 
$
(1
)
 
$
3

 
 
Policyholder liabilities (1)
 
649

 
(635
)
 
14

Foreign currency swaps:
 
Foreign-denominated fixed maturity securities
 
13

 
(11
)
 
2

 
 
Foreign-denominated policyholder account
balances (2)
 
(283
)
 
270

 
(13
)
Total
 
$
383

 
$
(377
)
 
$
6

__________________
(1)
Fixed rate liabilities reported in policyholder account balances or future policy benefits.
(2)
Fixed rate or floating rate liabilities.
All components of each derivative’s gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
Cash Flow Hedges
The Company designates and accounts for the following as cash flow hedges when they have met the requirements of cash flow hedging: (i) interest rate swaps to convert floating rate assets and liabilities to fixed rate assets and liabilities; (ii) foreign currency swaps to hedge the foreign currency cash flow exposure of foreign currency denominated assets and liabilities; (iii) interest rate forwards and credit forwards to lock in the price to be paid for forward purchases of investments; (iv) interest rate swaps and interest rate forwards to hedge the forecasted purchases of fixed-rate investments; and (v) interest rate forwards to hedge forecasted fixed-rate borrowings.
In certain instances, the Company discontinued cash flow hedge accounting because the forecasted transactions were no longer probable of occurring. Because certain of the forecasted transactions also were not probable of occurring within two months of the anticipated date, the Company reclassified amounts from AOCI into net derivative gains (losses). These amounts were $17 million, $14 million and ($14) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
At both December 31, 2016 and 2015, the maximum length of time over which the Company was hedging its exposure to variability in future cash flows for forecasted transactions did not exceed five years.

176
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

At both December 31, 2016 and 2015, the balance in AOCI associated with cash flow hedges was $2.2 billion.
The following table presents the effects of derivatives in cash flow hedging relationships on the consolidated statements of operations and the consolidated statements of equity:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Derivatives in Cash Flow
Hedging Relationships
 
Amount of Gains
(Losses)Deferred in
AOCI on Derivatives
 
Amount and Location
of Gains (Losses)
Reclassified from
AOCI into Income (Loss)
 
Amount and Location
of Gains (Losses)
Recognized in Income
(Loss) on Derivatives
 
 
(Effective Portion)
 
(Effective Portion)
(Ineffective Portion)
 
 
 
 
Net Derivative
Gains (Losses)
 
Net Investment
Income
 
Net Derivative
Gains (Losses)
 
 
(In millions)
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
 
$
58

 
$
57

 
$
12

 
$
—

Interest rate forwards
 
(366
)
 
(1
)
 
3

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
 
167

 
(251
)
 
(1
)
 
—

Credit forwards
 
—

 
3

 
1

 
—

Total
 
$
(141
)
 
$
(192
)
 
$
15

 
$
—

Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
 
$
76

 
$
83

 
$
11

 
$
2

Interest rate forwards
 
(3
)
 
4

 
2

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
 
(92
)
 
(679
)
 
(1
)
 
7

Credit forwards
 
—

 
1

 
1

 
—

Total
 
$
(19
)
 
$
(591
)
 
$
13

 
$
9

Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
 
$
587

 
$
41

 
$
9

 
$
3

Interest rate forwards
 
34

 
(8
)
 
2

 
—

Foreign currency swaps
 
(15
)
 
(725
)
 
(2
)
 
2

Credit forwards
 
—

 
—

 
1

 
—

Total
 
$
606

 
$
(692
)
 
$
10

 
$
5

All components of each derivative’s gain or loss were included in the assessment of hedge effectiveness.
At December 31, 2016, the Company expected to reclassify ($156) million of deferred net gains (losses) on derivatives in AOCI to earnings within the next 12 months.
Credit Derivatives
In connection with synthetically created credit investment transactions and credit default swaps held in relation to the trading portfolio, the Company writes credit default swaps for which it receives a premium to insure credit risk. Such credit derivatives are included within the nonqualifying derivatives and derivatives for purposes other than hedging table. If a credit event occurs, as defined by the contract, the contract may be cash settled or it may be settled gross by the Company paying the counterparty the specified swap notional amount in exchange for the delivery of par quantities of the referenced credit obligation. The Company’s maximum amount at risk, assuming the value of all referenced credit obligations is zero, was $8.0 billion and $6.6 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. The Company can terminate these contracts at any time through cash settlement with the counterparty at an amount equal to the then current estimated fair value of the credit default swaps. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company would have received $111 million and $40 million, respectively, to terminate all of these contracts.

177
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

The following table presents the estimated fair value, maximum amount of future payments and weighted average years to maturity of written credit default swaps at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
Rating Agency Designation of Referenced
Credit Obligations (1)
 
Estimated
Fair Value
of Credit
Default Swaps
 
Maximum
Amount
of Future
Payments under
Credit Default
Swaps
 
Weighted
Average
Years to
Maturity (2)
 
Estimated
Fair Value
of Credit
Default Swaps
 
Maximum
Amount
of Future
Payments under
Credit Default
Swaps
 
Weighted
Average
Years to
Maturity (2)
 
 
( Dollars in millions)
Aaa/Aa/A
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Single name credit default swaps (3)
 
$
1

 
$
229

 
2.7

 
$
2

 
$
245

 
2.5

Credit default swaps referencing indices
 
32

 
2,093

 
3.5

 
5

 
1,366

 
3.3

Subtotal
 
33

 
2,322

 
3.4

 
7

 
1,611

 
3.2

Baa
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Single name credit default swaps (3)
 
3

 
563

 
2.2

 
5

 
752

 
2.6

Credit default swaps referencing indices
 
61

 
4,730

 
5.1

 
21

 
3,452

 
4.8

Subtotal
 
64

 
5,293

 
4.8

 
26

 
4,204

 
4.4

Ba
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Single name credit default swaps (3)
 
(2
)
 
115

 
4.2

 
(2
)
 
60

 
2.2

Credit default swaps referencing indices
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
 
100

 
1.0

Subtotal
 
(2
)
 
115

 
4.2

 
(3
)
 
160

 
1.4

B
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Single name credit default swaps (3)
 
—

 
70

 
1.8

 
—

 
—

 
—

Credit default swaps referencing indices
 
16

 
225

 
5.0

 
10

 
602

 
4.9

Subtotal
 
16

 
295

 
4.2

 
10

 
602

 
4.9

Total
 
$
111

 
$
8,025

 
4.4

 
$
40

 
$
6,577

 
4.1

__________________
(1)
The rating agency designations are based on availability and the midpoint of the applicable ratings among Moody’s Investors Service (“Moody’s”), S&P and Fitch Ratings. If no rating is available from a rating agency, then an internally developed rating is used.
(2)
The weighted average years to maturity of the credit default swaps is calculated based on weighted average gross notional amounts.
(3)
Single name credit default swaps may be referenced to the credit of corporations, foreign governments, or state and political subdivisions.
The Company has also entered into credit default swaps to purchase credit protection on certain of the referenced credit obligations in the table above. As a result, the maximum amounts of potential future recoveries available to offset the $8.0 billion and $6.6 billion from the table above were $30 million and $70 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
At December 31, 2016, the Company no longer maintained a trading portfolio for derivatives. At December 31, 2015, written credit default swaps held in relation to the trading portfolio amounted to $20 million in gross notional amount and ($2) million in estimated fair value.

178
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

Credit Risk on Freestanding Derivatives
The Company may be exposed to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by its counterparties to derivatives. Generally, the current credit exposure of the Company’s derivatives is limited to the net positive estimated fair value of derivatives at the reporting date after taking into consideration the existence of master netting or similar agreements and any collateral received pursuant to such agreements.
The Company manages its credit risk related to derivatives by entering into transactions with creditworthy counterparties and establishing and monitoring exposure limits. The Company’s OTC-bilateral derivative transactions are generally governed by ISDA Master Agreements which provide for legally enforceable set-off and close-out netting of exposures to specific counterparties in the event of early termination of a transaction, which includes, but is not limited to, events of default and bankruptcy. In the event of an early termination, the Company is permitted to set off receivables from the counterparty against payables to the same counterparty arising out of all included transactions. Substantially all of the Company’s ISDA Master Agreements also include Credit Support Annex provisions which require both the pledging and accepting of collateral in connection with its OTC-bilateral derivatives.
The Company’s OTC-cleared derivatives are effected through central clearing counterparties and its exchange-traded derivatives are effected through regulated exchanges. Such positions are marked to market and margined on a daily basis (both initial margin and variation margin), and the Company has minimal exposure to credit-related losses in the event of nonperformance by counterparties to such derivatives.
See Note 10 for a description of the impact of credit risk on the valuation of derivatives.

179
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

The estimated fair values of the Company’s net derivative assets and net derivative liabilities after the application of master netting agreements and collateral were as follows at:
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
Derivatives Subject to a Master Netting Arrangement or a Similar Arrangement
 
Assets
 
Liabilities
 
Assets
 
Liabilities
 
 
(In millions)
Gross estimated fair value of derivatives:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OTC-bilateral (1)
 
$
7,926

 
$
3,349

 
$
7,368

 
$
2,667

OTC-cleared (1)
 
905

 
611

 
909

 
783

Exchange-traded
 
13

 
—

 
15

 
2

Total gross estimated fair value of derivatives (1)
 
8,844

 
3,960

 
8,292

 
3,452

Amounts offset on the consolidated balance sheets
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Estimated fair value of derivatives presented on the consolidated balance sheets (1)
 
8,844

 
3,960

 
8,292

 
3,452

Gross amounts not offset on the consolidated balance sheets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Gross estimated fair value of derivatives: (2)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OTC-bilateral
 
(2,737
)
 
(2,737
)
 
(2,117
)
 
(2,117
)
OTC-cleared
 
(391
)
 
(391
)
 
(776
)
 
(776
)
Exchange-traded
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Cash collateral: (3), (4)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OTC-bilateral
 
(3,418
)
 
—

 
(3,705
)
 
(3
)
OTC-cleared
 
(497
)
 
(217
)
 
(119
)
 
—

Exchange-traded
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Securities collateral: (5)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
OTC-bilateral
 
(1,560
)
 
(609
)
 
(1,345
)
 
(541
)
OTC-cleared
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Exchange-traded
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Net amount after application of master netting agreements and collateral
 
$
241

 
$
6

 
$
230

 
$
15

__________________
(1)
At December 31, 2016 and 2015, derivative assets included income or (expense) accruals reported in accrued investment income or in other liabilities of $116 million and $146 million, respectively, and derivative liabilities included (income) or expense accruals reported in accrued investment income or in other liabilities of ($36) million and $24 million, respectively.
(2)
Estimated fair value of derivatives is limited to the amount that is subject to set-off and includes income or expense accruals.
(3)
Cash collateral received by the Company for OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives is included in cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments or in fixed maturity securities, and the obligation to return it is included in payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions on the balance sheet.
(4)
The receivable for the return of cash collateral provided by the Company is inclusive of initial margin on exchange-traded and OTC-cleared derivatives and is included in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables on the balance sheet. The amount of cash collateral offset in the table above is limited to the net estimated fair value of derivatives after application of netting agreements. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company received excess cash collateral of $77 million and $17 million, respectively, and provided excess cash collateral of $9 million and $58 million, respectively, which is not included in the table above due to the foregoing limitation.

180
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

(5)
Securities collateral received by the Company is held in separate custodial accounts and is not recorded on the balance sheet. Subject to certain constraints, the Company is permitted by contract to sell or re-pledge this collateral, but at December 31, 2016, none of the collateral had been sold or re-pledged. Securities collateral pledged by the Company is reported in fixed maturity securities on the balance sheet. Subject to certain constraints, the counterparties are permitted by contract to sell or re-pledge this collateral. The amount of securities collateral offset in the table above is limited to the net estimated fair value of derivatives after application of netting agreements and cash collateral. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company received excess securities collateral with an estimated fair value of $21 million and $71 million, respectively, for its OTC-bilateral derivatives, which are not included in the table above due to the foregoing limitation. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, the Company provided excess securities collateral with an estimated fair value of $75 million and $81 million, respectively, for its OTC-bilateral derivatives, and $531 million and $239 million, respectively, for its OTC-cleared derivatives, and $116 million and $15 million, respectively, for its exchange-traded derivatives, which are not included in the table above due to the foregoing limitation.
The Company’s collateral arrangements for its OTC-bilateral derivatives generally require the counterparty in a net liability position, after considering the effect of netting agreements, to pledge collateral when the amount owed by that party reaches a minimum transfer amount. A small number of these arrangements also include financial strength or credit rating contingent provisions that include a threshold above which collateral must be posted. Such agreements provide for a reduction of these thresholds (on a sliding scale that converges toward zero) in the event of downgrades in credit ratings of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and/or the credit ratings of the counterparty. In addition, substantially all of the Company’s netting agreements for derivatives contain provisions that require both Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and the counterparty to maintain a specific investment grade financial strength or credit rating from each of Moody’s and S&P. If a party’s financial strength or credit ratings were to fall below that specific investment grade financial strength or credit rating, that party would be in violation of these provisions, and the other party to the derivatives could terminate the transactions and demand immediate settlement and payment based on such party’s reasonable valuation of the derivatives.
The following table presents the estimated fair value of the Company’s OTC-bilateral derivatives that are in a net liability position after considering the effect of netting agreements, together with the estimated fair value and balance sheet location of the collateral pledged. The table also presents the incremental collateral that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company would be required to provide if there was a one-notch downgrade in its financial strength or credit rating, as applicable, at the reporting date or if its financial strength or credit rating, as applicable, sustained a downgrade to a level that triggered full overnight collateralization or termination of the derivative position at the reporting date. OTC-bilateral derivatives that are not subject to collateral agreements are excluded from this table.
 
 
December 31,
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
Derivatives
Subject to
Financial
Strength-
Contingent
Provisions
 
Derivatives
Not Subject
to Financial
Strength-
Contingent
Provisions
 
Total
 
Derivatives
Subject to
Financial
Strength-
Contingent
Provisions
 
Derivatives
Not Subject
to Financial
Strength-
Contingent
Provisions
 
Total
 
 
(In millions)
Estimated Fair Value of Derivatives in a Net Liability Position (1)
 
$
612

 
$
—

 
$
612

 
$
547

 
$
3

 
$
550

Estimated Fair Value of Collateral Provided:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
 
$
684

 
$
—

 
$
684

 
$
622

 
$
—

 
$
622

Cash
 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
4

 
$
4

Estimated Fair Value of Incremental Collateral Provided Upon:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
One-notch downgrade in financial strength or credit rating, as applicable
 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

Downgrade in financial strength or credit rating, as applicable, to a level that triggers full overnight collateralization or termination of the derivative position
 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

__________________

181
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
9. Derivatives (continued)

(1)
After taking into consideration the existence of netting agreements.
Embedded Derivatives
The Company issues certain products or purchases certain investments that contain embedded derivatives that are required to be separated from their host contracts and accounted for as freestanding derivatives. These host contracts principally include: variable annuities with guaranteed minimum benefits, including GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs; affiliated ceded reinsurance of guaranteed minimum benefits related to GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs; affiliated assumed reinsurance of guaranteed minimum benefits related to GMWBs, GMABs, and certain GMIBs; funds withheld on ceded reinsurance and affiliated funds withheld on ceded reinsurance; funding agreements with equity or bond indexed crediting rates; fixed annuities with equity indexed returns; and certain debt and equity securities.
The following table presents the estimated fair value and balance sheet location of the Company’s embedded derivatives that have been separated from their host contracts at:
 
 
 
December 31,
 
Balance Sheet Location
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
 
(In millions)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts:
 
 
 
 
 
Ceded guaranteed minimum benefits
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables
 
$
460

 
$
712

Options embedded in debt or equity securities
Investments
 
(78
)
 
(142
)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts
 
$
382

 
$
570

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts:
 
 
 
 
Direct guaranteed minimum benefits
Policyholder account balances
 
$
169

 
$
(284
)
Assumed guaranteed minimum benefits
Policyholder account balances
 
390

 
126

Funds withheld on ceded reinsurance
Other liabilities
 
777

 
687

Fixed annuities with equity indexed returns
Policyholder account balances
 
17

 
(3
)
Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts
 
$
1,353

 
$
526

The following table presents changes in estimated fair value related to embedded derivatives:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Net derivative gains (losses) (1), (2)
$
(423
)
 
$
418

 
$
(170
)
__________________
(1)
The valuation of direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits includes a nonperformance risk adjustment. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses) in connection with this adjustment were $76 million, $29 million and $14 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. In addition, the valuation of ceded guaranteed minimum benefits includes a nonperformance risk adjustment. The amounts included in net derivative gains (losses) in connection with this adjustment were ($29) million, ($4) million and ($9) million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(2)
See Note 6 for discussion of affiliated net derivative gains (losses).

182
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

10. Fair Value
When developing estimated fair values, the Company considers three broad valuation techniques: (i) the market approach, (ii) the income approach, and (iii) the cost approach. The Company determines the most appropriate valuation technique to use, given what is being measured and the availability of sufficient inputs, giving priority to observable inputs. The Company categorizes its assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value into a three-level hierarchy, based on the significant input with the lowest level in its valuation. The input levels are as follows:
Level 1
Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities. The Company defines active markets based on average trading volume for equity securities. The size of the bid/ask spread is used as an indicator of market activity for fixed maturity securities.
 
Level 2
Quoted prices in markets that are not active or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly. These inputs can include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities other than quoted prices in Level 1, quoted prices in markets that are not active, or other significant inputs that are observable or can be derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the assets or liabilities.
 
Level 3
Unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and are significant to the determination of estimated fair value of the assets or liabilities. Unobservable inputs reflect the reporting entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability.
Financial markets are susceptible to severe events evidenced by rapid depreciation in asset values accompanied by a reduction in asset liquidity. The Company’s ability to sell securities, or the price ultimately realized for these securities, depends upon the demand and liquidity in the market and increases the use of judgment in determining the estimated fair value of certain securities.
Considerable judgment is often required in interpreting market data to develop estimates of fair value, and the use of different assumptions or valuation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
Recurring Fair Value Measurements
The assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy, including those items for which the Company has elected the FVO, are presented below at:

183
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

 
December 31, 2016
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
—

 
$
51,303

 
$
4,855

 
$
56,158

U.S. government and agency
17,597

 
18,018

 
—

 
35,615

Foreign corporate
—

 
20,373

 
3,984

 
24,357

RMBS
—

 
19,719

 
3,698

 
23,417

ABS
—

 
6,745

 
759

 
7,504

State and political subdivision
—

 
7,126

 
10

 
7,136

CMBS
—

 
4,851

 
84

 
4,935

Foreign government
—

 
3,977

 
21

 
3,998

Total fixed maturity securities
17,597

 
132,112

 
13,411

 
163,120

Equity securities
408

 
1,011

 
420

 
1,839

FVO and trading securities (1)
—

 
2

 
21

 
23

Short-term investments (2)
2,945

 
1,720

 
25

 
4,690

Residential mortgage loans — FVO
—

 
—

 
566

 
566

Derivative assets: (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate
3

 
5,489

 
2

 
5,494

Foreign currency exchange rate
—

 
2,763

 
—

 
2,763

Credit
—

 
101

 
30

 
131

Equity market
10

 
226

 
104

 
340

Total derivative assets
13

 
8,579

 
136

 
8,728

Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (4)
—

 
—

 
460

 
460

Separate account assets (5)
27,633

 
105,055

 
1,148

 
133,836

Total assets
$
48,596

 
$
248,479

 
$
16,187

 
$
313,262

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Derivative liabilities: (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate
$
—

 
$
917

 
$
500

 
$
1,417

Foreign currency exchange rate
—

 
1,902

 
2

 
1,904

Credit
—

 
14

 
—

 
14

Equity market
—

 
468

 
193

 
661

Total derivative liabilities
—

 
3,301

 
695

 
3,996

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (4)
—

 
—

 
1,353

 
1,353

Long-term debt
—

 
—

 
74

 
74

Trading liabilities (6)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Separate account liabilities (5)
—

 
16

 
7

 
23

Total liabilities
$
—

 
$
3,317

 
$
2,129

 
$
5,446


184
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

 
December 31, 2015
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate
$
—

 
$
56,848

 
$
4,709

 
$
61,557

U.S. government and agency
23,015

 
16,678

 
—

 
39,693

Foreign corporate
—

 
23,222

 
3,573

 
26,795

RMBS
—

 
20,585

 
3,330

 
23,915

ABS
—

 
5,699

 
868

 
6,567

State and political subdivision
—

 
6,941

 
33

 
6,974

CMBS
—

 
6,361

 
218

 
6,579

Foreign government
—

 
3,331

 
275

 
3,606

Total fixed maturity securities
23,015

 
139,665

 
13,006

 
175,686

Equity securities
424

 
1,197

 
328

 
1,949

FVO and trading securities (1)
—

 
402

 
29

 
431

Short-term investments (2)
1,513

 
3,882

 
200

 
5,595

Residential mortgage loans — FVO
—

 
—

 
314

 
314

Derivative assets: (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate
—

 
5,762

 
15

 
5,777

Foreign currency exchange rate
—

 
1,876

 
—

 
1,876

Credit
—

 
72

 
7

 
79

Equity market
15

 
282

 
117

 
414

Total derivative assets
15

 
7,992

 
139

 
8,146

Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts (4)
—

 
—

 
712

 
712

Separate account assets (5)
23,498

 
110,921

 
1,520

 
135,939

Total assets
$
48,465

 
$
264,059

 
$
16,248

 
$
328,772

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Derivative liabilities: (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate
$
2

 
$
1,224

 
$
—

 
$
1,226

Foreign currency exchange rate
—

 
1,665

 
—

 
1,665

Credit
—

 
17

 
2

 
19

Equity market
—

 
358

 
160

 
518

Total derivative liabilities
2

 
3,264

 
162

 
3,428

Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts (4)
—

 
—

 
526

 
526

Long-term debt
—

 
50

 
36

 
86

Trading liabilities (6)
103

 
50

 
—

 
153

Separate account liabilities (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Total liabilities
$
105

 
$
3,364

 
$
724

 
$
4,193

__________________
(1)
In 2016, the Company reinvested its trading securities portfolio into other asset classes and, at December 31, 2016, the Company no longer held any actively traded securities. FVO and trading securities at December 31, 2016 were comprised primarily of FVO general account securities, while at December 31, 2015, FVO and trading securities was comprised primarily of actively traded securities.
(2)
Short-term investments as presented in the tables above differ from the amounts presented on the consolidated balance sheets because certain short-term investments are not measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis.

185
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

(3)
Derivative assets are presented within other invested assets on the consolidated balance sheets and derivative liabilities are presented within other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. The amounts are presented gross in the tables above to reflect the presentation on the consolidated balance sheets, but are presented net for purposes of the rollforward in the Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3) tables.
(4)
Embedded derivatives within asset host contracts are presented within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables and other invested assets on the consolidated balance sheets. Embedded derivatives within liability host contracts are presented within policyholder account balances, future policy benefits and other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets. At December 31, 2016 and 2015, debt and equity securities also included embedded derivatives of ($78) million and ($142) million, respectively.
(5)
Investment performance related to separate account assets is fully offset by corresponding amounts credited to contractholders whose liability is reflected within separate account liabilities. Separate account liabilities are set equal to the estimated fair value of separate account assets. Separate account liabilities presented in the tables above represent derivative liabilities.
(6)
Trading liabilities are presented within other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets.
The following describes the valuation methodologies used to measure assets and liabilities at fair value. The description includes the valuation techniques and key inputs for each category of assets or liabilities that are classified within Level 2 and Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.
Investments
Valuation Controls and Procedures
On behalf of the Company and MetLife, Inc.’s Chief Investment Officer and Chief Financial Officer, a pricing and valuation committee that is independent of the trading and investing functions and comprised of senior management, provides oversight of control systems and valuation policies for securities, mortgage loans and derivatives. On a quarterly basis, this committee reviews and approves new transaction types and markets, ensures that observable market prices and market-based parameters are used for valuation, wherever possible, and determines that judgmental valuation adjustments, when applied, are based upon established policies and are applied consistently over time. This committee also provides oversight of the selection of independent third-party pricing providers and the controls and procedures to evaluate third-party pricing. Periodically, the Chief Accounting Officer reports to the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of each of MetLife, Inc. and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company regarding compliance with fair value accounting standards.
The Company reviews its valuation methodologies on an ongoing basis and revises those methodologies when necessary based on changing market conditions. Assurance is gained on the overall reasonableness and consistent application of input assumptions, valuation methodologies and compliance with fair value accounting standards through controls designed to ensure valuations represent an exit price. Several controls are utilized, including certain monthly controls, which include, but are not limited to, analysis of portfolio returns to corresponding benchmark returns, comparing a sample of executed prices of securities sold to the fair value estimates, comparing fair value estimates to management’s knowledge of the current market, reviewing the bid/ask spreads to assess activity, comparing prices from multiple independent pricing services and ongoing due diligence to confirm that independent pricing services use market-based parameters. The process includes a determination of the observability of inputs used in estimated fair values received from independent pricing services or brokers by assessing whether these inputs can be corroborated by observable market data. The Company ensures that prices received from independent brokers, also referred to herein as “consensus pricing,” represent a reasonable estimate of fair value by considering such pricing relative to the Company’s knowledge of the current market dynamics and current pricing for similar financial instruments. While independent non-binding broker quotations are utilized, they are not used for a significant portion of the portfolio. For example, fixed maturity securities priced using independent non-binding broker quotations represent less than 1% of the total estimated fair value of fixed maturity securities and 4% of the total estimated fair value of Level 3 fixed maturity securities at December 31, 2016.

186
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The Company also applies a formal process to challenge any prices received from independent pricing services that are not considered representative of estimated fair value. If prices received from independent pricing services are not considered reflective of market activity or representative of estimated fair value, independent non-binding broker quotations are obtained, or an internally developed valuation is prepared. Internally developed valuations of current estimated fair value, which reflect internal estimates of liquidity and nonperformance risks, compared with pricing received from the independent pricing services, did not produce material differences in the estimated fair values for the majority of the portfolio; accordingly, overrides were not material. This is, in part, because internal estimates of liquidity and nonperformance risks are generally based on available market evidence and estimates used by other market participants. In the absence of such market-based evidence, management’s best estimate is used.
Securities, Short-term Investments, Long-term Debt and Trading Liabilities
When available, the estimated fair value of these financial instruments is based on quoted prices in active markets that are readily and regularly obtainable. Generally, these are the most liquid of the Company’s securities holdings and valuation of these securities does not involve management’s judgment.
When quoted prices in active markets are not available, the determination of estimated fair value is based on market standard valuation methodologies, giving priority to observable inputs. The significant inputs to the market standard valuation methodologies for certain types of securities with reasonable levels of price transparency are inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. When observable inputs are not available, the market standard valuation methodologies rely on inputs that are significant to the estimated fair value that are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. These unobservable inputs can be based in large part on management’s judgment or estimation and cannot be supported by reference to market activity. Even though these inputs are unobservable, management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such securities and are considered appropriate given the circumstances.
The estimated fair value of FVO securities held by consolidated securitization entities (“CSEs”), long-term debt and trading liabilities is determined on a basis consistent with the methodologies described herein for securities.

187
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The valuation of most instruments listed below is determined using independent pricing sources, matrix pricing, discounted cash flow methodologies or other similar techniques that use either observable market inputs or unobservable inputs.
Instrument
 
Level 2
Observable Inputs

Level 3
Unobservable Inputs

Fixed Maturity Securities
U.S. corporate and Foreign corporate securities
 
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market and income approaches.
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market approach.
 
Key Inputs:
Key Inputs:
 
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active
•
illiquidity premium
 
•
benchmark yields; spreads off benchmark yields; new issuances; issuer rating
•
delta spread adjustments to reflect specific credit-related issues
 
•
trades of identical or comparable securities; duration
•
credit spreads
 
•
Privately-placed securities are valued using the additional key inputs:
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2
 
 
•
market yield curve; call provisions
 
 
 
•
observable prices and spreads for similar public or private securities that incorporate the credit quality and industry sector of the issuer
•

independent non-binding broker quotations
 
 
•
delta spread adjustments to reflect specific credit-related issues
 
 
U.S. government and agency, State and political subdivision and Foreign government securities
 
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market approach.
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market approach.
 
Key Inputs:
Key Inputs:
 
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active
•
independent non-binding broker quotations
 
•
benchmark U.S. Treasury yield or other yields
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2
 
•
the spread off the U.S. Treasury yield curve for the identical security
 
 
•
issuer ratings and issuer spreads; broker-dealer quotes
•
credit spreads
 
•
comparable securities that are actively traded
 
 
Structured Securities
 
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market and income approaches.
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market and income approaches.
 
Key Inputs:
Key Inputs:
 
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active
•
credit spreads
 
•
spreads for actively traded securities; spreads off benchmark yields
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2
 
•
expected prepayment speeds and volumes
 
 
•
current and forecasted loss severity; ratings; geographic region
•
independent non-binding broker quotations
 
•
weighted average coupon and weighted average maturity
 
 
 
•
average delinquency rates; debt-service coverage ratios
 
 
 
•
issuance-specific information, including, but not limited to:
 
 
 
 
•
collateral type; structure of the security; vintage of the loans
 
 
 
 
•
payment terms of the underlying assets
 
 
 
 
•
payment priority within the tranche; deal performance
 
 


188
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Instrument
 
Level 2
Observable Inputs

Level 3
Unobservable Inputs

Equity Securities
 
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market approach.
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market and income approaches.
 
Key Input:
Key Inputs:
 
•
quoted prices in markets that are not considered active
•
credit ratings; issuance structures
 
 
 
•
quoted prices in markets that are not active for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2
 
 
 
•
independent non-binding broker quotations
FVO and trading securities and Short-term investments
 
•
FVO and trading securities and short-term investments are of a similar nature and class to the fixed maturity and equity securities described above; accordingly, the valuation techniques and observable inputs used in their valuation are also similar to those described above.
•
FVO and trading securities and short-term investments are of a similar nature and class to the fixed maturity and equity securities described above; accordingly, the valuation techniques and unobservable inputs used in their valuation are also similar to those described above.
Residential mortgage loans — FVO
 
•
N/A
Valuation Techniques: Principally the market approach, including matrix pricing or other similar techniques.
 
 
 
 
Key Inputs:
 
 
 
 
•
Inputs that are unobservable or cannot be derived principally from, or
corroborated by, observable market data
Separate Account Assets and Separate Account Liabilities (1)
Mutual funds and hedge funds without readily determinable fair values as prices are not published publicly
 
Key Input:
•
N/A
 
•
quoted prices or reported NAV provided by the fund managers
 
 
Other limited partnership interests
 
•

N/A
Valuation Techniques: Valued giving consideration to the underlying holdings of the partnerships and by applying a premium or discount, if appropriate.
 
 
 
Key Inputs:
 
 
 
•
liquidity; bid/ask spreads; performance record of the fund manager
 
 
 
•
other relevant variables that may impact the exit value of the particular partnership interest
__________________
(1)
Estimated fair value equals carrying value, based on the value of the underlying assets, including: mutual fund interests, fixed maturity securities, equity securities, derivatives, hedge funds, other limited partnership interests, short-term investments and cash and cash equivalents. Fixed maturity securities, equity securities, derivatives, short-term investments and cash and cash equivalents are similar in nature to the instruments described under “— Securities, Short-term Investments, Long-term Debt and Trading Liabilities” and “— Derivatives — Freestanding Derivatives.”
Derivatives
The estimated fair value of derivatives is determined through the use of quoted market prices for exchange-traded derivatives, or through the use of pricing models for OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives. The determination of estimated fair value, when quoted market values are not available, is based on market standard valuation methodologies and inputs that management believes are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments. Derivative valuations can be affected by changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, financial indices, credit spreads, default risk, nonperformance risk, volatility, liquidity and changes in estimates and assumptions used in the pricing models. The valuation controls and procedures for derivatives are described in “— Investments.”
The significant inputs to the pricing models for most OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives are inputs that are observable in the market or can be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Certain OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives may rely on inputs that are significant to the estimated fair value that are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. These unobservable inputs may involve significant management judgment or estimation. Even though unobservable, these inputs are based on assumptions deemed appropriate given the circumstances and management believes they are consistent with what other market participants would use when pricing such instruments.

189
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Most inputs for OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives are mid-market inputs but, in certain cases, liquidity adjustments are made when they are deemed more representative of exit value. Market liquidity, as well as the use of different methodologies, assumptions and inputs, may have a material effect on the estimated fair values of the Company’s derivatives and could materially affect net income.
The credit risk of both the counterparty and the Company are considered in determining the estimated fair value for all OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives, and any potential credit adjustment is based on the net exposure by counterparty after taking into account the effects of netting agreements and collateral arrangements. The Company values its OTC-bilateral and OTC-cleared derivatives using standard swap curves which may include a spread to the risk-free rate, depending upon specific collateral arrangements. This credit spread is appropriate for those parties that execute trades at pricing levels consistent with similar collateral arrangements. As the Company and its significant derivative counterparties generally execute trades at such pricing levels and hold sufficient collateral, additional credit risk adjustments are not currently required in the valuation process. The Company’s ability to consistently execute at such pricing levels is in part due to the netting agreements and collateral arrangements that are in place with all of its significant derivative counterparties. An evaluation of the requirement to make additional credit risk adjustments is performed by the Company each reporting period.
Freestanding Derivatives
Level 2 Valuation Techniques and Key Inputs:
This level includes all types of derivatives utilized by the Company with the exception of exchange-traded derivatives included within Level 1 and those derivatives with unobservable inputs as described in Level 3.
Level 3 Valuation Techniques and Key Inputs:
These valuation methodologies generally use the same inputs as described in the corresponding sections for Level 2 measurements of derivatives. However, these derivatives result in Level 3 classification because one or more of the significant inputs are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data.
Freestanding derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. Valuations of non-option-based derivatives utilize present value techniques, whereas valuations of option-based derivatives utilize option pricing models. Key inputs are as follows:
Instrument
 
Interest Rate
 
Foreign Currency
Exchange Rate
 
Credit
 
Equity Market
Inputs common to Level 2 and Level 3 by instrument type
•
swap yield curves
•
swap yield curves
•
swap yield curves
•
swap yield curves
•
basis curves
•
basis curves
•
credit curves
•
spot equity index levels
•
interest rate volatility (1)
•
currency spot rates
•
recovery rates
•
dividend yield curves
 
 
 
•

cross currency basis curves
 
 
•

equity volatility (1)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Level 3
•
swap yield curves (2)
•
swap yield curves (2)
•
swap yield curves (2)
•
dividend yield curves (2)
 
•
basis curves (2)
•
basis curves (2)
•
credit curves (2)
•
equity volatility (1), (2)
 
•
repurchase rates
•
cross currency basis curves (2)
•
credit spreads
•
correlation between model inputs (1)
 
 
 
•
currency correlation
•
repurchase rates
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
•
independent non-binding broker quotations
 
 
__________________
(1)
Option-based only.
(2)
Extrapolation beyond the observable limits of the curve(s).

190
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Embedded Derivatives
Embedded derivatives principally include certain direct, assumed and ceded variable annuity guarantees, certain affiliated ceded reinsurance agreements related to such variable annuity guarantees, equity or bond indexed crediting rates within certain funding agreements and those related to funds withheld on ceded reinsurance agreements. Embedded derivatives are recorded at estimated fair value with changes in estimated fair value reported in net income.
The Company issues certain variable annuity products with guaranteed minimum benefits. GMWBs, GMABs and certain GMIBs contain embedded derivatives, which are measured at estimated fair value separately from the host variable annuity contract, with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). These embedded derivatives are classified within policyholder account balances on the consolidated balance sheets.
The Company’s actuarial department calculates the fair value of these embedded derivatives, which are estimated as the present value of projected future benefits minus the present value of projected future fees using actuarial and capital market assumptions including expectations concerning policyholder behavior. The calculation is based on in-force business, and is performed using standard actuarial valuation software which projects future cash flows from the embedded derivative over multiple risk neutral stochastic scenarios using observable risk-free rates.
Capital market assumptions, such as risk-free rates and implied volatilities, are based on market prices for publicly traded instruments to the extent that prices for such instruments are observable. Implied volatilities beyond the observable period are extrapolated based on observable implied volatilities and historical volatilities. Actuarial assumptions, including mortality, lapse, withdrawal and utilization, are unobservable and are reviewed at least annually based on actuarial studies of historical experience.
The valuation of these guarantee liabilities includes nonperformance risk adjustments and adjustments for a risk margin related to non-capital market inputs. The nonperformance adjustment is determined by taking into consideration publicly available information relating to spreads in the secondary market for MetLife, Inc.’s debt, including related credit default swaps. These observable spreads are then adjusted, as necessary, to reflect the priority of these liabilities and the claims paying ability of the issuing insurance subsidiaries as compared to MetLife, Inc.
Risk margins are established to capture the non-capital market risks of the instrument which represent the additional compensation a market participant would require to assume the risks related to the uncertainties of such actuarial assumptions as annuitization, premium persistency, partial withdrawal and surrenders. The establishment of risk margins requires the use of significant management judgment, including assumptions of the amount and cost of capital needed to cover the guarantees. These guarantees may be more costly than expected in volatile or declining equity markets. Market conditions including, but not limited to, changes in interest rates, equity indices, market volatility and foreign currency exchange rates; changes in nonperformance risk; and variations in actuarial assumptions regarding policyholder behavior, mortality and risk margins related to non-capital market inputs, may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of the guarantees that could materially affect net income.
The Company ceded the risk associated with certain of the GMIBs, GMABs and GMWBs previously described. In addition to ceding risks associated with guarantees that are accounted for as embedded derivatives, the Company also ceded directly written GMIBs that are accounted for as insurance (i.e., not as embedded derivatives) but where the reinsurance agreement contains an embedded derivative. These embedded derivatives are included within premiums, reinsurance and other receivables on the consolidated balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value reported in net derivative gains (losses). The value of the embedded derivatives on the ceded risk is determined using a methodology consistent with that described previously for the guarantees directly written by the Company with the exception of the input for nonperformance risk that reflects the credit of the reinsurer.

191
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The estimated fair value of the embedded derivatives within funds withheld related to certain ceded reinsurance is determined based on the change in estimated fair value of the underlying assets held by the Company in a reference portfolio backing the funds withheld liability. The estimated fair value of the underlying assets is determined as previously described in “— Investments — Securities, Short-term Investments, Long-term Debt and Trading Liabilities.” The estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives is included, along with their funds withheld hosts, in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). Changes in the credit spreads on the underlying assets, interest rates and market volatility may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives that could materially affect net income.
The estimated fair value of the embedded equity and bond indexed derivatives contained in certain funding agreements is determined using market standard swap valuation models and observable market inputs, including a nonperformance risk adjustment. The estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives are included, along with their funding agreements host, within policyholder account balances with changes in estimated fair value recorded in net derivative gains (losses). Changes in equity and bond indices, interest rates and the Company’s credit standing may result in significant fluctuations in the estimated fair value of these embedded derivatives that could materially affect net income.
Embedded Derivatives Within Asset and Liability Host Contracts
Level 3 Valuation Techniques and Key Inputs:
Direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits
These embedded derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. Valuations are based on option pricing techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include swap yield curves, currency exchange rates and implied volatilities. These embedded derivatives result in Level 3 classification because one or more of the significant inputs are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Significant unobservable inputs generally include: the extrapolation beyond observable limits of the swap yield curves and implied volatilities, actuarial assumptions for policyholder behavior and mortality and the potential variability in policyholder behavior and mortality, nonperformance risk and cost of capital for purposes of calculating the risk margin.
Reinsurance ceded on certain guaranteed minimum benefits
These embedded derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. The valuation techniques and significant market standard unobservable inputs used in their valuation are similar to those described above in “— Direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits” and also include counterparty credit spreads.
Embedded derivatives within funds withheld related to certain ceded reinsurance
These embedded derivatives are principally valued using the income approach. The valuations are based on present value techniques, which utilize significant inputs that may include the swap yield curves and the fair value of assets within the reference portfolio. These embedded derivatives result in Level 3 classification because one or more of the significant inputs are not observable in the market or cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data. Significant unobservable inputs generally include the fair value of certain assets within the reference portfolio which are not observable in the market and cannot be derived principally from, or corroborated by, observable market data.
Transfers between Levels
Overall, transfers between levels occur when there are changes in the observability of inputs and market activity. Transfers into or out of any level are assumed to occur at the beginning of the period.
Transfers between Levels 1 and 2:
For assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value and still held at December 31, 2016, there were no transfers between Levels 1 and 2. For assets and liabilities measured at estimated fair value and still held at December 31, 2015, transfers between Levels 1 and 2 were not significant.

192
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Transfers into or out of Level 3:
Assets and liabilities are transferred into Level 3 when a significant input cannot be corroborated with market observable data. This occurs when market activity decreases significantly and underlying inputs cannot be observed, current prices are not available, and/or when there are significant variances in quoted prices, thereby affecting transparency. Assets and liabilities are transferred out of Level 3 when circumstances change such that a significant input can be corroborated with market observable data. This may be due to a significant increase in market activity, a specific event, or one or more significant input(s) becoming observable.
Assets and Liabilities Measured at Fair Value Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
The following table presents certain quantitative information about the significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement, and the sensitivity of the estimated fair value to changes in those inputs, for the more significant asset and liability classes measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) at:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
Impact of
Increase in Input
on Estimated
Fair Value (2)
 
Valuation Techniques
 
Significant
Unobservable Inputs
 
Range
 
Weighted
Average (1)
 
Range
 
Weighted
Average (1)
 
Fixed maturity securities (3)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. corporate and foreign corporate
•
Matrix pricing
 
•
Offered quotes (4)
 
18
-
138
 
106
 
39
-
96
 
60
 
Increase
 
 
 
 
•
Delta spread adjustments (5)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(65)
-
240
 
37
 
Decrease
 
•
Market pricing
 
•
Quoted prices (4)
 
25
-
700
 
117
 
—
-
385
 
125
 
Increase
 
•
Consensus pricing
 
•
Offered quotes (4)
 
37
-
119
 
105
 
100
-
119
 
103
 
Increase
RMBS
•
Market pricing
 
•
Quoted prices (4)
 
19
-
137
 
91
 
19
-
121
 
92
 
Increase (6)
ABS
•
Market pricing
 
•
Quoted prices (4)
 
20
-
106
 
99
 
16
-
103
 
100
 
Increase (6)
 
•
Consensus pricing
 
•
Offered quotes (4)
 
98
-
100
 
100
 
97
-
105
 
99
 
Increase (6)
Derivatives
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate
•
Present value techniques
 
•
Swap yield (7)
 
200
-
300
 
 
 
307
-
307
 
 
 
Increase (8)
 
 
 
 
•
Repurchase rates (9)
 
(44)
-
18
 
 
 
—
-
—
 
 
 
Decrease (8)
Foreign currency exchange rate
•
Present value techniques
 
•
Swap yield (7)
 
50
-
236
 
 
 
—
-
—
 
 
 
Increase (8)
Credit
•
Present value techniques
 
•
Credit spreads (10)
 
97
-
98
 
 
 
98
-
100
 
 
 
Decrease (8)
 
•
Consensus pricing
 
•
Offered quotes (11)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Equity market
•
Present value techniques or option pricing models
 
•
Volatility (12)
 
14%
-
32%
 
 
 
17%
-
36%
 
 
 
Increase (8)
 
 
 
 
•
Correlation (13)
 
40%
-
40%
 
 
 
70%
-
70%
 
 
 
 
Embedded derivatives
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Direct, assumed and ceded guaranteed minimum benefits
•
Option pricing techniques
 
•
Mortality rates:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Ages 0 - 40
 
0%
-
0.09%
 
 
 
0%
-
0.09%
 
 
 
Decrease (14)
 
 
 
 
 
Ages 41 - 60
 
0.04%
-
0.65%
 
 
 
0.04%
-
0.65%
 
 
 
Decrease (14)
 
 
 
 
 
Ages 61 - 115
 
0.26%
-
100%
 
 
 
0.26%
-
100%
 
 
 
Decrease (14)
 
 
 
 
•
Lapse rates:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Durations 1 - 10
 
0.25%
-
100%
 
 
 
0.25%
-
100%
 
 
 
Decrease (15)
 
 
 
 
 
Durations 11 - 20
 
3%
-
100%
 
 
 
3%
-
100%
 
 
 
Decrease (15)
 
 
 
 
 
Durations 21 - 116
 
3%
-
100%
 
 
 
3%
-
100%
 
 
 
Decrease (15)
 
 
 
 
•
Utilization rates
 
0%
-
25%
 
 
 
0%
-
25%
 
 
 
Increase (16)
 
 
 
 
•
Withdrawal rates
 
0.25%
-
10%
 
 
 
0.25%
-
10%
 
 
 
(17)
 
 
 
 
•
Long-term equity volatilities
 
17.40%
-
25%
 
 
 
17.40%
-
25%
 
 
 
Increase (18)
 
 
 
 
•
Nonperformance risk spread
 
0.04%
-
0.57%
 
 
 
0.04%
-
0.52%
 
 
 
Decrease (19)
__________________
(1)
The weighted average for fixed maturity securities is determined based on the estimated fair value of the securities.

193
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

(2)
The impact of a decrease in input would have the opposite impact on estimated fair value. For embedded derivatives, changes to direct and assumed guaranteed minimum benefits are based on liability positions; changes to ceded guaranteed minimum benefits are based on asset positions.
(3)
Significant increases (decreases) in expected default rates in isolation would result in substantially lower (higher) valuations.
(4)
Range and weighted average are presented in accordance with the market convention for fixed maturity securities of dollars per hundred dollars of par.
(5)
Range and weighted average are presented in basis points.
(6)
Changes in the assumptions used for the probability of default is accompanied by a directionally similar change in the assumption used for the loss severity and a directionally opposite change in the assumptions used for prepayment rates.
(7)
Ranges represent the rates across different yield curves and are presented in basis points. The swap yield curves are utilized among different types of derivatives to project cash flows, as well as to discount future cash flows to present value. Since this valuation methodology uses a range of inputs across a yield curve to value the derivative, presenting a range is more representative of the unobservable input used in the valuation.
(8)
Changes in estimated fair value are based on long U.S. dollar net asset positions and will be inversely impacted for short U.S. dollar net asset positions.
(9)
Ranges represent different repurchase rates utilized as components within the valuation methodology and are presented in basis points.
(10)
Represents the risk quoted in basis points of a credit default event on the underlying instrument. Credit derivatives with significant unobservable inputs are primarily comprised of written credit default swaps.
(11)
At both December 31, 2016 and 2015, independent non-binding broker quotations were used in the determination of less than 1% of the total net derivative estimated fair value.
(12)
Ranges represent the underlying equity volatility quoted in percentage points. Since this valuation methodology uses a range of inputs across multiple volatility surfaces to value the derivative, presenting a range is more representative of the unobservable input used in the valuation.
(13)
Ranges represent the different correlation factors utilized as components within the valuation methodology. Presenting a range of correlation factors is more representative of the unobservable input used in the valuation. Increases (decreases) in correlation in isolation will increase (decrease) the significance of the change in valuations.
(14)
Mortality rates vary by age and by demographic characteristics such as gender. Mortality rate assumptions are based on company experience. A mortality improvement assumption is also applied. For any given contract, mortality rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.
(15)
Base lapse rates are adjusted at the contract level based on a comparison of the actuarially calculated guaranteed values and the current policyholder account value, as well as other factors, such as the applicability of any surrender charges. A dynamic lapse function reduces the base lapse rate when the guaranteed amount is greater than the account value as in the money contracts are less likely to lapse. Lapse rates are also generally assumed to be lower in periods when a surrender charge applies. For any given contract, lapse rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.
(16)
The utilization rate assumption estimates the percentage of contractholders with a GMIB or lifetime withdrawal benefit who will elect to utilize the benefit upon becoming eligible. The rates may vary by the type of guarantee, the amount by which the guaranteed amount is greater than the account value, the contract’s withdrawal history and by the age of the policyholder. For any given contract, utilization rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.

194
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

(17)
The withdrawal rate represents the percentage of account balance that any given policyholder will elect to withdraw from the contract each year. The withdrawal rate assumption varies by age and duration of the contract, and also by other factors such as benefit type. For any given contract, withdrawal rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative. For GMWBs, any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates results in an increase (decrease) in the estimated fair value of the guarantees. For GMABs and GMIBs, any increase (decrease) in withdrawal rates results in a decrease (increase) in the estimated fair value.
(18)
Long-term equity volatilities represent equity volatility beyond the period for which observable equity volatilities are available. For any given contract, long-term equity volatility rates vary throughout the period over which cash flows are projected for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.
(19)
Nonperformance risk spread varies by duration and by currency. For any given contract, multiple nonperformance risk spreads will apply, depending on the duration of the cash flow being discounted for purposes of valuing the embedded derivative.
The following is a summary of the valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement of assets and liabilities classified within Level 3 that are not included in the preceding table. Generally, all other classes of securities classified within Level 3, including those within separate account assets and embedded derivatives within funds withheld related to certain ceded reinsurance, use the same valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs as previously described for Level 3 securities. This includes matrix pricing and discounted cash flow methodologies, inputs such as quoted prices for identical or similar securities that are less liquid and based on lower levels of trading activity than securities classified in Level 2, as well as independent non-binding broker quotations. The residential mortgage loans — FVO and long-term debt are valued using independent non-binding broker quotations and internal models including matrix pricing and discounted cash flow methodologies using current interest rates. The sensitivity of the estimated fair value to changes in the significant unobservable inputs for these other assets and liabilities is similar in nature to that described in the preceding table. The valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used in the fair value measurement for the more significant assets measured at estimated fair value on a nonrecurring basis and determined using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) are summarized in “— Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements.”

195
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The following tables summarize the change of all assets and (liabilities) measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3):
 
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
 
Fixed Maturity Securities
 
 
 
 
 
Corporate (1)
 
Structured Securities
 
State and
Political
Subdivision  
 
Foreign
Government
 
Equity
Securities
 
FVO and
Trading
Securities (2)
 
(In millions)
Balance, January 1, 2015
$
8,528

 
$
5,570

 
$
—

 
$
202

 
$
215

 
$
31

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4)
38

 
101

 
—

 
1

 
12

 
(1
)
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses)
included in AOCI
(399
)
 
(67
)
 
—

 
(1
)
 
(53
)
 
—

Purchases (5)
1,546

 
1,393

 
33

 
120

 
127

 
—

Sales (5)
(1,018
)
 
(1,205
)
 
—

 
(1
)
 
(61
)
 
(1
)
Issuances (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Settlements (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Transfers into Level 3 (7)
635

 
32

 
—

 
—

 
88

 
—

Transfers out of Level 3 (7)
(1,048
)
 
(1,408
)
 
—

 
(46
)
 
—

 
—

Balance, December 31, 2015
8,282

 
4,416

 
33

 
275

 
328

 
29

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4)
—

 
100

 
1

 
—

 
(24
)
 
2

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI
(39
)
 
47

 
2

 
(1
)
 
21

 
—

Purchases (5)
1,967

 
1,821

 
—

 
7

 
23

 
—

Sales (5)
(1,226
)
 
(1,339
)
 
—

 
(40
)
 
(15
)
 
(5
)
Issuances (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Settlements (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Transfers into Level 3 (7)
848

 
18

 
7

 
—

 
282

 
—

Transfers out of Level 3 (7)
(993
)
 
(522
)
 
(33
)
 
(220
)
 
(195
)
 
(5
)
Balance, December 31, 2016
$
8,839

 
$
4,541

 
$
10

 
$
21

 
$
420

 
$
21

Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2014: (8)
$
(4
)
 
$
42

 
$
—

 
$
1

 
$
(5
)
 
$
—

Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2015: (8)
$
7

 
$
102

 
$
—

 
$
1

 
$
—

 
$
—

Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2016: (8)
$
—

 
$
101

 
$
1

 
$
—

 
$
(29
)
 
$
2

Gains (Losses) Data for the year ended December 31,
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4)
$
(5
)
 
$
12

 
$
—

 
$
(49
)
 
$
7

 
$
—

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI
$
218

 
$
103

 
$
—

 
$
22

 
$
2

 
$
—


196
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

 
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
 
Short-term
Investments
 
Residential
Mortgage
Loans - FVO
 
Net
Derivatives (9)
 
Net Embedded
Derivatives (10)
 
Separate
Account
Assets (11) 
 
Long-term
Debt
 
(In millions)
Balance, January 1, 2015
$
230

 
$
308

 
$
6

 
$
(67
)
 
$
1,615

 
$
(35
)
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4)
—

 
20

 
(27
)
 
447

 
15

 
—

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI
—

 
—

 
(2
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

Purchases (5)
200

 
136

 
3

 
—

 
348

 
—

Sales (5)
—

 
(121
)
 
—

 
—

 
(344
)
 
—

Issuances (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
98

 
(38
)
Settlements (5)
—

 
(29
)
 
(3
)
 
(194
)
 
(60
)
 
37

Transfers into Level 3 (7)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
1

 
—

Transfers out of Level 3 (7)
(230
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(153
)
 
—

Balance, December 31, 2015
200

 
314

 
(23
)
 
186

 
1,520

 
(36
)
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4) (6)
—

 
8

 
(168
)
 
(870
)
 
(2
)
 
—

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI
—

 
—

 
(366
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

Purchases (5)
28

 
297

 
27

 
—

 
375

 
—

Sales (5)
(3
)
 
(11
)
 
—

 
—

 
(474
)
 
—

Issuances (5)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
62

 
(46
)
Settlements (5)
—

 
(42
)
 
(29
)
 
(209
)
 
(51
)
 
8

Transfers into Level 3 (7)
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
19

 
—

Transfers out of Level 3 (7)
(200
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(308
)
 
—

Balance, December 31, 2016
$
25

 
$
566

 
$
(559
)
 
$
(893
)
 
$
1,141

 
$
(74
)
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2014: (8)
$
—

 
$
20

 
$
8

 
$
(115
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2015: (8)
$
—

 
$
20

 
$
(24
)
 
$
461

 
$
—

 
$
—

Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) for the instruments still held at
December 31, 2016: (8)
$
—

 
$
8

 
$
(166
)
 
$
(863
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

Gains (Losses) Data for the year ended December 31,
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net
income (loss) (3) (4)
$
(1
)
 
$
20

 
$
1

 
$
(144
)
 
$
102

 
$
—

Total realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in AOCI
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
40

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

__________________
(1)
Comprised of U.S. and foreign corporate securities.
(2)
Comprised of FVO general account securities, FVO securities held by CSEs and actively traded securities.
(3)
Amortization of premium/accretion of discount is included within net investment income. Impairments charged to net income (loss) on securities are included in net investment gains (losses), while changes in estimated fair value of residential mortgage loans — FVO are included in net investment income. Lapses associated with net embedded derivatives are included in net derivative gains (losses). Substantially all realized/unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for net derivatives and net embedded derivatives are reported in net derivatives gains (losses).
(4)
Interest and dividend accruals, as well as cash interest coupons and dividends received, are excluded from the rollforward.
(5)
Items purchased/issued and then sold/settled in the same period are excluded from the rollforward. Fees attributed to embedded derivatives are included in settlements. Sales for the year ended December 31, 2016 included financial instruments related to the disposition of NELICO and GALIC of $345 million for corporate securities, $117 million for structured securities, $38 million for foreign government securities and less than $1 million for equity securities. See Note 3.

197
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

(6)
Includes $420 million for net embedded derivatives for the year ended December 31, 2016 related to the disposition of NELICO and GALIC. See Note 3.
(7)
Gains and losses, in net income (loss) and OCI, are calculated assuming transfers into and/or out of Level 3 occurred at the beginning of the period. Items transferred into and then out of Level 3 in the same period are excluded from the rollforward.
(8)
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) relate to assets and liabilities still held at the end of the respective periods. Substantially all changes in unrealized gains (losses) included in net income (loss) for net derivatives and net embedded derivatives are reported in net derivative gains (losses).
(9)
Freestanding derivative assets and liabilities are presented net for purposes of the rollforward.
(10)
Embedded derivative assets and liabilities are presented net for purposes of the rollforward.
(11)
Investment performance related to separate account assets is fully offset by corresponding amounts credited to contractholders within separate account liabilities. Therefore, such changes in estimated fair value are not recorded in net income (loss). For the purpose of this disclosure, these changes are presented within net investment gains (losses). Separate account assets and liabilities are presented net for the purposes of the rollforward.
Fair Value Option
The following table presents information for residential mortgage loans, which are accounted for under the FVO, and were initially measured at fair value.
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Unpaid principal balance
$
794

 
$
436

Difference between estimated fair value and unpaid principal balance
(228
)
 
(122
)
Carrying value at estimated fair value
$
566

 
$
314

Loans in nonaccrual status
$
214

 
$
122

Loans more than 90 days past due
$
137

 
$
72

Loans in nonaccrual status or more than 90 days past due, or both — difference between aggregate estimated fair value and unpaid principal balance
$
(150
)
 
$
(52
)
The following table presents information for long-term debt, which is accounted for under the FVO, and was initially measured at fair value.
 
Long-term Debt
 
Long-term Debt of
CSEs - FVO
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
December 31, 2016
 
December 31, 2015
 
(In millions)
Contractual principal balance
$
71

 
$
82

 
$
25

 
$
24

Difference between estimated fair value and contractual
principal balance
3

 
4

 
(13
)
 
(13
)
Carrying value at estimated fair value (1)
$
74

 
$
86

 
$
12

 
$
11

__________________
(1)
Changes in estimated fair value are recognized in net investment gains (losses). Interest expense is recognized in other expenses.

198
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Nonrecurring Fair Value Measurements
The following table presents information for assets measured at estimated fair value on a nonrecurring basis during the periods and still held at the reporting dates (for example, when there is evidence of impairment). The estimated fair values for these assets were determined using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3).
 
At December 31,
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
Carrying Value After Measurement
 
Gains (Losses)
 
(In millions)
Mortgage loans (1)
$
8

 
$
40

 
$
94

 
$
—

 
$
(1
)
 
$
2

Other limited partnership interests (2)
$
95

 
$
57

 
$
109

 
$
(59
)
 
$
(31
)
 
$
(70
)
Other assets (3)
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
(30
)
 
$
—

 
$
—

__________________
(1)
Estimated fair values for impaired mortgage loans are based on independent broker quotations or valuation models using unobservable inputs or, if the loans are in foreclosure or are otherwise determined to be collateral dependent, are based on the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral or the present value of the expected future cash flows.
(2)
For these cost method investments, estimated fair value is determined from information provided on the financial statements of the underlying entities including NAV data. These investments include private equity and debt funds that typically invest primarily in various strategies including domestic and international leveraged buyout funds; power, energy, timber and infrastructure development funds; venture capital funds; and below investment grade debt and mezzanine debt funds. Distributions will be generated from investment gains, from operating income from the underlying investments of the funds and from liquidation of the underlying assets of the funds. It is estimated that the underlying assets of the funds will be liquidated over the next two to 10 years. Unfunded commitments for these investments at both December 31, 2016 and 2015 were not significant.
(3)
During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Company recognized an impairment of computer software in connection with the sale to Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Company (“MassMutual”) of MetLife, Inc.’s U.S. retail advisor force and certain assets associated with the MetLife Premier Client Group, including all of the issued and outstanding shares of MetLife’s affiliated broker-dealer, MetLife Securities, Inc. (“MSI”), a wholly-owned subsidiary of MetLife, Inc. See Note 18.
Fair Value of Financial Instruments Carried at Other Than Fair Value
The following tables provide fair value information for financial instruments that are carried on the balance sheet at amounts other than fair value. These tables exclude the following financial instruments: cash and cash equivalents, accrued investment income, payables for collateral under securities loaned and other transactions, short-term debt and those short-term investments that are not securities, such as time deposits, and therefore are not included in the three level hierarchy table disclosed in the “— Recurring Fair Value Measurements” section. The estimated fair value of the excluded financial instruments, which are primarily classified in Level 2, approximates carrying value as they are short-term in nature such that the Company believes there is minimal risk of material changes in interest rates or credit quality. All remaining balance sheet amounts excluded from the tables below are not considered financial instruments subject to this disclosure.

199
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The carrying values and estimated fair values for such financial instruments, and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy, are summarized as follows at:
 
 
December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
 
Carrying
Value
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mortgage loans
 
$
55,994

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
57,171

 
$
57,171

Policy loans
 
$
5,945

 
$
—

 
$
258

 
$
6,695

 
$
6,953

Real estate joint ventures
 
$
4

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
26

 
$
26

Other limited partnership interests
 
$
336

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
362

 
$
362

Other invested assets
 
$
2,263

 
$
—

 
$
2,151

 
$
151

 
$
2,302

Premiums, reinsurance and other
receivables
 
$
14,888

 
$
—

 
$
368

 
$
15,421

 
$
15,789

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances
 
$
72,944

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
74,052

 
$
74,052

Long-term debt
 
$
1,503

 
$
—

 
$
1,755

 
$
—

 
$
1,755

Other liabilities
 
$
14,731

 
$
—

 
$
894

 
$
13,920

 
$
14,814

Separate account liabilities
 
$
65,545

 
$
—

 
$
65,545

 
$
—

 
$
65,545

 
 
December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
 
Carrying
Value
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Mortgage loans
 
$
53,408

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
54,969

 
$
54,969

Policy loans
 
$
8,134

 
$
—

 
$
330

 
$
9,539

 
$
9,869

Real estate joint ventures
 
$
12

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
39

 
$
39

Other limited partnership interests
 
$
467

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
553

 
$
553

Other invested assets
 
$
2,372

 
$
—

 
$
2,197

 
$
202

 
$
2,399

Premiums, reinsurance and other
receivables
 
$
13,879

 
$
—

 
$
229

 
$
14,610

 
$
14,839

Liabilities
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Policyholder account balances
 
$
71,331

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
73,506

 
$
73,506

Long-term debt
 
$
1,618

 
$
—

 
$
1,912

 
$
—

 
$
1,912

Other liabilities
 
$
19,545

 
$
—

 
$
323

 
$
19,882

 
$
20,205

Separate account liabilities
 
$
60,767

 
$
—

 
$
60,767

 
$
—

 
$
60,767


200
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

The methods, assumptions and significant valuation techniques and inputs used to estimate the fair value of financial instruments are summarized as follows:
Mortgage Loans
The estimated fair value of mortgage loans is primarily determined by estimating expected future cash flows and discounting them using current interest rates for similar mortgage loans with similar credit risk, or is determined from pricing for similar loans.
Policy Loans
Policy loans with fixed interest rates are classified within Level 3. The estimated fair values for these loans are determined using a discounted cash flow model applied to groups of similar policy loans determined by the nature of the underlying insurance liabilities. Cash flow estimates are developed by applying a weighted-average interest rate to the outstanding principal balance of the respective group of policy loans and an estimated average maturity determined through experience studies of the past performance of policyholder repayment behavior for similar loans. These cash flows are discounted using current risk-free interest rates with no adjustment for borrower credit risk, as these loans are fully collateralized by the cash surrender value of the underlying insurance policy. Policy loans with variable interest rates are classified within Level 2 and the estimated fair value approximates carrying value due to the absence of borrower credit risk and the short time period between interest rate resets, which presents minimal risk of a material change in estimated fair value due to changes in market interest rates.
Real Estate Joint Ventures and Other Limited Partnership Interests
The estimated fair values of these cost method investments are generally based on the Company’s share of the NAV as provided on the financial statements of the investees. In certain circumstances, management may adjust the NAV by a premium or discount when it has sufficient evidence to support applying such adjustments.
Other Invested Assets
These other invested assets are principally comprised of loans to affiliates. The estimated fair value of loans to affiliates is determined by discounting the expected future cash flows using market interest rates currently available for instruments with similar terms and remaining maturities.
Premiums, Reinsurance and Other Receivables
Premiums, reinsurance and other receivables are principally comprised of certain amounts recoverable under reinsurance agreements, amounts on deposit with financial institutions to facilitate daily settlements related to certain derivatives and amounts receivable for securities sold but not yet settled.
Amounts recoverable under ceded reinsurance agreements, which the Company has determined do not transfer significant risk such that they are accounted for using the deposit method of accounting, have been classified as Level 3. The valuation is based on discounted cash flow methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using interest rates determined to reflect the appropriate credit standing of the assuming counterparty.
The amounts on deposit for derivative settlements, classified within Level 2, essentially represent the equivalent of demand deposit balances and amounts due for securities sold are generally received over short periods such that the estimated fair value approximates carrying value.
Policyholder Account Balances
These policyholder account balances include investment contracts which primarily include certain funding agreements, fixed deferred annuities, modified guaranteed annuities, fixed term payout annuities and total control accounts (“TCA”). The valuation of these investment contracts is based on discounted cash flow methodologies using significant unobservable inputs. The estimated fair value is determined using current market risk-free interest rates adding a spread to reflect the nonperformance risk in the liability.

201
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
10. Fair Value (continued)

Long-term Debt
The estimated fair value of long-term debt is principally determined using market standard valuation methodologies.
Valuations of instruments are based primarily on quoted prices in markets that are not active or using matrix pricing that use standard market observable inputs such as quoted prices in markets that are not active and observable yields and spreads in the market. Instruments valued using discounted cash flow methodologies use standard market observable inputs including market yield curve, duration, call provisions, observable prices and spreads for similar publicly traded or privately traded issues.
Other Liabilities
Other liabilities consist primarily of amounts due for securities purchased but not yet settled, funds withheld amounts payable, which are contractually withheld by the Company in accordance with the terms of the reinsurance agreements, and amounts payable under certain assumed reinsurance agreements, which are recorded using the deposit method of accounting. The Company evaluates the specific terms, facts and circumstances of each instrument to determine the appropriate estimated fair values, which are not materially different from the carrying values, with the exception of certain deposit type reinsurance payables. For such payables, the estimated fair value is determined as the present value of expected future cash flows, which are discounted using an interest rate determined to reflect the appropriate credit standing of the assuming counterparty.
Separate Account Liabilities
Separate account liabilities represent those balances due to policyholders under contracts that are classified as investment contracts.
Separate account liabilities classified as investment contracts primarily represent variable annuities with no significant mortality risk to the Company such that the death benefit is equal to the account balance, funding agreements related to group life contracts and certain contracts that provide for benefit funding.
Since separate account liabilities are fully funded by cash flows from the separate account assets which are recognized at estimated fair value as described in the section “— Recurring Fair Value Measurements,” the value of those assets approximates the estimated fair value of the related separate account liabilities. The valuation techniques and inputs for separate account liabilities are similar to those described for separate account assets.
11. Long-term and Short-term Debt
Long-term and short-term debt outstanding was as follows:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
December 31,
 
Interest Rates (1)
 
 
 
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
Range
 
Weighted Average
 
Maturity
 
Face
Value
 
Unamortized
Discount
 
Unamortized
Issuance
Costs
 
Carrying
Value
 
Face
Value
 
Unamortized
Discount
 
Unamortized
Issuance
Costs
 
Carrying
Value (2)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
(In millions)
Surplus notes - affiliated
7.38%

7.38%
 
7.38%
 
2037
 
$
700

 
$
(5
)
 
$
(5
)
 
$
690

 
$
700

 
$
(5
)
 
$
(5
)
 
$
690

Surplus notes (3)
7.63%

7.88%
 
7.83%
 
2024
-
2025
 
400

 
(1
)
 
(2
)
 
397

 
507

 
(5
)
 
(2
)
 
500

Senior notes - affiliated
1.01%

2.71%
 
1.94%
 
—
 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
50

 
—

 
—

 
50

Other notes
1.62%

6.49%
 
4.12%
 
2017
-
2031
 
494

 
—

 
(4
)
 
490

 
457

 
—

 
(5
)
 
452

Total long-term debt (4)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
1,594

 
(6
)
 
(11
)
 
1,577

 
1,714

 
(10
)
 
(12
)
 
1,692

Total short-term debt
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
100

 
—

 
—

 
100

 
100

 
—

 
—

 
100

Total
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
$
1,694

 
$
(6
)
 
$
(11
)
 
$
1,677

 
$
1,814

 
$
(10
)
 
$
(12
)
 
$
1,792

__________________
(1)
Range of interest rates and weighted average interest rates are for the year ended December 31, 2016.
(2)
Net of $12 million of unamortized issuance costs, which were reported in other assets at December 31, 2015.

202
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
11. Long-term and Short-term Debt (continued)

(3)
In December 2016, the $107 million 7.625% surplus notes were deconsolidated due to the disposition of GALIC. See Note 3.
(4)
Excludes $12 million and $11 million of long-term debt relating to CSEs — FVO at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. See Note 10.
The aggregate maturities of long-term debt at December 31, 2016 for the next five years and thereafter are $20 million in 2017, $0 in each of 2018 and 2019, $346 million in 2020, $0 in 2021 and $1.2 billion thereafter.
Unsecured senior debt which consists of senior notes and other notes rank highest in priority. Payments of interest and principal on the Company’s surplus notes are subordinate to all other obligations and may be made only with the prior approval of the insurance department of the state of domicile.
Debt Issuance - Other Notes
In December 2015, MetLife Private Equity Holdings, LLC (“MPEH”), a wholly-owned indirect investment subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, entered into a five-year credit agreement (the “MPEH Credit Agreement”) and borrowed $350 million under term loans that mature in December 2020. The loans bear interest at a variable rate of three-month LIBOR plus 3.70%, payable quarterly. In connection with the borrowing, $6 million of costs were incurred which have been capitalized and are being amortized over the term of the loans. Additionally, the MPEH Credit Agreement provides for MPEH to borrow up to $100 million on a revolving basis at a variable rate of three-month LIBOR plus 3.70%, payable quarterly. There were no revolving loans outstanding under the MPEH Credit Agreement at both December 31, 2016 and 2015. Term loans and revolving loans borrowed under the MPEH Credit Agreement are non-recourse to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company.
Debt Repayments
In December 2015, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $110 million of its mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2016.
In November 2015, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $188 million of surplus notes issued to MetLife Mexico S.A., an affiliate. The redemption was approved by the New York Superintendent of Financial Services (the “Superintendent”).
In November 2015, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $200 million of surplus notes. The redemption was approved by the Superintendent.
During 2015, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $132 million of its 7.26% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2020.
In November 2014, a wholly-owned real estate subsidiary of the Company repaid in cash $60 million of its 7.01% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2020. It also repaid in cash $60 million of its 4.67% mortgage loans issued to Brighthouse Insurance due in January 2017.
In September 2014, the Company repaid in cash, at maturity, $217 million of surplus notes issued to MetLife Mexico S.A. The redemption was approved by the Superintendent.
Short-term Debt
Short-term debt with maturities of one year or less was as follows:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(Dollars in millions)
Commercial paper
$
100

 
$
100

Average daily balance
$
100

 
$
100

Average days outstanding
40 days

 
68 days

During the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, the weighted average interest rate on short-term debt was 0.42%, 0.15% and 0.10%, respectively.

203
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
11. Long-term and Short-term Debt (continued)

Interest Expense
Interest expense included in other expenses was $112 million, $122 million and $150 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. These amounts include $52 million, $67 million and $88 million of interest expense related to affiliated debt for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Such amounts do not include interest expense on long-term debt related to CSEs. See Note 8.
Credit and Committed Facilities
At December 31, 2016, MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (“MetLife Funding”), maintained a $4.0 billion unsecured revolving credit facility (the “Credit Facility”), and Missouri Reinsurance, Inc., a wholly-owned subsidiary of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, had access to a committed bank facility of MetLife, Inc., which provides letters of credit for the benefit of certain affiliates of MetLife, Inc., including Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and certain of its subsidiaries, subject to bank consent (the “Committed Facility”). When drawn upon, these facilities bear interest at varying rates in accordance with the respective agreements.
Credit Facility
The Credit Facility is used for general corporate purposes, to support the borrowers’ commercial paper programs and for the issuance of letters of credit. Total fees associated with the Credit Facility were $8 million, $4 million and $4 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and were included in other expenses.
Information on the Credit Facility at December 31, 2016 was as follows:
Borrower(s)
 
Expiration
 
Maximum
Capacity
 
Letters of Credit Used by the Company (1)
 
Letters of Credit Used by Affiliates (1)
 
Drawdowns
 
Unused
Commitments
 
 
 
 
(In millions)
MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc.
 
May 2019 (2) (3)
 
$
4,000

(2) (3)
$
202

 
$
528

 
$
—

 
$
3,270

__________________
(1)
MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding are severally liable for their respective obligations under the Credit Facility. MetLife Funding was not an applicant under letters of credit outstanding as of December 31, 2016 and is not responsible for any reimbursement obligations under such letters of credit.
(2)
All borrowings under the Credit Facility must be repaid by May 30, 2019, except that letters of credit outstanding upon termination may remain outstanding until May 30, 2020.
(3)
In December 2016, MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding entered into an agreement to amend their existing $4.0 billion unsecured revolving credit facility, which provides, among other things, that the facility will be amended and restated upon the completion of the proposed Separation and the satisfaction of certain other conditions. As amended and restated, the unsecured revolving credit facility will provide for borrowings and the issuance of letters of credit in an aggregate amount of up to $3.0 billion. All borrowings under this amended unsecured revolving credit facility must be repaid by December 20, 2021, except that letters of credit outstanding upon termination may remain outstanding until December 20, 2022.
Committed Facility
The letters of credit issued under the Committed Facility are used for collateral for certain of the Company’s affiliated reinsurance liabilities. Total fees associated with the Committed Facility were $4 million for each of the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014 and were included in other expenses. Missouri Reinsurance, Inc. had $255 million in letters of credit outstanding and there was no remaining availability under the Committed Facility at December 31, 2016. The Committed Facility matures on June 20, 2018. In addition to the Committed Facility, see “— Debt Issuance — Other Notes” for information about an undrawn line of credit facility in the amount of $100 million.
Debt and Facility Covenants
Certain of the Company’s debt instruments and the Credit Facility contain various administrative, reporting, legal and financial covenants. The Company believes it was in compliance with all applicable covenants at December 31, 2016.

204
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

12. Equity
Stock-Based Compensation Plans
The Company does not issue any awards payable in its common stock or options to purchase its common stock.
An affiliate employs the personnel who conduct most of the Company’s business. In accordance with a services agreement with that affiliate, the Company bears a proportionate share of stock-based compensation expense for those employees. Stock-based compensation expense relate to Stock Options, Performance Shares, and Restricted Stock Units under the MetLife, Inc. 2005 Stock and Incentive Compensation Plan and the MetLife, Inc. 2015 Stock and Incentive Compensation Plan, most of which MetLife, Inc. granted in the first quarter of each year.
The Company’s expense related to stock-based compensation included in other expenses was $89 million, $85 million and $100 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Statutory Equity and Income
See Note 3 for information on the disposition of NELICO and GALIC.
The states of domicile of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries each impose risk-based capital (“RBC”) requirements that were developed by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners (“NAIC”). Regulatory compliance is determined by a ratio of a company’s total adjusted capital, calculated in the manner prescribed by the NAIC (“TAC”) to its authorized control level RBC, calculated in the manner prescribed by the NAIC (“ACL RBC”), based on the statutory-based filed financial statements. Companies below specific trigger levels or ratios are classified by their respective levels, each of which requires specified corrective action. The minimum level of TAC before corrective action commences is twice ACL RBC (“CAL RBC”). The CAL RBC ratios for Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries were each in excess of 400% for all periods presented.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s foreign insurance operations are regulated by applicable authorities of the countries in which each entity operates and are subject to minimum capital and solvency requirements in those countries before corrective action commences. The aggregate required capital and surplus of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s foreign insurance operations was $37 million and the aggregate actual regulatory capital and surplus was $493 million as of the date of the most recent required capital adequacy calculation for each jurisdiction. Each of those foreign insurance operations exceeded minimum capital and solvency requirements of their respective countries for all periods presented.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries prepare statutory-basis financial statements in accordance with statutory accounting practices prescribed or permitted by the insurance department of the state of domicile. The NAIC has adopted the Codification of Statutory Accounting Principles (“Statutory Codification”). Statutory Codification is intended to standardize regulatory accounting and reporting to state insurance departments. However, statutory accounting principles continue to be established by individual state laws and permitted practices. Modifications by the various state insurance departments may impact the effect of Statutory Codification on the statutory capital and surplus of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries.
Statutory accounting principles differ from GAAP primarily by charging policy acquisition costs to expense as incurred, establishing future policy benefit liabilities using different actuarial assumptions, reporting surplus notes as surplus instead of debt, reporting of reinsurance agreements and valuing securities on a different basis.
In addition, certain assets are not admitted under statutory accounting principles and are charged directly to surplus. The most significant assets not admitted by the Company are net deferred income tax assets resulting from temporary differences between statutory accounting principles basis and tax basis not expected to reverse and become recoverable within three years.
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries have no material state prescribed accounting practices, except as described below.
New York has adopted certain prescribed accounting practices, primarily consisting of the continuous Commissioners’ Annuity Reserve Valuation Method, which impacts deferred annuities, and the New York Special Consideration Letter, which mandates certain assumptions in asset adequacy testing. The collective impact of these prescribed accounting practices decreased the statutory capital and surplus of MLIC for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 by an amount of $909 million and $1.2 billion, respectively, in excess of the amount of the decrease had capital and surplus been measured under NAIC guidance.

205
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
12. Equity (continued)

The tables below present amounts from Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and its former U.S. insurance subsidiaries, which are derived from their respective statutory–basis financial statements as filed with the insurance regulators.
Statutory net income (loss) was as follows:
 
 
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
Company
 
State of Domicile
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
 
 
(In millions)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (1)
 
New York
 
$
3,444

 
$
3,703

 
$
1,487

New England Life Insurance Company (1)
 
Massachusetts
 
N/A

 
$
157

 
$
303

General American Life Insurance Company (1)
 
Missouri
 
N/A

 
$
204

 
$
129

__________________
(1)
In December 2016, MLIC distributed all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc., in the form of a non-cash extraordinary dividend.
Statutory capital and surplus was as follows at:
 
 
December 31,
Company
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
(In millions)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (1)
 
$
11,195

 
$
14,485

New England Life Insurance Company (1)
 
N/A

 
$
632

General American Life Insurance Company (1)
 
N/A

 
$
984

__________________
(1)
In December 2016, MLIC distributed all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc., in the form of a non-cash extraordinary dividend.
Dividend Restrictions
The table below sets forth the dividends permitted to be paid by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to MetLife, Inc. without insurance regulatory approval and dividends paid:
 
 
2017
 
2016
 
2015
Company
 
Permitted Without
Approval 
 
Paid (1) (2)
 
Paid (1)
 
 
(In millions)
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
 
$
2,723

 
$
5,740

 
$
1,489

__________________
(1)
Reflects all amounts paid, including those requiring regulatory approval.
(2)
In 2016, MLIC paid an ordinary cash dividend to MetLife, Inc. in the amount of $3.6 billion. In addition, in December 2016, MLIC distributed to MetLife, Inc. as a non-cash extraordinary dividend all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC in the amount of $981 million and $1.2 billion, respectively, as calculated on a statutory basis.

206
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
12. Equity (continued)

Effective for dividends paid during 2016 and going forward, the New York Insurance Law was amended permitting Metropolitan Life Insurance Company without prior insurance regulatory clearance, to pay stockholder dividends to MetLife, Inc. in any calendar year based on either of two standards. Under one standard, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is permitted, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, to pay dividends out of earned surplus (defined as positive “unassigned funds (surplus)” excluding 85% of the change in net unrealized capital gains or losses (less capital gains tax), for the immediately preceding calendar year), in an amount up to the greater of: (i) 10% of its surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) its statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains), not to exceed 30% of surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year. In addition, under this standard, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company may not, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, pay any dividends in any calendar year immediately following a calendar year for which its net gain from operations, excluding realized capital gains, was negative. Under the second standard, if dividends are paid out of other than earned surplus, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company may, without prior insurance regulatory clearance, pay an amount up to the lesser of: (i) 10% of its surplus to policyholders as of the end of the immediately preceding calendar year, or (ii) its statutory net gain from operations for the immediately preceding calendar year (excluding realized capital gains). In addition, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company will be permitted to pay a dividend to MetLife, Inc. in excess of the amounts allowed under both standards only if it files notice of its intention to declare such a dividend and the amount thereof with the Superintendent and the Superintendent either approves the distribution of the dividend or does not disapprove the dividend within 30 days of its filing. Under New York Insurance Law, the Superintendent has broad discretion in determining whether the financial condition of a stock life insurance company would support the payment of such dividends to its stockholders.
The table below sets forth the dividends paid by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s former U.S. insurance subsidiaries to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company without regulatory approval:
 
 
2017
 
2016
 
2015
Company
 
Permitted Without
Approval (1)
 
Paid (2)
 
Paid (2)
 
 
(In millions)
New England Life Insurance Company (1)
 
N/A
 
$
—

 
$
199

General American Life Insurance Company (1)
 
N/A
 
$
—

 
$
—

__________________
(1)
As MLIC distributed all of the issued and outstanding common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc. in December 2016, there are no dividend amounts that may be paid to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in 2017. See Note 3.
(2)
Includes all amounts paid, including those requiring regulatory approval.

207
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
12. Equity (continued)

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Information regarding changes in the balances of each component of AOCI attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, was as follows:
 
Unrealized
Investment Gains
(Losses), Net of
Related Offsets (1)
 
Unrealized
Gains (Losses)
on Derivatives
 
Foreign
Currency
Translation
Adjustments
 
Defined
Benefit
Plans
Adjustment
 
Total
 
(In millions)
Balance at December 31, 2013
$
3,468

 
$
236

 
$
31

 
$
(1,577
)
 
$
2,158

OCI before reclassifications
4,095

 
606

 
(44
)
 
(1,181
)
 
3,476

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(1,409
)
 
(212
)
 
10

 
406

 
(1,205
)
AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax
6,154

 
630

 
(3
)
 
(2,352
)
 
4,429

Amounts reclassified from AOCI
70

 
682

 
—

 
180

 
932

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(24
)
 
(239
)
 
—

 
(64
)
 
(327
)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax
46

 
443

 
—

 
116

 
605

Balance at December 31, 2014
6,200

 
1,073

 
(3
)
 
(2,236
)
 
5,034

OCI before reclassifications
(4,839
)
 
(19
)
 
(101
)
 
113

 
(4,846
)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
1,715

 
6

 
30

 
(40
)
 
1,711

AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax
3,076

 
1,060

 
(74
)
 
(2,163
)
 
1,899

Amounts reclassified from AOCI
405

 
578

 
—

 
229

 
1,212

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(144
)
 
(202
)
 
—

 
(80
)
 
(426
)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax
261

 
376

 
—

 
149

 
786

Balance at December 31, 2015
3,337

 
1,436

 
(74
)
 
(2,014
)
 
2,685

OCI before reclassifications
792

 
(141
)
 
(11
)
 
(4
)
 
636

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(286
)
 
49

 
3

 
(5
)
 
(239
)
AOCI before reclassifications, net of income tax
3,843

 
1,344

 
(82
)
 
(2,023
)
 
3,082

Amounts reclassified from AOCI
71

 
177

 
—

 
191

 
439

Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
(26
)
 
(62
)
 
—

 
(60
)
 
(148
)
Amounts reclassified from AOCI, net of income tax
45

 
115

 
—

 
131

 
291

Dispositions (2)
(456
)
 
—

 
23

 
30

 
(403
)
Deferred income tax benefit (expense)
160

 
—

 
(8
)
 
(3
)
 
149

Dispositions, net of income tax
(296
)
 
—

 
15

 
27

 
(254
)
Balance at December 31, 2016
$
3,592

 
$
1,459

 
$
(67
)
 
$
(1,865
)
 
$
3,119

__________________
(1)
See Note 8 for information on offsets to investments related to future policy benefits, DAC, VOBA and DSI, and the policyholder dividend obligation.
(2)
See Note 3.

208
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
12. Equity (continued)

Information regarding amounts reclassified out of each component of AOCI was as follows:
AOCI Components
 
Amounts Reclassified from AOCI
 
Consolidated Statement of
Operations and
Comprehensive Income (Loss)
Locations
 
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
 
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
 
 
 
(In millions)
 
 
Net unrealized investment gains (losses):
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)
 
$
10

 
$
(208
)
 
$
(103
)
 
Net investment gains (losses)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)
 
21

 
31

 
40

 
Net investment income
Net unrealized investment gains (losses)
 
(102
)
 
(228
)
 
(7
)
 
Net derivative gains (losses)
Net unrealized investment gains (losses), before income tax
 
(71
)
 
(405
)
 
(70
)
 
 
Income tax (expense) benefit
 
26

 
144

 
24

 
 
Net unrealized investment gains (losses), net of income tax
 
(45
)
 
(261
)
 
(46
)
 
 
Unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives - cash flow hedges:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Interest rate swaps
 
57

 
83

 
41

 
Net derivative gains (losses)
Interest rate swaps
 
12

 
11

 
9

 
Net investment income
Interest rate forwards
 
(1
)
 
4

 
(8
)
 
Net derivative gains (losses)
Interest rate forwards
 
3

 
2

 
2

 
Net investment income
Foreign currency swaps
 
(251
)
 
(679
)
 
(725
)
 
Net derivative gains (losses)
Foreign currency swaps
 
(1
)
 
(1
)
 
(2
)
 
Net investment income
Credit forwards
 
3

 
1

 
—

 
Net derivative gains (losses)
Credit forwards
 
1

 
1

 
1

 
Net investment income
Gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, before income tax
 
(177
)
 
(578
)
 
(682
)
 
 
Income tax (expense) benefit
 
62

 
202

 
239

 
 
Gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, net of income tax
 
(115
)
 
(376
)
 
(443
)
 
 
Defined benefit plans adjustment: (1)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Amortization of net actuarial gains (losses)
 
(198
)
 
(233
)
 
(180
)
 
 
Amortization of prior service (costs) credit
 
7

 
4

 
—

 
 
Amortization of defined benefit plan items, before income tax
 
(191
)
 
(229
)
 
(180
)
 
 
Income tax (expense) benefit
 
60

 
80

 
64

 
 
Amortization of defined benefit plan items, net of income tax
 
(131
)
 
(149
)
 
(116
)
 
 
Total reclassifications, net of income tax
 
$
(291
)
 
$
(786
)
 
$
(605
)
 
 
__________________
(1)
These AOCI components are included in the computation of net periodic benefit costs. See Note 14.


209
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

13. Other Expenses
Information on other expenses was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Compensation
$
2,116

 
$
2,056

 
$
2,257

Pension, postretirement and postemployment benefit costs
251

 
241

 
322

Commissions
687

 
685

 
828

Volume-related costs
303

 
221

 
70

Affiliated expenses on ceded and assumed reinsurance
923

 
807

 
1,009

Capitalization of DAC
(332
)
 
(482
)
 
(424
)
Amortization of DAC and VOBA
441

 
742

 
695

Interest expense on debt
112

 
122

 
151

Premium taxes, licenses and fees
365

 
355

 
328

Professional services
924

 
1,133

 
1,013

Rent and related expenses, net of sublease income
133

 
87

 
128

Other (1)
(120
)
 
291

 
(306
)
Total other expenses
$
5,803

 
$
6,258

 
$
6,071

__________________
(1)
See Note 15 for information on the charge related to income tax for the year ended December 31, 2015.
Capitalization of DAC and Amortization of DAC and VOBA
See Note 5 for additional information on DAC and VOBA including impacts of capitalization and amortization. See also Note 7 for a description of the DAC amortization impact associated with the closed block.
Interest Expense on Debt
See Note 11 for additional information on interest expense on debt.
Affiliated Expenses
Commissions, capitalization of DAC and amortization of DAC and VOBA include the impact of affiliated reinsurance transactions. See Notes 6, 11 and 18 for a discussion of affiliated expenses included in the table above.
Restructuring Charges
In 2016, the Company completed a previous enterprise-wide strategic initiative. These restructuring charges are included in other expenses. As the expenses relate to an enterprise-wide initiative, they are reported in Corporate & Other. Information regarding restructuring charges was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
Severance
 
Lease and
Asset
Impairment
 
Total
 
Severance
 
Lease and
Asset
Impairment
 
Total
 
Severance
 
Lease and
Asset
Impairment
 
Total

(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
$
17

 
$
4

 
$
21

 
$
31

 
$
6

 
$
37

 
$
39

 
$
6

 
$
45

Restructuring charges
—

 
1

 
1

 
52

 
4

 
56

 
66

 
8

 
74

Cash payments
(17
)
 
(4
)
 
(21
)
 
(66
)
 
(6
)
 
(72
)
 
(74
)
 
(8
)
 
(82
)
Balance at December 31,
$
—

 
$
1

 
$
1

 
$
17

 
$
4

 
$
21

 
$
31

 
$
6

 
$
37

Total restructuring charges incurred since inception of initiative
$
306

 
$
47

 
$
353

 
$
306

 
$
46

 
$
352

 
$
254

 
$
42

 
$
296


210
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

14. Employee Benefit Plans
Pension and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans
The Company sponsors and administers various qualified and nonqualified defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement employee benefit plans covering employees and sales representatives who meet specified eligibility requirements. Pension benefits are provided utilizing either a traditional formula or cash balance formula. The traditional formula provides benefits that are primarily based upon years of credited service and either final average or career average earnings. The cash balance formula utilizes hypothetical or notional accounts which credit participants with benefits equal to a percentage of eligible pay, as well as interest credits, determined annually based upon the annual rate of interest on 30-year U.S. Treasury securities, for each account balance. The nonqualified pension plans provide supplemental benefits in excess of limits applicable to a qualified plan. Participating affiliates are allocated an equitable share of net expense related to the plans, proportionate to other expenses being allocated to these affiliates.
The Company also provides certain postemployment benefits and certain postretirement medical and life insurance benefits for retired employees. Employees of the Company who were hired prior to 2003 (or, in certain cases, rehired during or after 2003) and meet age and service criteria while working for the Company may become eligible for these other postretirement benefits, at various levels, in accordance with the applicable plans. Virtually all retirees, or their beneficiaries, contribute a portion of the total costs of postretirement medical benefits. Employees hired after 2003 are not eligible for any employer subsidy for postretirement medical benefits. Participating affiliates are allocated a proportionate share of net expense and contributions related to the postemployment and other postretirement plans.

211
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

Obligations and Funded Status
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Pension
Benefits (1)
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
Pension
Benefits (1)
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
(In millions)
Change in benefit obligations:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Benefit obligations at January 1,
$
9,760

 
$
1,905

 
$
10,262

 
$
2,129

Service costs
203

 
9

 
217

 
15

Interest costs
415

 
82

 
404

 
88

Plan participants’ contributions
—

 
33

 
—

 
30

Net actuarial (gains) losses
298

 
(119
)
 
(626
)
 
(233
)
Divestitures, settlements and curtailments (2)
(270
)
 
(8
)
 
—

 
—

Change in benefits and other
(11
)
 
(43
)
 
—

 
(14
)
Benefits paid
(558
)
 
(117
)
 
(497
)
 
(109
)
Effect of foreign currency translation
—

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
Benefit obligations at December 31,
9,837

 
1,742

 
9,760

 
1,905

Change in plan assets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Estimated fair value of plan assets at January 1,
8,490

 
1,372

 
8,750

 
1,426

Actual return on plan assets
620

 
75

 
(138
)
 
3

Divestitures (2)
(155
)
 
—

 
—

 
—

Plan participants’ contributions
—

 
33

 
—

 
30

Employer contributions
324

 
16

 
375

 
22

Benefits paid
(558
)
 
(117
)
 
(497
)
 
(109
)
Estimated fair value of plan assets at December 31,
8,721

 
1,379

 
8,490

 
1,372

Over (under) funded status at December 31,
$
(1,116
)
 
$
(363
)
 
$
(1,270
)
 
$
(533
)
Amounts recognized on the consolidated balance sheets:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Other assets
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

Other liabilities
(1,116
)
 
(363
)
 
(1,270
)
 
(533
)
Net amount recognized
$
(1,116
)
 
$
(363
)
 
$
(1,270
)
 
$
(533
)
AOCI:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net actuarial (gains) losses
$
2,839

 
$
93

 
$
2,894

 
$
221

Prior service costs (credit)
(11
)
 
(48
)
 
(1
)
 
(14
)
AOCI, before income tax
$
2,828

 
$
45

 
$
2,893

 
$
207

Accumulated benefit obligation
$
9,557

 
N/A

 
$
9,439

 
N/A

__________________
(1)
Includes nonqualified unfunded plans, for which the aggregate PBO was $1.1 billion at both December 31, 2016 and 2015.
(2)
Divestitures for the year ended December 31, 2016 include amounts related to the disposition of NELICO and GALIC. See Note 3.

212
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

Information for pension plans with PBOs in excess of plan assets and accumulated benefit obligations (“ABO”) in excess of plan assets was as follows at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2016
 
2015
 
PBO Exceeds Estimated Fair Value
of Plan Assets
 
ABO Exceeds Estimated Fair Value
of Plan Assets
 
(In millions)
Projected benefit obligations
$
9,837

 
$
9,759

 
$
1,093

 
$
1,832

Accumulated benefit obligations
$
9,557

 
$
9,439

 
$
1,046

 
$
1,751

Estimated fair value of plan assets
$
8,721

 
$
8,490

 
$
—

 
$
646

Net Periodic Benefit Costs
The components of net periodic benefit costs and other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in OCI were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
Pension
Benefits
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
Pension
Benefits
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
Pension
Benefits
 
Other
Postretirement
Benefits
 
(In millions)
Net periodic benefit costs:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Service costs
$
203

 
$
9

 
$
217

 
$
15

 
$
200

 
$
14

Interest costs
415

 
82

 
404

 
88

 
437

 
92

Settlement and curtailment costs (1)
1

 
30

 
—

 
—

 
14

 
2

Expected return on plan assets
(527
)
 
(74
)
 
(538
)
 
(80
)
 
(475
)
 
(75
)
Amortization of net actuarial (gains) losses
188

 
10

 
190

 
43

 
169

 
11

Amortization of prior service costs (credit)
(1
)
 
(6
)
 
(1
)
 
(3
)
 
1

 
(1
)
Allocated to affiliates
(64
)
 
(9
)
 
(59
)
 
(18
)
 
(54
)
 
(11
)
Total net periodic benefit costs (credit)
215

 
42

 
213

 
45

 
292

 
32

Other changes in plan assets and benefit obligations recognized in OCI:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Net actuarial (gains) losses
176

 
(121
)
 
50

 
(156
)
 
996

 
222

Prior service costs (credit)
(11
)
 
(40
)
 
—

 
(7
)
 
(18
)
 
(12
)
Dispositions (2)
(32
)
 
2

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Amortization of net actuarial (gains) losses
(188
)
 
(10
)
 
(190
)
 
(43
)
 
(169
)
 
(11
)
Amortization of prior service (costs) credit
1

 
6

 
1

 
3

 
(1
)
 
1

Total recognized in OCI
(54
)
 
(163
)
 
(139
)
 
(203
)
 
808

 
200

Total recognized in net periodic benefit costs and OCI
$
161

 
$
(121
)
 
$
74

 
$
(158
)
 
$
1,100

 
$
232

__________________
(1)
The Company recognized curtailment charges on certain postretirement benefit plans in connection with the sale to MassMutual of MetLife, Inc.’s U.S. retail advisor force and certain assets associated with the MetLife Premier Client Group, including all of the issued and outstanding shares of MSI. See Note 18.
(2)
See Note 3.

213
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

The estimated net actuarial (gains) losses and prior service costs (credit) for the defined benefit pension plans and other postretirement benefit plans that will be amortized from AOCI into net periodic benefit costs over the next year are $175 million and ($1) million, and $0 and ($22) million, respectively.
Assumptions
Assumptions used in determining benefit obligations were as follows:
 
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
Weighted average discount rate
 
4.30%
 
4.45%
Rate of compensation increase
 
2.25
%
-
8.50%
 
N/A
December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
Weighted average discount rate
 
4.50%
 
4.60%
Rate of compensation increase
 
2.25
%
-
8.50%
 
N/A
Assumptions used in determining net periodic benefit costs were as follows:
 
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
Year Ended December 31, 2016
 
 
 
 
Weighted average discount rate
 
4.13%
 
4.37%
Weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets
 
6.00%
 
5.53%
Rate of compensation increase
 
2.25
%
-
8.50%
 
N/A
Year Ended December 31, 2015
 
 
 
 
Weighted average discount rate
 
4.10%
 
4.10%
Weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets
 
6.25%
 
5.70%
Rate of compensation increase
 
2.25
%
-
8.50%
 
N/A
Year Ended December 31, 2014
 
 
 
 
Weighted average discount rate
 
5.15%
 
5.15%
Weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets
 
6.25%
 
5.70%
Rate of compensation increase
 
3.50
%
-
7.50%
 
N/A
The weighted average discount rate is determined annually based on the yield, measured on a yield to worst basis, of a hypothetical portfolio constructed of high quality debt instruments available on the valuation date, which would provide the necessary future cash flows to pay the aggregate PBO when due.
The weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets is based on anticipated performance of the various asset sectors in which the plan invests, weighted by target allocation percentages. Anticipated future performance is based on long-term historical returns of the plan assets by sector, adjusted for the Company’s long-term expectations on the performance of the markets. While the precise expected rate of return derived using this approach will fluctuate from year to year, the Company’s policy is to hold this long-term assumption constant as long as it remains within reasonable tolerance from the derived rate.
The weighted average expected rate of return on plan assets for use in that plan’s valuation in 2017 is currently anticipated to be 6.00% for pension benefits and 5.35% for other postretirement benefits.

214
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

The assumed healthcare costs trend rates used in measuring the APBO and net periodic benefit costs were as follows:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
Before
Age 65
 
Age 65 and
older
 
Before
Age 65
 
Age 65 and
older
Following year
6.8
%
 
13
%
 
6.3
%
 
10.3
%
Ultimate rate to which cost increase is assumed to decline
4.0
%
 
4.3
%
 
4.2
%
 
4.6
%
Year in which the ultimate trend rate is reached
2077

 
2092

 
2086

 
2091

Assumed healthcare costs trend rates may have a significant effect on the amounts reported for healthcare plans. A 1% change in assumed healthcare costs trend rates would have the following effects as of December 31, 2016:
 
One Percent
Increase
 
One Percent
Decrease
 
(In millions)
Effect on total of service and interest costs components
$
12

 
$
(10
)
Effect of accumulated postretirement benefit obligations
$
215

 
$
(177
)
Plan Assets
The Company provides employees with benefits under various Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) benefit plans. These include qualified pension plans, postretirement medical plans and certain retiree life insurance coverage. The assets of the Company’s qualified pension plans are held in an insurance group annuity contract, and the vast majority of the assets of the postretirement medical plan and backing the retiree life coverage are held in a trust which largely utilizes insurance contracts to hold the assets. All of these contracts are issued by the Company’s insurance affiliates, and the assets under the contracts are held in insurance separate accounts that have been established by the Company. The underlying assets of the separate accounts are principally comprised of cash and cash equivalents, short-term investments, fixed maturity and equity securities, derivatives, real estate, private equity investments and hedge fund investments.
The insurance contract provider engages investment management firms (“Managers”) to serve as sub-advisors for the separate accounts based on the specific investment needs and requests identified by the plan fiduciary. These Managers have portfolio management discretion over the purchasing and selling of securities and other investment assets pursuant to the respective investment management agreements and guidelines established for each insurance separate account. The assets of the qualified pension plans and postretirement medical plans (the “Invested Plans”) are well diversified across multiple asset categories and across a number of different Managers, with the intent of minimizing risk concentrations within any given asset category or with any of the given Managers.

215
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

The Invested Plans, other than those held in participant directed investment accounts, are managed in accordance with investment policies consistent with the longer-term nature of related benefit obligations and within prudent risk parameters. Specifically, investment policies are oriented toward (i) maximizing the Invested Plan’s funded status; (ii) minimizing the volatility of the Invested Plan’s funded status; (iii) generating asset returns that exceed liability increases; and (iv) targeting rates of return in excess of a custom benchmark and industry standards over appropriate reference time periods. These goals are expected to be met through identifying appropriate and diversified asset classes and allocations, ensuring adequate liquidity to pay benefits and expenses when due and controlling the costs of administering and managing the Invested Plan’s investments. Independent investment consultants are periodically used to evaluate the investment risk of the Invested Plan’s assets relative to liabilities, analyze the economic and portfolio impact of various asset allocations and management strategies and recommend asset allocations.
Derivative contracts may be used to reduce investment risk, to manage duration and to replicate the risk/return profile of an asset or asset class. Derivatives may not be used to leverage a portfolio in any manner, such as to magnify exposure to an asset, asset class, interest rates or any other financial variable. Derivatives are also prohibited for use in creating exposures to securities, currencies, indices or any other financial variable that is otherwise restricted.
The table below summarizes the actual weighted average allocation of the estimated fair value of total plan assets by asset class at December 31 for the years indicated and the approved target allocation by major asset class at December 31, 2016 for the Invested Plans:
 
December 31,
 
2016
2015
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement
Benefits (2)
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement
Benefits (2)
 
Target
 
Actual 
Allocation
 
Target
 
Actual 
Allocation
 
Actual 
Allocation
 
Actual 
Allocation
Asset Class (1)
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities
82
%
 
81
%
 
76
%
 
76
%
 
75
%
 
75
%
Equity securities (3)
10
%
 
11
%
 
24
%
 
24
%
 
15
%
 
25
%
Alternative securities (4)
8
%
 
8
%
 
—
%
 
—
%
 
10
%
 
—
%
Total assets
 
 
100
%
 
 
 
100
%
 
100
%
 
100
%
__________________
(1)
Certain prior year amounts have been reclassified from alternative securities into fixed maturity securities to conform to the current year presentation.
(2)
Other postretirement benefits do not reflect postretirement life’s plan assets invested in fixed maturity securities.
(3)
Equity securities percentage includes derivative assets.
(4)
Alternative securities primarily include hedges, private equity and real estate funds.
Estimated Fair Value
The pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets are categorized into a three-level fair value hierarchy, as described in Note 10, based upon the significant input with the lowest level in its valuation. The Level 2 asset category includes certain separate accounts that are primarily invested in liquid and readily marketable securities. The estimated fair value of such separate accounts is based upon reported NAV provided by fund managers and this value represents the amount at which transfers into and out of the respective separate account are effected. These separate accounts provide reasonable levels of price transparency and can be corroborated through observable market data. Directly held investments are primarily invested in U.S. and foreign government and corporate securities. The Level 3 asset category includes separate accounts that are invested in assets that provide little or no price transparency due to the infrequency with which the underlying assets trade and generally require additional time to liquidate in an orderly manner. Accordingly, the values for separate accounts invested in these alternative asset classes are based on inputs that cannot be readily derived from or corroborated by observable market data.

216
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

The pension and other postretirement plan assets measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis and their corresponding placement in the fair value hierarchy are summarized as follows:
 
December 31, 2016
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Corporate
$
—

 
$
3,406

 
$
—

 
$
3,406

 
$
20

 
$
305

 
$
—

 
$
325

U.S. government bonds
1,655

 
4

 
—

 
1,659

 
210

 
1

 
—

 
211

Foreign bonds
—

 
775

 
—

 
775

 
—

 
72

 
—

 
72

Federal agencies
—

 
196

 
—

 
196

 
—

 
28

 
—

 
28

Municipals
—

 
313

 
—

 
313

 
—

 
23

 
—

 
23

Short-term investments
118

 
212

 
—

 
330

 
13

 
416

 
—

 
429

Other (1)
—

 
362

 
9

 
371

 
—

 
55

 
—

 
55

Total fixed maturity securities
1,773

 
5,268

 
9

 
7,050

 
243

 
900

 
—

 
1,143

Equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock - domestic
474

 
—

 
—

 
474

 
113

 
—

 
—

 
113

Common stock - foreign
380

 
—

 
—

 
380

 
122

 
—

 
—

 
122

Total equity securities
854

 
—

 
—

 
854

 
235

 
—

 
—

 
235

Other investments
—

 
105

 
634

 
739

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Derivative assets
16

 
(2
)
 
64

 
78

 
1

 
—

 
—

 
1

Total assets
$
2,643

 
$
5,371

 
$
707

 
$
8,721

 
$
479

 
$
900

 
$
—

 
$
1,379


217
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

 
December 31, 2015
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Fair Value Hierarchy
 
 
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
Level 1
 
Level 2
 
Level 3
 
Total
Estimated
Fair Value
 
(In millions)
Assets
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Corporate
$
—

 
$
2,905

 
$
78

 
$
2,983

 
$
18

 
$
280

 
$
1

 
$
299

U.S. government bonds
994

 
493

 
—

 
1,487

 
193

 
12

 
—

 
205

Foreign bonds
—

 
677

 
17

 
694

 
—

 
61

 
—

 
61

Federal agencies
—

 
228

 
—

 
228

 
—

 
34

 
—

 
34

Municipals
—

 
302

 
—

 
302

 
—

 
55

 
—

 
55

Short-term investments (2)
10

 
304

 
—

 
314

 
1

 
431

 
—

 
432

Other (1), (2)
9

 
403

 
7

 
419

 
—

 
47

 
—

 
47

Total fixed maturity securities
1,013

 
5,312

 
102

 
6,427

 
212

 
920

 
1

 
1,133

Equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock - domestic
751

 
24

 
—

 
775

 
126

 
—

 
—

 
126

Common stock - foreign
378

 
—

 
—

 
378

 
111

 
—

 
—

 
111

Total equity securities
1,129

 
24

 
—

 
1,153

 
237

 
—

 
—

 
237

Other investments
—

 
84

 
722

 
806

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Derivative assets
26

 
3

 
75

 
104

 
2

 
—

 
—

 
2

Total assets
$
2,168

 
$
5,423

 
$
899

 
$
8,490

 
$
451

 
$
920

 
$
1

 
$
1,372

__________________
(1)
Other primarily includes money market securities, mortgage-backed securities, collateralized mortgage obligations and ABS.
(2)
The prior year amounts have been reclassified into fixed maturity securities to conform to the current year presentation.

218
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

A rollforward of all pension and other postretirement benefit plan assets measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs was as follows:
 
Fair Value Measurements Using Significant Unobservable Inputs (Level 3)
 
Pension Benefits
 
Fixed Maturity Securities
 
 
 
 
 
Corporate
 
Foreign
Bonds
 
Other (1)
 
Other
Investments
 
Derivative
Assets
 
(In millions)
Balance, January 1, 2015
$
80

 
$
17

 
$
8

 
$
743

 
$
72

Realized gains (losses)
1

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
(11
)
Unrealized gains (losses)
(5
)
 
—

 
1

 
55

 
(9
)
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net
8

 
1

 
(1
)
 
(76
)
 
23

Transfers into and/or out of Level 3
(6
)
 
(1
)
 
(1
)
 
—

 
—

Balance, December 31, 2015
$
78

 
$
17

 
$
7

 
$
722

 
$
75

Realized gains (losses)
3

 
—

 
—

 
(1
)
 
3

Unrealized gains (losses)
3

 
(4
)
 
1

 
32

 
(18
)
Purchases, sales, issuances and settlements, net
(22
)
 
(3
)
 
—

 
(119
)
 
6

Transfers into and/or out of Level 3
(62
)
 
(10
)
 
1

 
—

 
(2
)
Balance, December 31, 2016
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
9

 
$
634

 
$
64

__________________
(1)
Other includes ABS and collateralized mortgage obligations.
Other postretirement benefit plan assets measured at estimated fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable (Level 3) inputs were not significant for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015.
Expected Future Contributions and Benefit Payments
It is the Company’s practice to make contributions to the qualified pension plan to comply with minimum funding requirements of ERISA. In accordance with such practice, no contributions are required for 2017. The Company expects to make discretionary contributions to the qualified pension plan of $225 million in 2017. For information on employer contributions, see “— Obligations and Funded Status.”
Benefit payments due under the nonqualified pension plans are primarily funded from the Company’s general assets as they become due under the provision of the plans, therefore benefit payments equal employer contributions. The Company expects to make contributions of $70 million to fund the benefit payments in 2017.
Postretirement benefits are either: (i) not vested under law; (ii) a non-funded obligation of the Company; or (iii) both. Current regulations do not require funding for these benefits. The Company uses its general assets, net of participant’s contributions, to pay postretirement medical claims as they come due. As permitted under the terms of the governing trust document, the Company may be reimbursed from plan assets for postretirement medical claims paid from their general assets. The Company expects to make contributions of $50 million towards benefit obligations in 2017 to pay postretirement medical claims.

219
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
14. Employee Benefit Plans (continued)

Gross benefit payments for the next 10 years, which reflect expected future service where appropriate, are expected to be as follows:
 
Pension Benefits
 
Other Postretirement Benefits
 
(In millions)
2017
$
534

 
$
83

2018
$
547

 
$
85

2019
$
559

 
$
91

2020
$
580

 
$
93

2021
$
587

 
$
95

2022-2026
$
3,210

 
$
494

Additional Information
As previously discussed, most of the assets of the pension benefit plans are held in a group annuity contract issued by the Company while some of the assets of the postretirement benefit plans are held in a trust which largely utilizes life insurance contracts issued by the Company to hold such assets. Total revenues from these contracts recognized on the consolidated statements of operations were $57 million, $55 million and $50 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and included policy charges and net investment income from investments backing the contracts and administrative fees. Total investment income (loss), including realized and unrealized gains (losses), credited to the account balances was $660 million, ($130) million and $1.2 billion for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The terms of these contracts are consistent in all material respects with those the Company offers to unaffiliated parties that are similarly situated.
Defined Contribution Plans
The Company sponsors defined contribution plans for substantially all Company employees under which a portion of employee contributions are matched. The Company contributed $73 million, $72 million and $68 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
15. Income Tax
The provision for income tax from continuing operations was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Current:
 
 
 
 
 
Federal
$
675

 
$
1,384

 
$
901

State and local
5

 
20

 
3

Foreign
40

 
36

 
74

Subtotal
720

 
1,440

 
978

Deferred:
 
 
 
 
 
Federal
(531
)
 
315

 
538

Foreign
18

 
27

 
16

Subtotal
(513
)
 
342

 
554

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
$
207

 
$
1,782

 
$
1,532

 

220
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
15. Income Tax (continued)

The Company’s income (loss) from continuing operations before income tax expense (benefit) from domestic and foreign operations were as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Income (loss) from continuing operations:
 
 
 
 
 
Domestic
$
2,401

 
$
4,467

 
$
5,335

Foreign
(438
)
 
72

 
56

Total
$
1,963

 
$
4,539

 
$
5,391

The reconciliation of the income tax provision at the U.S. statutory rate to the provision for income tax as reported for continuing operations was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Tax provision at U.S. statutory rate
$
687

 
$
1,589

 
$
1,887

Tax effect of:
 
 
 
 
 
Dividend received deduction
(79
)
 
(82
)
 
(82
)
Tax-exempt income
(38
)
 
(24
)
 
(40
)
Prior year tax (1)
(33
)
 
558

 
11

Low income housing tax credits
(270
)
 
(221
)
 
(205
)
Other tax credits
(98
)
 
(68
)
 
(66
)
Foreign tax rate differential
1

 
(4
)
 
—

Change in valuation allowance
(1
)
 
(1
)
 
—

Other, net
38

 
35

 
27

Provision for income tax expense (benefit)
$
207

 
$
1,782

 
$
1,532

__________________
(1)
As discussed further below, for the year ended December 31, 2015, prior year tax includes a $557 million non-cash charge related to an uncertain tax position.

221
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
15. Income Tax (continued)

Deferred income tax represents the tax effect of the differences between the book and tax bases of assets and liabilities. Net deferred income tax assets and liabilities consisted of the following at:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Deferred income tax assets:
 
 
 
Policyholder liabilities and receivables
$
174

 
$
1,888

Net operating loss carryforwards
27

 
26

Employee benefits
828

 
922

Tax credit carryforwards
947

 
700

Litigation-related and government mandated
212

 
231

Other
460

 
438

Total gross deferred income tax assets
2,648

 
4,205

Less: Valuation allowance
20

 
21

Total net deferred income tax assets
2,628

 
4,184

Deferred income tax liabilities:
 
 
 
Investments, including derivatives
1,234

 
3,025

Intangibles
53

 
53

DAC
1,150

 
1,461

Net unrealized investment gains
2,693

 
2,528

Other
1

 
5

Total deferred income tax liabilities
5,131

 
7,072

Net deferred income tax asset (liability)
$
(2,503
)
 
$
(2,888
)
The Company also has recorded a valuation allowance benefit of $1 million related to certain state net operating loss carryforwards for the year ended December 31, 2016. The valuation allowance reflects management’s assessment, based on available information, that it is more likely than not that the deferred income tax asset for certain state net operating loss carryforwards will not be realized. The tax benefit will be recognized when management believes that it is more likely than not that these deferred income tax assets are realizable.
The following table sets forth the domestic and state net operating loss carryforwards for tax purposes at December 31, 2016.
 
Net Operating Loss Carryforwards
 
Domestic
 
State
 
(In millions)
Expiration:
 
 
 
2017-2021
$
—

 
$
38

2022-2026
—

 
59

2027-2031
—

 
29

2032-2036
19

 
2

Indefinite
—

 
—

 
$
19

 
$
128


222
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
15. Income Tax (continued)

The following table sets forth the general business credits, foreign tax credits, and other credit carryforwards for tax purposes at December 31, 2016.
 
Tax Credit Carryforwards
 
General Business
Credits
 
Foreign Tax Credits
 
Other
 
(In millions)
Expiration:
 
 
 
 
 
2017-2021
$
—

 
$
—

 
$
—

2022-2026
—

 
187

 
—

2027-2031
178

 
—

 
—

2032-2036
661

 
—

 
—

Indefinite
—

 
—

 
149

 
$
839

 
$
187

 
$
149

The Company participates in a tax sharing agreement with MetLife, Inc., as described in Note 1. Pursuant to this tax sharing agreement, the amounts due to (from) affiliates included ($60) million, and $124 million for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
The Company files income tax returns with the U.S. federal government and various state and local jurisdictions, as well as foreign jurisdictions. The Company is under continuous examination by the IRS and other tax authorities in jurisdictions in which the Company has significant business operations. The income tax years under examination vary by jurisdiction and subsidiary. The Company is no longer subject to U.S. federal, state, or local income tax examinations for years prior to 2007, except for i) 2000 through 2002 where the IRS disallowance relates to certain tax credits claimed - in April 2015, the Company received a Statutory Notice of Deficiency (the “Notice”) and paid the tax thereon in September 2015 (see note (1) below); and ii) 2003 through 2006, where the IRS disallowance relates predominantly to certain tax credits claimed and the Company is engaged with IRS Appeals. Management believes it has established adequate tax liabilities and final resolution for the years 2000 through 2006 is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The IRS audit cycle for the years 2007-2009, which began in December of 2015, is scheduled to conclude in 2017.

223
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
15. Income Tax (continued)

The Company’s liability for unrecognized tax benefits may increase or decrease in the next 12 months. A reasonable estimate of the increase or decrease cannot be made at this time. However, the Company continues to believe that the ultimate resolution of the pending issues will not result in a material change to its consolidated financial statements, although the resolution of income tax matters could impact the Company’s effective tax rate for a particular future period.
A reconciliation of the beginning and ending amount of unrecognized tax benefits was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Balance at January 1,
$
1,075

 
$
546

 
$
532

Additions for tax positions of prior years (1)
7

 
558

 
27

Reductions for tax positions of prior years (2)
(109
)
 
—

 
(13
)
Additions for tax positions of current year
6

 
4

 
3

Settlements with tax authorities
(48
)
 
(33
)
 
(3
)
Balance at December 31,
$
931

 
$
1,075

 
$
546

Unrecognized tax benefits that, if recognized would impact the effective rate
$
931

 
$
1,060

 
$
497

__________________
(1)
The significant increase in 2015 is related to a non-cash charge the Company recorded to net income of $792 million, net of tax. The charge was related to an uncertain tax position and was comprised of a $557 million charge included in provision for income tax expense (benefit) and a $362 million ($235 million, net of tax) charge included in other expenses. This charge is the result of the Company’s consideration of recent decisions of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit upholding the disallowance of foreign tax credits claimed by other corporate entities not affiliated with the Company. The Company’s action relates to tax years from 2000 to 2009, during which MLIC held non-U.S. investments in support of its life insurance business through a United Kingdom investment subsidiary that was structured as a joint venture at the time.
(2)
Included for 2016 is the impact of the dividend by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of all of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock of each of NELICO and GALIC to MetLife, Inc.
The Company classifies interest accrued related to unrecognized tax benefits in interest expense, included within other expenses, while penalties are included in income tax expense.
Interest was as follows:
 
Years Ended December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions)
Interest recognized on the consolidated statements of operations (1)
$
(33
)
 
$
382

 
$
37

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
December 31,
 
 
 
2016
 
2015
 
 
 
(In millions)
Interest included in other liabilities on the consolidated balance sheets (1)
 
 
$
606

 
$
647

__________________
(1)
The significant increase in 2015 is related to the non-cash charge discussed above.
The Company had no penalties for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014.

224
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
15. Income Tax (continued)

There has been no change in the Company’s position on the disallowance of its foreign tax credits by the IRS. The Company continues to contest the disallowance of these foreign tax credits by the IRS as management believes the facts strongly support the Company’s position. The Company will defend its position vigorously and does not expect any additional charges related to this matter.
Also related to the aforementioned foreign tax credit matter, on April 9, 2015, the IRS issued the Notice to the Company. The Notice asserted that the Company owes additional taxes and interest for 2000 through 2002 primarily due to the disallowance of foreign tax credits. The transactions that are the subject of the Notice continue through 2009, and it is likely that the IRS will seek to challenge these later periods. On September 18, 2015, the Company paid the assessed tax and interest of $444 million for 2000 through 2002 and will subsequently file a claim for a refund. On November 19, 2015, $9 million of this amount was refunded from the IRS as an overpayment of interest.
The U.S. Treasury Department and the IRS have indicated that they intend to address through regulations the methodology to be followed in determining the dividends received deduction (“DRD”), related to variable life insurance and annuity contracts. The DRD reduces the amount of dividend income subject to tax and is a significant component of the difference between the actual tax expense and expected amount determined using the federal statutory tax rate of 35%. Any regulations that the IRS ultimately proposes for issuance in this area will be subject to public notice and comment, at which time insurance companies and other interested parties will have the opportunity to raise legal and practical questions about the content, scope and application of such regulations. As a result, the ultimate timing and substance of any such regulations are unknown at this time. For the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, the Company recognized an income tax benefit of $75 million, $76 million and $92 million, respectively, related to the separate account DRD. The 2014 benefit included a benefit of $16 million related to a true-up of the 2013 tax return.
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees
Contingencies
Litigation
The Company is a defendant in a large number of litigation matters. In some of the matters, very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Modern pleading practice in the U.S. permits considerable variation in the assertion of monetary damages or other relief. Jurisdictions may permit claimants not to specify the monetary damages sought or may permit claimants to state only that the amount sought is sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of the trial court. In addition, jurisdictions may permit plaintiffs to allege monetary damages in amounts well exceeding reasonably possible verdicts in the jurisdiction for similar matters. This variability in pleadings, together with the actual experience of the Company in litigating or resolving through settlement numerous claims over an extended period of time, demonstrates to management that the monetary relief which may be specified in a lawsuit or claim bears little relevance to its merits or disposition value.
Due to the vagaries of litigation, the outcome of a litigation matter and the amount or range of potential loss at particular points in time may normally be difficult to ascertain. Uncertainties can include how fact finders will evaluate documentary evidence and the credibility and effectiveness of witness testimony, and how trial and appellate courts will apply the law in the context of the pleadings or evidence presented, whether by motion practice, or at trial or on appeal. Disposition valuations are also subject to the uncertainty of how opposing parties and their counsel will themselves view the relevant evidence and applicable law.
The Company establishes liabilities for litigation and regulatory loss contingencies when it is probable that a loss has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated. Liabilities have been established for a number of the matters noted below. It is possible that some of the matters could require the Company to pay damages or make other expenditures or establish accruals in amounts that could not be reasonably estimated at December 31, 2016. While the potential future charges could be material in the particular quarterly or annual periods in which they are recorded, based on information currently known to management, management does not believe any such charges are likely to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position.

225
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Matters as to Which an Estimate Can Be Made
For some of the matters disclosed below, the Company is able to estimate a reasonably possible range of loss. For such matters where a loss is believed to be reasonably possible, but not probable, no accrual has been made. As of December 31, 2016, the Company estimates the aggregate range of reasonably possible losses in excess of amounts accrued for these matters to be $0 to $275 million.
Matters as to Which an Estimate Cannot Be Made
For other matters disclosed below, the Company is not currently able to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss. The Company is often unable to estimate the possible loss or range of loss until developments in such matters have provided sufficient information to support an assessment of the range of possible loss, such as quantification of a damage demand from plaintiffs, discovery from other parties and investigation of factual allegations, rulings by the court on motions or appeals, analysis by experts, and the progress of settlement negotiations. On a quarterly and annual basis, the Company reviews relevant information with respect to litigation contingencies and updates its accruals, disclosures and estimates of reasonably possible losses or ranges of loss based on such reviews.
Asbestos-Related Claims
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is and has been a defendant in a large number of asbestos-related suits filed primarily in state courts. These suits principally allege that the plaintiff or plaintiffs suffered personal injury resulting from exposure to asbestos and seek both actual and punitive damages. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has never engaged in the business of manufacturing, producing, distributing or selling asbestos or asbestos-containing products nor has Metropolitan Life Insurance Company issued liability or workers’ compensation insurance to companies in the business of manufacturing, producing, distributing or selling asbestos or asbestos-containing products. The lawsuits principally have focused on allegations with respect to certain research, publication and other activities of one or more of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s employees during the period from the 1920’s through approximately the 1950’s and allege that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company learned or should have learned of certain health risks posed by asbestos and, among other things, improperly publicized or failed to disclose those health risks. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company believes that it should not have legal liability in these cases. The outcome of most asbestos litigation matters, however, is uncertain and can be impacted by numerous variables, including differences in legal rulings in various jurisdictions, the nature of the alleged injury and factors unrelated to the ultimate legal merit of the claims asserted against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company employs a number of resolution strategies to manage its asbestos loss exposure, including seeking resolution of pending litigation by judicial rulings and settling individual or groups of claims or lawsuits under appropriate circumstances.
Claims asserted against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company have included negligence, intentional tort and conspiracy concerning the health risks associated with asbestos. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s defenses (beyond denial of certain factual allegations) include that: (i) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company owed no duty to the plaintiffs — it had no special relationship with the plaintiffs and did not manufacture, produce, distribute or sell the asbestos products that allegedly injured plaintiffs; (ii) plaintiffs did not rely on any actions of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; (iii) Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s conduct was not the cause of the plaintiffs’ injuries; (iv) plaintiffs’ exposure occurred after the dangers of asbestos were known; and (v) the applicable time with respect to filing suit has expired. During the course of the litigation, certain trial courts have granted motions dismissing claims against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, while other trial courts have denied Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motions. There can be no assurance that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company will receive favorable decisions on motions in the future. While most cases brought to date have settled, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company intends to continue to defend aggressively against claims based on asbestos exposure, including defending claims at trials.

226
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

The approximate total number of asbestos personal injury claims pending against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company as of the dates indicated, the approximate number of new claims during the years ended on those dates and the approximate total settlement payments made to resolve asbestos personal injury claims at or during those years are set forth in the following table:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
2014
 
(In millions, except number of claims)
Asbestos personal injury claims at year end
67,223

 
67,787

 
68,460

Number of new claims during the year
4,146

 
3,856

 
4,636

Settlement payments during the year (1)
$
50.2

 
$
56.1

 
$
46.0

__________________
(1)
Settlement payments represent payments made by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company during the year in connection with settlements made in that year and in prior years. Amounts do not include Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s attorneys’ fees and expenses.
The number of asbestos cases that may be brought, the aggregate amount of any liability that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company may incur, and the total amount paid in settlements in any given year are uncertain and may vary significantly from year to year.
The ability of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to estimate its ultimate asbestos exposure is subject to considerable uncertainty, and the conditions impacting its liability can be dynamic and subject to change. The availability of reliable data is limited and it is difficult to predict the numerous variables that can affect liability estimates, including the number of future claims, the cost to resolve claims, the disease mix and severity of disease in pending and future claims, the impact of the number of new claims filed in a particular jurisdiction and variations in the law in the jurisdictions in which claims are filed, the possible impact of tort reform efforts, the willingness of courts to allow plaintiffs to pursue claims against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company when exposure to asbestos took place after the dangers of asbestos exposure were well known, and the impact of any possible future adverse verdicts and their amounts.
The ability to make estimates regarding ultimate asbestos exposure declines significantly as the estimates relate to years further in the future. In the Company’s judgment, there is a future point after which losses cease to be probable and reasonably estimable. It is reasonably possible that the Company’s total exposure to asbestos claims may be materially greater than the asbestos liability currently accrued and that future charges to income may be necessary. While the potential future charges could be material in the particular quarterly or annual periods in which they are recorded, based on information currently known by management, management does not believe any such charges are likely to have a material effect on the Company’s financial position.
The Company believes adequate provision has been made in its consolidated financial statements for all probable and reasonably estimable losses for asbestos-related claims. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s recorded asbestos liability is based on its estimation of the following elements, as informed by the facts presently known to it, its understanding of current law and its past experiences: (i) the probable and reasonably estimable liability for asbestos claims already asserted against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, including claims settled but not yet paid; (ii) the probable and reasonably estimable liability for asbestos claims not yet asserted against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, but which Metropolitan Life Insurance Company believes are reasonably probable of assertion; and (iii) the legal defense costs associated with the foregoing claims. Significant assumptions underlying Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s analysis of the adequacy of its recorded liability with respect to asbestos litigation include: (i) the number of future claims; (ii) the cost to resolve claims; and (iii) the cost to defend claims.

227
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company reevaluates on a quarterly and annual basis its exposure from asbestos litigation, including studying its claims experience, reviewing external literature regarding asbestos claims experience in the United States, assessing relevant trends impacting asbestos liability and considering numerous variables that can affect its asbestos liability exposure on an overall or per claim basis. These variables include bankruptcies of other companies involved in asbestos litigation, legislative and judicial developments, the number of pending claims involving serious disease, the number of new claims filed against it and other defendants and the jurisdictions in which claims are pending. As previously disclosed, in 2014, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company increased its recorded liability for asbestos-related claims to $690 million. Based upon its regular reevaluation of its exposure from asbestos litigation, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has updated its liability analysis for asbestos-related claims through December 31, 2016.
Regulatory Matters
The Company receives and responds to subpoenas or other inquiries seeking a broad range of information from state regulators, including state insurance commissioners; state attorneys general or other state governmental authorities; federal regulators, including the SEC; federal governmental authorities, including congressional committees; and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”). The issues involved in information requests and regulatory matters vary widely. The Company cooperates in these inquiries.
In the Matter of Chemform, Inc. Site, Pompano Beach, Broward County, Florida
In July 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) advised Metropolitan Life Insurance Company that it believed payments were due under two settlement agreements, known as “Administrative Orders on Consent,” that New England Mutual Life Insurance Company (“New England Mutual”) signed in 1989 and 1992 with respect to the cleanup of a Superfund site in Florida (the “Chemform Site”). The EPA originally contacted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (as successor to New England Mutual) and a third party in 2001, and advised that they owed additional clean-up costs for the Chemform Site. The matter was not resolved at that time. The EPA is requesting payment of an amount under $1 million from Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and such third party for past costs and an additional amount for future environmental testing costs at the Chemform Site. In September 2012, the EPA, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and the third party executed an Administrative Order on Consent under which Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and the third party have agreed to be responsible for certain environmental testing at the Chemform Site. The Company estimates that its costs for the environmental testing will not exceed $100,000. The September 2012 Administrative Order on Consent does not resolve the EPA’s claim for past clean-up costs. The EPA may seek additional costs if the environmental testing identifies issues. The Company estimates that the aggregate cost to resolve this matter will not exceed $1 million.
Sales Practices Regulatory Matters.
Regulatory authorities in a number of states and FINRA, and occasionally the SEC, have had investigations or inquiries relating to sales of individual life insurance policies or annuities or other products by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company. These investigations often focus on the conduct of particular financial services representatives and the sale of unregistered or unsuitable products or the misuse of client assets. Over the past several years, these and a number of investigations by other regulatory authorities were resolved for monetary payments and certain other relief, including restitution payments. The Company may continue to resolve investigations in a similar manner. The Company believes adequate provision has been made in its consolidated financial statements for all probable and reasonably estimable losses for these sales practices-related investigations or inquiries.
Unclaimed Property Litigation
West Virginia Lawsuits
On September 20, 2012, the West Virginia Treasurer filed an action against Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in West Virginia state court (West Virginia ex rel. John D. Perdue v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Circuit Court of Putnam County, Civil Action No. 12-C-295) alleging that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company violated the West Virginia Uniform Unclaimed Property Act, seeking to compel compliance with the Act, and seeking payment of unclaimed property, interest and penalties. On January 31, 2017, the parties entered into a settlement agreement resolving these actions.

228
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Total Control Accounts Litigation
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is a defendant in a lawsuit related to its use of retained asset accounts, known as TCA, as a settlement option for death benefits.
Owens v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (N.D. Ga., filed April 17, 2014)
Plaintiff filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of all persons for whom Metropolitan Life Insurance Company established a retained asset account, known as a TCA, to pay death benefits under an ERISA plan. The action alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s use of the TCA as the settlement option for life insurance benefits under some group life insurance policies violates Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s fiduciary duties under ERISA. As damages, plaintiff seeks disgorgement of profits that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company realized on accounts owned by members of the putative class. On September 27, 2016, the court denied Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s summary judgment motion in full and granted plaintiff’s partial summary judgment motion. The Company intends to defend this action vigorously.
Reinsurance Litigation
Robainas, et al. v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (S.D.N.Y., December 16, 2014)
Plaintiffs filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and all persons and entities who, directly or indirectly, purchased, renewed or paid premiums on life insurance policies issued by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company from 2009 through 2014 (the “Policies”). Two similar actions were subsequently filed, Yale v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (S.D.N.Y., January 12, 2015) and International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers District Lodge 15 v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (E.D.N.Y., February 2, 2015). Both of these actions were consolidated with the Robainas action. The consolidated complaint alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company inadequately disclosed in its statutory annual statements that certain reinsurance transactions with affiliated reinsurance companies were collateralized using “contractual parental guarantees,” and thereby allegedly misrepresented its financial condition and the adequacy of its reserves. The lawsuit sought recovery under Section 4226 of the New York Insurance Law of a statutory penalty in the amount of the premiums paid for the Policies. On October 9, 2015, the court granted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss the consolidated complaint, finding that plaintiffs lacked Article III standing because they did not allege any concrete injury as a result of the alleged conduct. On February 23, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.
Intoccia v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (S.D.N.Y., April 20, 2015)
Plaintiffs filed this putative class action on behalf of themselves and all persons and entities who, directly or indirectly, purchased, renewed or paid premiums for Guaranteed Benefits Insurance Riders attached to variable annuity contracts with Metropolitan Life Insurance Company from 2009 through 2015 (the “Annuities”). The court consolidated Weilert v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (S.D.N.Y., April 30, 2015) with the Intoccia case, and the consolidated, amended complaint alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company inadequately disclosed in its statutory annual statements that certain reinsurance transactions with affiliated reinsurance companies were collateralized using “contractual parental guarantees,” and thereby allegedly misrepresented its financial condition and the adequacy of its reserves. The lawsuits seek recovery under Section 4226 of the New York Insurance Law of a statutory penalty in the amount of the premiums paid for Guaranteed Benefits Insurance Riders attached to the Annuities. The Court granted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss, adopting the reasoning of the Robainas decision. On February 23, 2017, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed this decision.

229
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Other Litigation
Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada Indemnity Claim
In 2006, Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada (“Sun Life”), as successor to the purchaser of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s Canadian operations, filed a lawsuit in Toronto, seeking a declaration that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company remains liable for “market conduct claims” related to certain individual life insurance policies sold by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company that were subsequently transferred to Sun Life. In January 2010, the court found that Sun Life had given timely notice of its claim for indemnification but, because it found that Sun Life had not yet incurred an indemnifiable loss, granted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motion for summary judgment. Both parties agreed to consider the indemnity claim through arbitration. In September 2010, Sun Life notified Metropolitan Life Insurance Company that a purported class action lawsuit was filed against Sun Life in Toronto alleging sales practices claims regarding the policies sold by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and transferred to Sun Life. On August 30, 2011, Sun Life notified Metropolitan Life Insurance Company that another purported class action lawsuit was filed against Sun Life in Vancouver, BC alleging sales practices claims regarding certain of the same policies sold by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and transferred to Sun Life. Sun Life contends that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company is obligated to indemnify Sun Life for some or all of the claims in these lawsuits. These sales practices cases against Sun Life are ongoing, and the Company is unable to estimate the reasonably possible loss or range of loss arising from this litigation.
Fauley v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, et al. (Circuit Court of the 19th Judicial Circuit, Lake County, Ill., July 3, 2014).
On September 28, 2016, the Illinois Supreme Court denied an objector’s petition for leave to appeal from an order approving Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s $23 million settlement of a class action alleging violation of the Telephone Consumer Protection Act. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company paid out the settlement funds in January 2017.
Voshall v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles, April 8, 2015)
Plaintiff filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of himself and all persons covered under a long-term group disability income insurance policy issued by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company to public entities in California between April 8, 2011 and April 8, 2015. Plaintiff alleges that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company improperly reduced benefits by including cost of living adjustments and employee paid contributions in the employer retirement benefits and other income that reduces the benefit payable under such policies. Plaintiff asserts causes of action for declaratory relief, violation of the California Business & Professions Code, breach of contract and breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The Company intends to defend this action vigorously.
Martin v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (Superior Court of the State of California, County of Contra Costa, filed December 17, 2015)
Plaintiffs filed this putative class action lawsuit on behalf of themselves and all California persons who have been charged compound interest by Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in life insurance policy and/or premium loan balances within the last four years. Plaintiffs allege that Metropolitan Life Insurance Company has engaged in a pattern and practice of charging compound interest on life insurance policy and premium loans without the borrower authorizing such compounding, and that this constitutes an unlawful business practice under California law. Plaintiff asserts causes of action for declaratory relief, violation of California’s Unfair Competition Law and Usury Law, and unjust enrichment. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, restitution of interest, and damages in an unspecified amount. On April 12, 2016, the court granted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss. Plaintiffs have filed a notice appealing this ruling.

230
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Lau v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (S.D.N.Y. filed, December 3, 2015)
This putative class action lawsuit was filed by a single defined contribution plan participant on behalf of all ERISA plans whose assets were invested in Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s “Group Annuity Contract Stable Value Funds” within the past six years. The suit alleges breaches of fiduciary duty under ERISA and challenges the “spread” with respect to the stable value fund group annuity products sold to retirement plans. The allegations focus on the methodology Metropolitan Life Insurance Company uses to establish and reset the crediting rate, the terms under which plan participants are permitted to transfer funds from a stable value option to another investment option, the procedures followed if an employer terminates a contract, and the level of disclosure provided. Plaintiff seeks declaratory and injunctive relief, as well as damages in an unspecified amount. The Company intends to defend this action vigorously.
Newman v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Company (N.D. Ill., filed March 23, 2016)
Plaintiff filed this putative class action alleging causes of action for breach of contract, fraud, and violations of the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act, based on Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s class-wide increase in premiums charged for long-term care insurance policies. Plaintiff alleges a class consisting of herself and all persons over age 65 who selected a Reduced Pay at Age 65 payment feature and whose premium rates were increased after age 65. Plaintiff asserts that premiums could not be increased for these class members and/or that marketing material was misleading as to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s right to increase premiums. Plaintiff seeks unspecified compensatory, statutory and punitive damages as well as recessionary and injunctive relief. On March 9, 2017, the court granted Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s motion to dismiss, without prejudice. The Company intends to defend this action vigorously.
Sales Practices Claims
Over the past several years, the Company has faced numerous claims, including class action lawsuits, alleging improper marketing or sales of individual life insurance policies, annuities, mutual funds, other products or the misuse of client assets. Some of the current cases seek substantial damages, including punitive and treble damages and attorneys’ fees. The Company continues to defend vigorously against the claims in these matters. The Company believes adequate provision has been made in its consolidated financial statements for all probable and reasonably estimable losses for sales practices matters.
Summary
Putative or certified class action litigation and other litigation and claims and assessments against the Company, in addition to those discussed previously and those otherwise provided for in the Company’s consolidated financial statements, have arisen in the course of the Company’s business, including, but not limited to, in connection with its activities as an insurer, investor and taxpayer. Further, state insurance regulatory authorities and other federal and state authorities regularly make inquiries and conduct investigations concerning the Company’s compliance with applicable insurance and other laws and regulations.
It is not possible to predict the ultimate outcome of all pending investigations and legal proceedings. In some of the matters referred to previously, very large and/or indeterminate amounts, including punitive and treble damages, are sought. Although in light of these considerations it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain cases could have a material effect upon the Company’s financial position, based on information currently known by the Company’s management, in its opinion, the outcomes of such pending investigations and legal proceedings are not likely to have such an effect. However, given the large and/or indeterminate amounts sought in certain of these matters and the inherent unpredictability of litigation, it is possible that an adverse outcome in certain matters could, from time to time, have a material effect on the Company’s consolidated net income or cash flows in particular quarterly or annual periods.
Insolvency Assessments
Most of the jurisdictions in which the Company is admitted to transact business require insurers doing business within the jurisdiction to participate in guaranty associations, which are organized to pay contractual benefits owed pursuant to insurance policies issued by impaired, insolvent or failed insurers. These associations levy assessments, up to prescribed limits, on all member insurers in a particular state on the basis of the proportionate share of the premiums written by member insurers in the lines of business in which the impaired, insolvent or failed insurer engaged. Some states permit member insurers to recover assessments paid through full or partial premium tax offsets.

231
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Assets and liabilities held for insolvency assessments were as follows:
 
December 31,
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Other Assets:
 
 
 
Premium tax offset for future discounted and undiscounted assessments
$
24

 
$
29

Premium tax offsets currently available for paid assessments
32

 
50

Total
$
56

 
$
79

Other Liabilities:
 
 
 
Insolvency assessments
$
37

 
$
43

Commitments
Leases
The Company, as lessee, has entered into various lease and sublease agreements for office space, information technology, aircrafts and other equipment. Future minimum gross rental payments relating to these lease arrangements are as follows:
 
 
Amount
 
 
(In millions)
2017
 
$
216

2018
 
213

2019
 
191

2020
 
191

2021
 
178

Thereafter
 
987

Total
 
$
1,976

Total minimum rentals to be received in the future under non-cancelable subleases were $374 million as of December 31, 2016.
Mortgage Loan Commitments
The Company commits to lend funds under mortgage loan commitments. The amounts of these mortgage loan commitments were $3.9 billion and $4.2 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
Commitments to Fund Partnership Investments, Bank Credit Facilities, Bridge Loans and Private Corporate Bond Investments
The Company commits to fund partnership investments and to lend funds under bank credit facilities, bridge loans and private corporate bond investments. The amounts of these unfunded commitments were $4.2 billion and $4.4 billion at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

232
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)
16. Contingencies, Commitments and Guarantees (continued)

Guarantees
In the normal course of its business, the Company has provided certain indemnities, guarantees and commitments to third parties such that it may be required to make payments now or in the future. In the context of acquisition, disposition, investment and other transactions, the Company has provided indemnities and guarantees, including those related to tax, environmental and other specific liabilities and other indemnities and guarantees that are triggered by, among other things, breaches of representations, warranties or covenants provided by the Company. In addition, in the normal course of business, the Company provides indemnifications to counterparties in contracts with triggers similar to the foregoing, as well as for certain other liabilities, such as third-party lawsuits. These obligations are often subject to time limitations that vary in duration, including contractual limitations and those that arise by operation of law, such as applicable statutes of limitation. In some cases, the maximum potential obligation under the indemnities and guarantees is subject to a contractual limitation ranging from less than $1 million to $127 million, with a cumulative maximum of $416 million, while in other cases such limitations are not specified or applicable. Since certain of these obligations are not subject to limitations, the Company does not believe that it is possible to determine the maximum potential amount that could become due under these guarantees in the future. Management believes that it is unlikely the Company will have to make any material payments under these indemnities, guarantees, or commitments.
In addition, the Company indemnifies its directors and officers as provided in its charters and by-laws. Also, the Company indemnifies its agents for liabilities incurred as a result of their representation of the Company’s interests. Since these indemnities are generally not subject to limitation with respect to duration or amount, the Company does not believe that it is possible to determine the maximum potential amount that could become due under these indemnities in the future.
The Company’s recorded liabilities were $5 million and $4 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, for indemnities, guarantees and commitments.

233
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

17. Quarterly Results of Operations (Unaudited)
The unaudited quarterly results of operations for 2016 and 2015 are summarized in the table below:
 
Three Months Ended
 
March 31,
 
June 30,
 
September 30,
 
December 31,
 
(In millions)
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
$
8,794

 
$
9,082

 
$
9,876

 
$
8,738

Total expenses
$
8,196

 
$
8,749

 
$
9,123

 
$
8,459

Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
$
496

 
$
326

 
$
630

 
$
304

Net income (loss)
$
496

 
$
326

 
$
630

 
$
304

Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests
$
—

 
$
(2
)
 
$
(7
)
 
$
1

Net income (loss) attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
$
496

 
$
328

 
$
637

 
$
303

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Total revenues
$
9,862

 
$
8,833

 
$
10,772

 
$
9,304

Total expenses
$
8,170

 
$
7,945

 
$
9,637

 
$
8,480

Income (loss) from continuing operations, net of income tax
$
1,190

 
$
668

 
$
268

 
$
631

Net income (loss)
$
1,190

 
$
668

 
$
268

 
$
631

Less: Net income (loss) attributable to noncontrolling interests
$
1

 
$
6

 
$
(8
)
 
$
1

Net income (loss) attributable to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
$
1,189

 
$
662

 
$
276

 
$
630

18. Related Party Transactions
Service Agreements
The Company has entered into various agreements with affiliates for services necessary to conduct its activities. Typical services provided under these agreements include personnel, policy administrative functions and distribution services. For certain agreements, charges are based on various performance measures or activity-based costing. The bases for such charges are modified and adjusted by management when necessary or appropriate to reflect fairly and equitably the actual cost incurred by the Company and/or affiliate. Expenses and fees incurred with affiliates related to these agreements, recorded in other expenses, were $2.1 billion for each of the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014. Revenues received from affiliates related to these agreements, recorded in universal life and investment-type product policy fees, were $138 million, $135 million and $129 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Revenues received from affiliates related to these agreements, recorded in other revenues, were $113 million, $151 million and $177 million for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The Company also entered into agreements with affiliates to provide additional services necessary to conduct the affiliates’ activities. Typical services provided under these agreements include management, policy administrative functions, investment advice and distribution services. Expenses incurred by the Company related to these agreements, included in other expenses, were $1.5 billion for both of the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015 and $1.8 billion for the year ended December 31, 2014, and were reimbursed to the Company by these affiliates.
The Company had net payables to affiliates, related to the items discussed above, of $165 million and $282 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.
See Notes 6, 8, 11, 12 and 14 for additional information on related party transactions.
Sales Distribution Services
In July 2016, MetLife, Inc. completed the sale to MassMutual of MetLife, Inc.’s U.S. retail advisor force and certain assets associated with the MetLife Premier Client Group, including all of the issued and outstanding shares of MSI. MassMutual assumed all of the liabilities related to such assets and that arise or occur after the closing of the sale.

234
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements — (continued)

19. Subsequent Events
Reinsurance
Effective January 1, 2017, Brighthouse NY and NELICO recaptured risks related to certain variable annuities, including guaranteed minimum benefits, reinsured by the Company. This recapture resulted in a decrease in cash and cash equivalents of approximately $34 million, a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of approximately $77 million, a decrease in future policy benefits of approximately $79 million, a decrease in policyholder account balances of approximately $387 million and an increase in other liabilities of approximately $76 million. The Company will recognize a gain of approximately $178 million, net of income tax, as a result of this transaction.
Effective January 1, 2017, the Company recaptured risks related to guaranteed minimum benefit guarantees on certain variable annuities reinsured by Brighthouse Insurance, an affiliate. This recapture resulted in an increase in investments and cash and cash equivalents of approximately $568 million and a decrease in premiums, reinsurance and other receivables of approximately $565 million. The Company will recognize a gain of approximately $2 million, net of income tax, as a result of this transaction.

235

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Schedule I
Consolidated Summary of Investments —
Other Than Investments in Related Parties
December 31, 2016
(In millions)
Types of Investments
Cost or
Amortized Cost (1)
 
Estimated
Fair
Value
 
Amount at
Which Shown on
Balance Sheet
Fixed maturity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
Bonds:
 
 
 
 
 
U.S. government and agency securities
$
32,834

 
$
35,615

 
$
35,615

Public utilities
6,893

 
7,465

 
7,465

State and political subdivision securities
6,252

 
7,136

 
7,136

Foreign government securities
3,565

 
3,998

 
3,998

All other corporate bonds
69,592

 
72,236

 
72,236

Total bonds
119,136

 
126,450

 
126,450

Mortgage-backed and asset-backed securities
35,229

 
35,856

 
35,856

Redeemable preferred stock
776

 
814

 
814

Total fixed maturity securities
155,141

 
163,120

 
163,120

FVO and trading securities
36

 
23

 
23

Equity securities:
 
 
 
 
 
Common stock:
 
 
 
 
 
Industrial, miscellaneous and all other
1,127

 
1,177

 
1,177

Public utilities
93

 
122

 
122

Non-redeemable preferred stock
565

 
540

 
540

Total equity securities
1,785

 
1,839

 
1,839

Mortgage loans
56,560

 
 
 
56,560

Policy loans
5,945

 
 
 
5,945

Real estate and real estate joint ventures
6,329

 
 
 
6,329

Real estate acquired in satisfaction of debt
57

 
 
 
57

Other limited partnership interests
3,725

 
 
 
3,725

Short-term investments
4,690

 
 
 
4,690

Other invested assets
17,232

 
 
 
17,232

Total investments
$
251,500

 
 
 
$
259,520

______________
(1)
Cost or amortized cost for fixed maturity securities and mortgage loans represents original cost reduced by repayments, valuation allowances and impairments from other-than-temporary declines in estimated fair value that are charged to earnings and adjusted for amortization of premiums or accretion of discounts; for equity securities, cost represents original cost reduced by impairments from other-than-temporary declines in estimated fair value; for real estate, cost represents original cost reduced by impairments and depreciation; for real estate joint ventures and other limited partnership interests, cost represents original cost reduced for impairments or original cost adjusted for equity in earnings and distributions.


236

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Schedule III
Consolidated Supplementary Insurance Information
December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
Segment
 
DAC
and
VOBA
 
Future Policy Benefits,
Other Policy-Related
Balances and
Policyholder Dividend
Obligation
 
Policyholder
Account
Balances
 
Policyholder
Dividends
Payable
 
Unearned
Premiums (1), (2)
 
Unearned
Revenue (1)
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
421

 
$
57,862

 
$
66,643

 
$
—

 
$
133

 
$
30

MetLife Holdings
 
4,317

 
66,019

 
25,823

 
510

 
167

 
182

Corporate & Other
 
5

 
337

 
—

 
—

 
—

 
—

Total
 
$
4,743

 
$
124,218

 
$
92,466

 
$
510

 
$
300

 
$
212

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
418

 
$
56,090

 
$
63,716

 
$
—

 
$
136

 
$
33

MetLife Holdings
 
5,000

 
70,302

 
29,827

 
621

 
171

 
201

Corporate & Other
 
625

 
1,506

 
877

 
3

 
1

 
321

Total
 
$
6,043

 
$
127,898

 
$
94,420

 
$
624

 
$
308

 
$
555

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
406

 
$
54,374

 
$
65,343

 
$
—

 
$
176

 
$
41

MetLife Holdings
 
4,894

 
70,522

 
29,665

 
612

 
179

 
204

Corporate & Other
 
675

 
1,501

 
894

 
3

 
1

 
323

Total
 
$
5,975

 
$
126,397

 
$
95,902

 
$
615

 
$
356

 
$
568

______________
(1)
Amounts are included within the future policy benefits, other policy-related balances and policyholder dividend obligation column.
(2)
Includes premiums received in advance.

237

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Schedule III
Consolidated Supplementary Insurance Information — (continued)
December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(In millions)
Segment
 
Premiums and Universal Life
and Investment-Type
Product Policy Fees
 
Net
Investment
Income
 
Policyholder
Benefits and
Claims and
Interest Credited
to Policyholder
Account Balances
 
Amortization of
DAC and 
VOBA
Charged to
Other 
Expenses
 
Other
Operating
Expenses (1)
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
18,909

 
$
5,811

 
$
20,230

 
$
56

 
$
2,721

MetLife Holdings
 
5,739

 
5,355

 
7,139

 
342

 
2,797

Corporate & Other
 
287

 
(83
)
 
155

 
43

 
1,044

Total
 
$
24,935

 
$
11,083

 
$
27,524

 
$
441

 
$
6,562

2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
18,281

 
$
5,874

 
$
19,582

 
$
59

 
$
2,658

MetLife Holdings
 
5,910

 
5,613

 
6,962

 
631

 
2,678

Corporate & Other
 
327

 
90

 
166

 
52

 
1,444

Total
 
$
24,518

 
$
11,577

 
$
26,710

 
$
742

 
$
6,780

2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
U.S.
 
$
17,678

 
$
5,817

 
$
19,002

 
$
54

 
$
2,574

MetLife Holdings
 
5,825

 
5,749

 
6,859

 
551

 
2,625

Corporate & Other
 
347

 
327

 
168

 
90

 
1,417

Total
 
$
23,850

 
$
11,893

 
$
26,029

 
$
695

 
$
6,616

______________
(1)
Includes other expenses and policyholder dividends, excluding amortization of DAC and VOBA charged to other expenses.

238

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company
(A Wholly-Owned Subsidiary of MetLife, Inc.)
Schedule IV
Consolidated Reinsurance
December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014
(Dollars in millions)
 
 
Gross Amount
 
Ceded
 
Assumed
 
Net Amount
 
% Amount
Assumed
to Net
2016
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance in-force
 
$
3,013,618

 
$
277,693

 
$
777,037

 
$
3,512,962

 
22.1
%
Insurance premium
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance (1)
 
$
14,931

 
$
1,101

 
$
1,668

 
$
15,498

 
10.8
%
Accident & health insurance
 
7,000

 
124

 
19

 
6,895

 
0.3
%
Total insurance premium
 
$
21,931

 
$
1,225

 
$
1,687

 
$
22,393

 
7.5
%
2015
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance in-force
 
$
3,035,399

 
$
361,355

 
$
811,435

 
$
3,485,479

 
23.3
%
Insurance premium
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance (1)
 
$
14,449

 
$
1,143

 
$
1,638

 
$
14,944

 
11.0
%
Accident & health insurance
 
7,048

 
99

 
41

 
6,990

 
0.6
%
Total insurance premium
 
$
21,497

 
$
1,242

 
$
1,679

 
$
21,934

 
7.7
%
2014
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance in-force
 
$
2,935,363

 
$
372,886

 
$
830,980

 
$
3,393,457

 
24.5
%
Insurance premium
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Life insurance (1)
 
$
14,135

 
$
1,159

 
$
1,630

 
$
14,606

 
11.2
%
Accident & health insurance
 
6,828

 
93

 
43

 
6,778

 
0.6
%
Total insurance premium
 
$
20,963

 
$
1,252

 
$
1,673

 
$
21,384

 
7.8
%
______________
(1)
Includes annuities with life contingencies.
For the year ended December 31, 2016, reinsurance ceded and assumed included affiliated transactions for life insurance in-force of $17.6 billion and $258.3 billion, respectively, and life insurance premiums of $45 million and $727 million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2015, reinsurance ceded and assumed included affiliated transactions for life insurance in-force of $23.1 billion and $276.7 billion, respectively, and life insurance premiums of $40 million and $701 million, respectively. For the year ended December 31, 2014, reinsurance ceded and assumed included affiliated transactions for life insurance in-force of $23.9 billion and $277.9 billion, respectively, and life insurance premiums of $36 million and $681 million, respectively.

239

Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure
None.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Management, with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(e) as of the end of the period covered by this report. Based on that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that these disclosure controls and procedures are effective.
There were no changes to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as defined in Exchange Act Rule 13a-15(f) during the quarter ended December 31, 2016 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Management of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company and subsidiaries is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs of control procedures. The objectives of internal control include providing management with reasonable, but not absolute, assurance that assets are safeguarded against loss from unauthorized use or disposition, and that transactions are executed in accordance with management’s authorization and recorded properly to permit the preparation of consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP.
Management has documented and evaluated the effectiveness of the internal control of the Company at December 31, 2016 pertaining to financial reporting in accordance with the criteria established in Internal Control — Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
In the opinion of management, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting at December 31, 2016.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, an independent registered public accounting firm, has audited the consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedules included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016. The Report of the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm on their audit of the consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedules is included on page 97.
Item 9B. Other Information
None.

240

Part III
Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance
Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters
Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence
Omitted pursuant to General Instruction I(2)(c) of Form 10-K.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”), the independent auditor of MetLife, Inc., has served as the independent auditor of the Company for more than 75 years. Its long-term knowledge of the MetLife group of companies, combined with its insurance industry expertise and global presence, has enabled it to carry out its audits of the Company’s financial statements with effectiveness and efficiency. Deloitte is a registered public accounting firm with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) as required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Sarbanes-Oxley”) and the Rules of the PCAOB.
Independent Auditor’s Fees for 2016 and 2015
The table below presents fees for professional services rendered by Deloitte for the audit of the Company’s annual financial statements, audit-related services, tax services and all other services for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015. All fees shown in the table were related to services that were approved by the Audit Committee of MetLife, Inc. (“Audit Committee”).
 
2016
 
2015
 
(In millions)
Audit fees (1)
$
44.7

 
$
44.6

Audit-related fees (2)
$
10.9

 
$
7.7

Tax fees (3)
$
1.4

 
$
2.2

All other fees (4)
$
0.9

 
$
0.2

______________
(1)
Fees for services to perform an audit or review in accordance with auditing standards of the PCAOB and services that generally only the Company’s independent auditor can reasonably provide, such as comfort letters, statutory audits, attest services, consents and assistance with and review of documents filed with the SEC.
(2)
Fees for assurance and related services that are traditionally performed by the Company’s independent auditor, such as audit and related services for employee benefit plan audits, due diligence related to mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, accounting consultations and audits in connection with proposed or consummated acquisitions and divestitures, control reviews, attest services not required by statute or regulation, and consultation concerning financial accounting and reporting standards.
(3)
Fees for tax compliance, consultation and planning services. Tax compliance generally involves preparation of original and amended tax returns, claims for refunds and tax payment planning services. Tax consultation and tax planning encompass a diverse range of advisory services, including assistance in connection with tax audits and filing appeals, tax advice related to mergers, acquisitions and divestitures, advice related to employee benefit plans and requests for rulings or technical advice from taxing authorities. In 2016, tax compliance and tax preparation fees total $1.3 million and tax advisory fees total $0.1 million and in 2015, tax compliance and tax preparation fees total $1.5 million and tax advisory fees total $0.6 million.
(4)
Fees for other types of permitted services, including employee benefit advisory services, risk and other consulting services, financial advisory services and valuation services.

241

Approval of Fees
The Audit Committee approves Deloitte’s audit and non-audit services to MetLife, Inc. and its subsidiaries, including the Company, in advance as required under Sarbanes-Oxley and SEC rules. Before the commencement of each fiscal year, the Audit Committee appoints the independent auditor to perform audit services that MetLife expects to be performed for the fiscal year and appoints the auditor to perform audit-related, tax and other permitted non-audit services. The Audit Committee or a designated member of the Audit Committee to whom authority has been delegated may, from time to time, pre-approve additional audit and non-audit services to be performed by MetLife’s independent auditor. Any pre-approval of services between Audit Committee meetings must be reported to the full Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting.
The Audit Committee is responsible for approving fees for the audit and for any audit-related, tax or other permitted non-audit services. If the audit, audit-related, tax and other permitted non-audit fees for a particular period or service exceed the amounts previously approved, the Audit Committee determines whether or not to approve the additional fees.
The Audit Committee ensures the regular rotation of the audit engagement team partners as required by law.

242

Part IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
The following documents are filed as part of this report:
1. Financial Statements
The financial statements are listed in the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules on page 96.
2. Financial Statement Schedules
The financial statement schedules are listed in the Index to Consolidated Financial Statements, Notes and Schedules on page 96.
3. Exhibits
The exhibits are listed in the Exhibit Index which begins on page E-1.

243

Signatures
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
March 23, 2017
METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY
 
 
 
 
By
 
 
/s/ Steven A. Kandarian
 
 
Name:
Steven A. Kandarian
 
 
Title:
Chairman of the Board,
President and
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.
Signature
  
Title
 
Date
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Cheryl W. Grisé
 
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Cheryl W. Grisé
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Carlos M. Gutierrez
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Carlos M. Gutierrez
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ David L. Herzog
 
Director
 
March 23, 2017
David L. Herzog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ R. Glenn Hubbard
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
R. Glenn Hubbard
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Alfred F. Kelly, Jr.
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Alfred F. Kelly, Jr.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Edward J. Kelly, III
 
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Edward J. Kelly, III
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ William E. Kennard
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
William E. Kennard
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ James M. Kilts
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
James M. Kilts
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Catherine R. Kinney
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Catherine R. Kinney
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Denise M. Morrison
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Denise M. Morrison
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Kenton J. Sicchitano
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Kenton J. Sicchitano
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Lulu C. Wang
  
Director
 
March 23, 2017
Lulu C. Wang
 
 
 
 

244

Signature
 
Title
 
Date
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Steven A. Kandarian
  
Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
 
March 23, 2017
Steven A. Kandarian
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ John C. R. Hele
  
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
 
March 23, 2017
John C. R. Hele
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
/s/ Peter M. Carlson
  
Executive Vice President and
Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)
 
March 23, 2017
Peter M. Carlson
 
 
 

245

Exhibit Index
(Note Regarding Reliance on Statements in Our Contracts: In reviewing the agreements included as exhibits to this Annual Report on Form 10-K, please remember that they are included to provide you with information regarding their terms and are not intended to provide any other factual or disclosure information about Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, its subsidiaries or affiliates, or the other parties to the agreements. The agreements contain representations and warranties by each of the parties to the applicable agreement. These representations and warranties have been made solely for the benefit of the other parties to the applicable agreement and (i) should not in all instances be treated as categorical statements of fact, but rather as a way of allocating the risk to one of the parties if those statements prove to be inaccurate; (ii) have been qualified by disclosures that were made to the other party in connection with the negotiation of the applicable agreement, which disclosures are not necessarily reflected in the agreement; (iii) may apply standards of materiality in a way that is different from what may be viewed as material to investors; and (iv) were made only as of the date of the applicable agreement or such other date or dates as may be specified in the agreement and are subject to more recent developments. Accordingly, these representations and warranties may not describe the actual state of affairs as of the date they were made or at any other time. Additional information about Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, its subsidiaries and affiliates may be found elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s other public filings, which are available without charge through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.)
Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
 
 
 
2.1
 
Plan of Reorganization of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company dated September 28, 1999. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-1 (No. 333-91517) (the “S-1 Registration Statement”)).
 
 
 
2.2
 
Amendment to Plan of Reorganization of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company dated March 9, 2000. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 2.2 to the S-1 Registration Statement).
 
 
 
3.1
 
Amended and Restated Charter of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, effective May 16, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.2 to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 19, 2016).
 
 
 
3.2
 
Amended and Restated By-Laws of Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, effective May 16, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3.4 to Metropolitan Life Insurance Company’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 19, 2016).
 
 
 
10.1
 
MetLife Executive Severance Plan (as amended and restated, effective June 14, 2010). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2014 (the "2014 Annual Report")).*
 
 
 
10.2
 
Offer Letter, dated March 25, 2009, between American Life Insurance Company and Michel Khalaf. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to MetLife, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016 (the "2016 Annual Report")).*
 
 
 
10.3
 
Adjustment of certain compensation items for Michel Khalaf, effective July 1, 2012. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to MetLife, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2012).*
 
 
 
10.4
 
Employment Agreement between Christopher G. Townsend and MetLife Asia Pacific Limited, dated May 11, 2012. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.'s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 16, 2012 (the "May 16, 2012 Form 8-K")).*
 
 
 
10.5
 
Letter Agreement dated June 11, 2015 between MetLife, Inc. and Christopher Townsend. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 15, 2015). *
 
 
 
10.6
 
Tax Equalization Agreement dated June 10, 2015 between MetLife, Inc. and Michel Khalaf. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2015).*
 
 
 
10.7
 
Separation Agreement, Waiver and General Release, dated July 30, 2015, between MetLife Group, Inc. and William J. Wheeler. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015).*
 
 
 
10.8
 
Agreement to Protect Corporate Property executed by William J. Wheeler on June 21, 2001. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to MetLife, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2015).*
 
 
 
10.9

 
Agreement to Protect Corporate Property, dated January 1, 2015, executed by Esther S. Lee. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to MetLife, Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015 (the "2015 Annual Report")).*
 
 
 
10.10
 
Form of Agreement to Protect Corporate Property executed by Steven A. Kandarian, Steven J. Goulart, and Maria M. Morris. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.14 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.11
 
Form of Agreement to Protect Corporate Property executed by Ricardo A. Anzaldua, John C. R. Hele, Frans Hijkoop, and Esther Lee on May 25, 2016; Steven A. Kandarian on May 31, 2016; Steven J. Goulart on June 2, 2016; and Maria M. Morris on June 8, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.'s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2016).*

E-1

Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
10.12
 
MetLife, Inc. 2005 Stock and Incentive Compensation Plan, effective April 15, 2005 (the "2005 SIC Plan"). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.13
 
Form of Management Stock Option Agreement under the 2005 SIC Plan (effective as of April 25, 2007). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the 2012 Annual Report). *
 
 
 
10.14
 
Amendment to Stock Option Agreements under the 2005 SIC Plan (effective as of April 25, 2007). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.15
 
Form of Management Stock Option Agreement under the 2005 SIC Plan (effective December 15, 2009). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.28 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.16
 
Form of Management Stock Option Agreement under the 2005 SIC Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.29 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.17
 
Form of Stock Option Agreement under the 2005 SIC Plan (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to MetLife, Inc.'s Current Report on Form 8-K dated February 15, 2013 (the "February 15, 2013 Form 8-K")).*
 
 
 
10.18
 
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Three-Year "Cliff" Exercisability) under the 2005 SIC Plan (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.19
 
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.20
 
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Three-Year "Cliff" Period of Restriction; No Code 162(m) Goals) (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.21
 
Form of Performance Share Agreement (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.22
 
MetLife International Performance Unit Incentive Plan (as amended and restated effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.23
 
Form of Performance Unit Agreement (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.24
 
MetLife International Unit Option Incentive Plan, dated July 21, 2011 (as amended and restated effective February 23, 2011). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.24 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.25
 
Form of Unit Option Agreement under the MetLife International Unit Option Incentive Plan (effective February 23, 2011). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.25 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.26
 
MetLife International Unit Option Incentive Plan (as amended and restated December 3, 2012). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.27
 
Form of Unit Option Agreement (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.12 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.28
 
Form of Unit Option Agreement (Three-Year "Cliff" Exercisability) (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.13 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.29
 
MetLife International Restricted Unit Incentive Plan (as amended and restated effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.30
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.31
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (Three-Year "Cliff" Period of Restriction; No Code 162(m) Goals) (effective February 11, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to the February 15, 2013 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.32
  
Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of May 30, 2014, among MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., as borrowers, and the other parties signatory thereto, amending and restating (i) the Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of August 12, 2011, among MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., as borrowers, and the other parties signatory thereto and (ii) the Five-Year Credit Agreement dated as of September 13, 2012 among MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., as borrowers, and the other parties signatory thereto. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated June 4, 2014).
 
 
 
10.33
  
First Amendment dated as of November 20, 2015 to the Five-Year Credit Agreement dated as of May 30, 2014, among MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., as Borrowers, Bank of America, N.A., as Administrative Agent, Fronting L/C Issuer, Several L/C Agent and a Limited Fronting Lender, JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Fronting L/C Issuers and Limited Fronting Lenders, and the other Lenders party thereto. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 24, 2015).

E-2

Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
10.34
  
Second Amendment dated December 20, 2016 to the Five-Year Credit Agreement, dated as of May 30, 2014, among MetLife, Inc. and MetLife Funding, Inc., as borrowers, and the other parties signatory thereto, providing for the amendment and restatement of such Credit Agreement. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 21, 2016).
 
 
 
10.35
  
Metropolitan Life Auxiliary Savings and Investment Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.72 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.36
  
Amendment 1 to the Metropolitan Life Auxiliary Savings and Investment Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.74 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.37
  
Amendment Number 2 to the Metropolitan Life Auxiliary Savings and Investment Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.48 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.38
  
Amendment Number 3 to the Metropolitan Life Auxiliary Savings and Investment Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.75 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.39
  
Amendment Number 4 to the Metropolitan Life Auxiliary Savings and Investment Plan (Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.77 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.40
  
MetLife Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers, as amended and restated, effective November 1, 2003. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.78 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.41
  
Amendment Number One to the MetLife Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers (as amended and restated as of November 1, 2003), dated May 4, 2005. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.52 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.42
  
Amendment Number Two to the MetLife Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers (as amended and restated as of November 1, 2003, effective December 14, 2005). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.53 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.43
  
Amendment Number Three to the MetLife Deferred Compensation Plan for Officers (as amended and restated as of November 1, 2003, effective February 26, 2007). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.45 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.44
  
MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated November 2, 2006 (as amended and restated, effective with respect to salary and cash incentive compensation, January 1, 2005, and with respect to stock compensation, April 15, 2005). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.46 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.45
  
Amendment Number One to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 13, 2007 (effective as of December 31, 2007). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.81 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.46
  
Amendment Number Two to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 11, 2008 (effective December 31, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.84 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.47
  
Amendment Number Three to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 11, 2009 (effective January 1, 2010). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.85 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.48
  
Amendment Number Four to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 11, 2009 (effective December 31, 2009). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.86 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.49
  
Amendment Number Five to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 11, 2009 (effective January 1, 2011). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.60 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.50
  
Amendment Number Six to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 27, 2011 (effective January 1, 2011). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.52 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.51
  
Amendment Number Seven to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 26, 2012 (effective January 1, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.53 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.52
  
Amendment Number Eight to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 17, 2013 (effective January 1, 2014). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.54 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.53
  
Amendment Number Nine to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated December 30, 2014 (effective January 1, 2015). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.88 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.54
  
Amendment Number Ten to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated September 30, 2016 (effective October 1, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.56 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.55
  
Amendment Number Eleven to the MetLife Leadership Deferred Compensation Plan, dated September 30, 2016 (effective October 1, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.57 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.56
  
MetLife Non-Management Director Deferred Compensation Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2005). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-214710).*
 
 
 

E-3

Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
10.57
  
MetLife, Inc. Director Indemnity Plan (dated and effective July 22, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.94 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.58
  
MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan, dated August 7, 2006 (as amended and restated, effective June 30, 2006). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.60 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.59
  
MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan, dated December 21, 2006 (amending and restating Part I thereof, effective January 1, 2007). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.61 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.60
  
MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan, dated December 21, 2007 (amending and restating Part I thereof, effective January 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.95 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.61
  
Amendment #1 to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008), dated October 24, 2008 (effective October 1, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.98 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.62
  
Amendment Number Two to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008), dated December 12, 2008 (effective December 31, 2008). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.99 to the 2013 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.63
  
Amendment Number Three to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008) dated March 25, 2009 (effective January 1, 2009). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.71 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.64
  
Amendment Number Four to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008), dated December 16, 2009 (effective January 1, 2010). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.102 to the 2014 Annual Report). *
 
 
 
10.65
  
Amendment Number Five to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008) dated December 21, 2010 (effective January 1, 2010). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.73 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.66
  
Amendment Number Six to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008) dated December 20, 2012 (effective January 1, 2012). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.101 to the 2012 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.67
  
Amendment Number Seven to the MetLife Auxiliary Pension Plan (as amended and restated, effective January 1, 2008) dated December 27, 2013 (effective December 10, 2013). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.69 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.68
  
Alico Overseas Pension Plan, dated January 2009. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.70 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.69
  
Amendment Number One to the Alico Overseas Pension Plan (effective November 1, 2010), dated December 20, 2010. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.71 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.70
  
Amendment Number Two to the Alico Overseas Pension Plan (effective as of November 1, 2011), dated December 13, 2011. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.72 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.71
  
Amendment Number Three to the Alico Overseas Pension Plan, dated May 1, 2012 (effective January 1, 2012). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.'s Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 4, 2012).*
 
 
 
10.72
  
Member's Explanatory Handbook for the Metropolitan Life Insurance Company of Hong Kong Limited Healthcare Plan (2014). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.79 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.73
  
MetLife Plan for Transition Assistance for Officers, dated April 21, 2014 (as amended and restated, effective April 1, 2014 (the "MPTA")). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to MetLife, Inc.’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2014).*
 
 
 
10.74
  
Amendment Number One to the MPTA, dated December 30, 2014 (effective January 1, 2015). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.111 to the 2014 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.75
  
Amendment Number Two to the MPTA, dated March 30, 2016 (effective April 1, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.77 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.76
  
Amendment Number Three to the MPTA, dated June 30, 2016 (effective June 30, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.78 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.77
  
Amendment Number Four to the MPTA, dated October 24, 2016 (effective October 31, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.79 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.78
  
Amendment Number Five to the MPTA, dated November 3, 2016 (effective October 1, 2016). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.80 to the 2016 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.79
  
MetLife, Inc. 2015 Non-Management Director Stock Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2015. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198141).*
 
 
 
10.80
  
MetLife, Inc. 2015 Stock and Incentive Plan, effective January 1, 2015 (the “2015 SIC Plan”). (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198145)).*
 
 
 
10.81
  
Form of Performance Share Agreement under the 2015 SIC Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 to MetLife, Inc.’s Current Report on Form 8-K dated December 11, 2014 (the “December 11, 2014 Form 8-K”).*
 
 
 
10.82
  
Form of Performance Unit Agreement under the 2015 SIC Plan. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.83
  
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Ratable Period of Restriction Ends in Thirds; Code Section 162(m) Goals) under the 2015 SIC Plan (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*

E-4

Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
10.84
  
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Period of Restriction; No Code Section 162(m) Goals) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.85
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (Ratable Period of Restriction Ends in Thirds; Code Section 162(m) Goals) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.5 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.86
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Period of Restriction; No Code Section 162(m) Goals) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.6 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.87
  
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Ratable Exercisability in Thirds) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.7 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.88
  
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Exercisability) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.8 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.89
  
Form of Unit Option Agreement (Ratable Exercisability in Thirds) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.9 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.90
  
Form of Unit Option Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Exercisability) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.10 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.91
  
MetLife Annual Variable Incentive Plan (effective as amended and restated January 1, 2015) (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.11 to the December 11, 2014 Form 8-K).*
 
 
 
10.92
  
Form of Performance Share Agreement under the 2015 SIC Plan, effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.95 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.93
  
Form of Performance Unit Agreement under the 2015 SIC Plan, effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.96 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.94
  
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Ratable Period of Restriction Ends in Thirds; Code Section 162(m) Goals) under the 2015 SIC Plan, effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.97 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.95
  
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Period of Restriction; No Code Section 162(m) Goals), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.98 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.96
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (Ratable Period of Restriction Ends in Thirds; Code Section 162(m) Goals), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.99 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.97
  
Form of Restricted Unit Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Period of Restriction; No Code Section 162(m) Goals), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.100 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.98
  
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Ratable Exercisability in Thirds), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.101 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.99
  
Form of Stock Option Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Exercisability), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.102 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.100
  
Form of Unit Option Agreement (Ratable Exercisability in Thirds), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.103 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.101
  
Form of Unit Option Agreement (Three-Year “Cliff” Exercisability), effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.104 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.102
  
Award Agreement Supplement, effective January 1, 2016. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.105 to the 2015 Annual Report).*
 
 
 
10.103
  
MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2010. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 to MetLife, Inc. ’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 


E-5

Exhibit No.
 
Description
 
 
 
10.104
  
Amendment Number One to the MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2010. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.2 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 
10.105
  
Amendment Number Two to the MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2010. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.3 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 
10.106
  
Amendment Number Three to the MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2013. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.4 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 
10.107
  
Amendment Number Four to the MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective January 1, 2014. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.5 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 
10.108
  
Amendment Number Five to the MetLife Individual Distribution Sales Deferred Compensation Plan, effective June 1, 2014. (Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.6 to MetLife, Inc.’s Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-198143)).*
 
 
 
23.1
 
Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP.
 
 
 
31.1
 
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
 
 
31.2
 
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
 
 
32.1
 
Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
 
 
32.2
 
Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
 
 
101.INS
 
XBRL Instance Document.
 
 
 
101.SCH
 
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document.
 
 
 
101.CAL
 
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document.
 
 
 
101.LAB
 
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document.
 
 
 
101.PRE
 
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document.
 
 
 
101.DEF
 
XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document.
 
 
 
______________
* Indicates management contracts or compensatory plans or arrangements. SEC File No. 001-15787.


E-6