Cincinnati Financial Corp. 10-K
United States Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549
Form 10-K
|
|
|
þ |
|
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF
1934. |
For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2006.
|
|
|
o |
|
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 0-4604
Cincinnati Financial Corporation
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
|
|
|
Ohio
(State of incorporation)
|
|
31-0746871
(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) |
|
|
|
6200 S. Gilmore Road Fairfield, Ohio
|
|
45014-5141 |
(Address of principal executive offices)
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(513) 870-2000
(Registrants 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:
$2.00 par, common stock
(Title of Class)
6.125% Senior Notes due 2034
(Title of Class)
6.9% Senior Debentures due 2028
(Title of Class)
6.92% Senior Debentures due 2028
(Title of Class)
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule
405 of the Securities Act. Yes þ No o
Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or
Section 15(d) of the Act. Yeso 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 o
Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is
not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrants 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. o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer,
or a non-accelerated filer. See definition of accelerated filer and large accelerated filer in
Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.(Check one):
Large accelerated filer þ Accelerated filer o Non-accelerated filer o
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act). Yeso No þ
The aggregate market value of voting stock held by nonaffiliates of the Registrant was
$7,397,523,700 as of June 30, 2006.
As of February 16, 2007, there were 172,835,849 shares of common stock outstanding.
Document Incorporated by Reference
Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement for Cincinnati Financial Corporations Annual Meeting of
Shareholders to be held on May 5, 2007, are incorporated by reference into Parts II and III of this
Form 10-K.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Part I
Item 1. Business
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Introduction
We are an Ohio corporation formed in 1968. Through our subsidiaries, we have been in
business since 1950, marketing commercial, personal and life insurance through independent
insurance agencies to businesses and individuals. Our headquarters is in Fairfield, Ohio. At
year-end 2006, we had 4,048 associates, with 2,888 headquarters associates providing support
to 1,160 field associates.
Cincinnati Financial Corporation (CFC) owns 100 percent of three subsidiaries: The
Cincinnati Insurance Company, CFC Investment Company and CinFin Capital Management Company.
In addition, the parent company has an investment portfolio and is responsible for corporate
borrowings and shareholder dividends. The Cincinnati Insurance Company owns 100 percent of
our three smaller insurance subsidiaries: The Cincinnati Casualty Company, The Cincinnati
Indemnity Company and The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company.
The Cincinnati Insurance Company, founded in 1950, leads the property casualty group known
as The Cincinnati Insurance Companies. The Cincinnati Casualty Company and The Cincinnati
Indemnity Company round out the property casualty insurance group, providing flexibility in
pricing and underwriting while ceding all of their business to The Cincinnati Insurance
Company. The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company primarily markets life insurance and
annuities. CFC Investment Company complements the insurance subsidiaries with leasing and
financing services. CinFin Capital Management Company provides asset management services to
institutions, corporations and high net worth individuals.
Our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) are available, free of charge,
on our Web site, www.cinfin.com, as soon as possible after they have been filed with the
SEC. These filings include our annual reports on Form 10-K, our quarterly reports on Form
10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished
pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. In the following
pages we reference various Web sites. These Web sites, including our own, are not
incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Periodically, we refer to estimated industry data so that we can give information about our
performance versus the overall insurance industry. Unless otherwise noted, the industry data
is prepared by A.M. Best Co., a leading insurance industry statistical, analytical and
financial strength rating organization. Information from A.M. Best is presented on a
statutory basis. When we provide our results on a comparable statutory basis, we label it as
such; all other company data is presented in accordance with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America (GAAP).
Our Business and Our Strategy
Introduction
Our company was founded more than 50 years ago by independent agents to support the
ability of local independent property casualty insurance agents to deliver quality financial
protection to people and businesses in their communities. Today, we operate much the same
way, actively marketing commercial insurance policies in 32 states through a select group of
independent insurance agencies. We actively market all of our personal lines insurance
policies in 22 of those states. We also seek to become the life insurance carrier of choice
for the agencies that market our property casualty insurance products and offer other
financial services to help agents and their clients, the policyholders.
Our company distinguishes itself in three ways:
|
|
We cultivate relationships with the independent insurance agents who market our
policies and we make our decisions at the local level |
|
|
|
We achieve claims excellence, covering the spectrum from our response to reported
claims to our approach to establishing reserves for not-yet-paid claims |
|
|
|
We invest for long-term total return, using available cash flow to purchase equity
securities after covering insurance liabilities by purchasing fixed-maturity securities |
Cultivating Relationships with Independent Insurance Agents
The U.S. property casualty insurance industry is a highly competitive marketplace with
over 3,900 stock and mutual companies operating independently or in groups. No single
company or group dominates across all product lines and states. Insurance companies
(carriers) can market a broad array of products nationally or:
|
|
choose to sell a limited product line or only one type of insurance (monoline
carrier) |
|
|
|
target a certain segment of the market (for example, personal insurance) |
2006 10-K Page 1
|
|
focus on one or more states or regions (regional carrier) |
Property casualty insurers generally market their products through one or more distribution
channels:
|
|
independent agents, who represent multiple carriers, |
|
|
|
captive agents, who represent one carrier exclusively, or |
|
|
|
direct marketing through the mail or Internet |
Some carriers use more than one channel. For the most part, we compete with insurance
companies that market through independent insurance agents.
Independent Agency Distribution System
We are committed to the independent agency distribution system, offering a broad array
of commercial, personal and life insurance products through this channel. We recognize that
locally based independent agencies have relationships in their communities that can lead to
policyholder satisfaction, loyalty and profitable business. Our field associates provide
service and accountability to the agencies, living in the communities they serve and working
from offices in their homes, providing 24/7 availability to our agents.
At year-end 2006, our 1,066 agency relationships had 1,289 reporting agency locations
marketing our insurance products. An increasing number of agencies have multiple, separately
identifiable locations, reflecting their growth and consolidation of ownership within the
independent agency marketplace. Reporting agency locations describes our agents scope of
business and our presence within our 32 active states. At year-end 2005, we had 1,024 agency
relationships with 1,252 reporting agency locations. At year-end 2004, we had 998 agency
relationships with 1,213 reporting agency locations. In addition to providing data on
reporting agency locations, we continue to give agency relationships metrics, such as our
penetration within each agency relationship.
Property Casualty Earned Premiums by State
In our 10 highest volume states, 877 reporting agency locations wrote 70.0 percent of
our 2006 total property casualty earned premium volume compared with 69.7 percent in 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned |
|
Percent of |
|
Reporting |
|
Avg premium |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
premiums |
|
total earned |
|
agency locations |
|
per location |
|
Year ended December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
695 |
|
|
|
22.0 |
% |
|
|
220 |
|
|
$ |
3.2 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
291 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
147 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
3.8 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
2.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
687 |
|
|
|
22.5 |
% |
|
|
224 |
|
|
$ |
3.1 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
9.2 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
222 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
5.9 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
126 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
In 2005, the most recent period for which data is available, Cincinnati Insurance was
the No. 1 or No. 2 carrier in 75 percent of the reporting agency locations that have
represented us for more than five years. The independent agencies that we choose to market
our products share our philosophies. They do business person to person; offer broad,
value-added services; maintain sound balance sheets and manage their agencies
professionally. On average, we have a 15.7 percent share of the property casualty insurance
in our reporting agency locations. Our share is 22.4 percent in reporting agency locations
that have represented us for more than 10 years; 9.9 percent in agencies that have
represented us for five to 10 years; 4.3 percent in agencies that have represented us for
one to five years; and 1.2 percent in agencies that have represented us for less than one
year.
Over the next decade, industry analysts predict successful agencies will have opportunities
to increase their size on average almost three-fold. Agencies are expected to continue to
pursue consolidation opportunities,
2006 10-K Page 2
buying or merging with other agencies to create stronger
organizations and expand service. In addition to the growing networks of agency locations
owned by banks and brokers, other agencies are addressing the consolidation by forming
voluntary associations. These associations, or clusters, share back office and other
functions to enhance economies, while maintaining their individual ownership structures.
No single agency relationship accounted for more than 1.2 percent of our total agency earned
premiums in 2006. Some of our agency relationships are with individual offices of bank- or
broker-owned organizations. Our relationships are with each office separately, however, no
bank- or broker-owned organization, in aggregate, accounted for more than 2.3 percent of our
total agency earned premiums in 2006.
Strengthening Our Agency Relationships
We follow a number of strategies to strengthen our relationships with the independent
property casualty insurance agencies that represent us.
Emphasis on Relationships and Local Decision-making
We continue to expand the services we provide that support agency opportunities.
Accessible field representatives are the first layer of support. Headquarters associates
also provide agencies with underwriting, accounting and technology assistance and training.
Company executives, headquarters underwriters and special teams regularly travel to visit
agencies. Agents have opportunities for direct, personal conversations with our senior
management team, and headquarters associates have opportunities to refresh their knowledge
of marketplace conditions and field activities.
The field marketing representatives are joined by field representatives specializing in
claims, loss control, machinery and equipment, bond, premium audit, life insurance and
leasing. For example, our field machinery and equipment and loss control representatives
perform inspections and recommend specific actions to improve the safety of the
policyholders operations and the quality of the agents account.
Agents tell us they agree with the need to carefully select risks and assure pricing
adequacy. They appreciate the time our associates invest in creating solutions for their
clients while protecting profitability, whether that means working on an individual case or
developing modified policy terms and conditions that preserve flexibility, choice and other
sales advantages.
Risk-specific Underwriting
We seek to be a consistent, predictable and reasonable property casualty carrier that
agencies can rely on to serve their clients. Our field and headquarters underwriters make
risk-specific decisions about both new business and renewals. On a case-by-case basis, we
select risks we can cover on acceptable terms and at adequate prices rather than
underwriting solely by geographic location or business class.
For new commercial lines business, this case-by-case underwriting and pricing is coordinated
by the local field marketing representatives. Our agents and our field marketing, loss
control, bond and machinery and equipment representatives get to know the people and
businesses in their communities and can make informed decisions about each risk. These field
marketing representatives also are responsible for selecting new independent agencies,
coordinating field teams of specialized company representatives and promoting all of the
companys products within the agencies they serve. Commercial lines policy renewals are
managed by headquarters underwriters who are assigned to specific agencies and consult with
local field staff, as needed.
We apply our risk-specific underwriting philosophy to personal lines new and renewal
business in a different process. Each agency selects personal lines business from within the
geographic territory that it serves,
based on the agents knowledge of the risks in those communities or familiarity with the
policyholder. New and renewal business activities are supported by headquarters associates
assigned to individual agencies.
Competitive Insurance Products
We are committed to offering the property casualty products and services local agents
need to serve their clients the policyholders. Our commercial lines products are
structured to allow flexible combinations of coverages in a single package with a single
expiration date. Our intent is to offer personal auto and homeowners coverages together with
other coverages such as personal umbrella. This approach brings policyholders convenience,
discounts and a reduced risk of coverage gaps or disputes. At the same time, it increases
account retention and saves time and expense for the agency and our company.
Our commercial lines packages are typically offered on a three-year policy term for most
insurance coverages, a key competitive advantage. Although we offer three-year policy terms,
premiums for some coverages within those policies are adjustable at anniversary for the next
annual period, and policies may be cancelled at any time at the discretion of the
policyholder. Contract terms often provide that rates for property, general liability,
inland marine and crime coverages, as well as policy terms and conditions, are fixed for the
term of the policy. The general liability exposure basis may be audited annually. Commercial
auto, workers compensation, professional liability and most umbrella liability coverages
within multi-year packages are rated at each of the policys annual anniversaries for the
next one-year period. The annual pricing could incorporate rate changes approved by state
insurance regulatory authorities between the date the policy was written and its annual
2006 10-K Page 3
anniversary date, as well as changes in risk exposures and premium credits or debits
relating to loss experience, competition and other underwriting judgment factors. We
estimate that approximately 75 percent of 2006 commercial premiums were subject to annual
rating or were written on a one-year policy term.
In our experience, multi-year packages are somewhat less price sensitive for the
quality-conscious insurance buyers who we believe are typical clients of our independent
agents. Customized insurance programs on a three-year term complement the long-term
relationships these policyholders typically have with their agents and with the company. By
reducing annual administrative efforts, multi-year policies lower expenses for our company
and for our agents. The commitment we make to policyholders encourages long-term
relationships and reduces their need to annually re-evaluate their insurance carrier or
agency. We believe that the advantages of three-year policies in terms of policyholder
convenience, account retention and reduced administrative costs outweigh the potential
disadvantage of these policies, even in periods of rising rates.
Our personal lines policies are offered on a one-year term, except for homeowner policies in
five states. Competitive advantages of our personal lines coverages include a generous
credit structure and customizable endorsements for both the personal auto and homeowner
policies. A newly introduced personal auto policy endorsement is replacement cost coverage
for newly purchased vehicles. Popular homeowner endorsements include replacement cost for
contents, inflation guard, identity theft mitigation and advocacy, flexible water damage
coverages and enhanced replacement cost coverage for older homes.
Technology Solutions
We seek to employ technology solutions and business process improvements that
complement our core values of local underwriting decisions, strong relationships with our
independent agencies and superior claims service. In recent years, we have made significant
investments in state-of-the-art information technology platforms, systems and Internet-based
applications to:
|
|
allow our agencies and our field and headquarters associates to collaborate more
efficiently, |
|
|
|
provide our agencies the ability to access our systems and client data to process
business transactions from their offices, |
|
|
|
automate our internal processes so our associates can spend more time serving
agents and policyholders, and |
|
|
|
reduce duplication and make our processes more effective to reduce company and
agency costs. |
Agencies access our systems and other electronic services via CinciLink®, our secure
agency-only portal. CinciLink provides an array of Web-based services and content that make
it easier to do business with us, such as commercial and personal lines rating and
processing systems, policy loss information, sales and marketing materials, educational
courses on our products and services, and electronic libraries for property and casualty
coverage forms and state rating manuals.
Commercial Lines Technology Through our WinCPP® commercial lines premium quoting system,
agency and company representatives are able to complete online, real-time premium quotes for
new business and renewals. WinCPP is used by all of our agency locations in the 32 states in
which we actively market insurance and provides quoting capabilities for nearly 100 percent
of our new and renewal commercial lines business. In 2007, we will introduce agency
integration technology for WinCPP; CinciBridge allows automated movement of key
underwriting data from an agents management system to WinCPP, reducing agents data entry
and allowing seamless quoting and rating capabilities.
Some small business accounts written as Businessowner Policies (BOP) and Dentists Package
Policies (DBOP) are eligible to be issued at our agency locations through our Web-based
e-CLAS® policy processing system. (A businessowner policy combines property, liability and
business interruption coverages for small businesses.) e-CLAS provides full policy
lifecycle transactions including: quoting, issuance, policy changes, renewal processing and
policy printing at the agency location. These features make it easier and more efficient for
our agencies to issue and service these policies. e-CLAS is in use in seven states
representing 44 percent of the BOP and DBOP premiums. During 2007, we expect to roll-out
e-CLAS to an additional 12 states for these policy types. We also intend to introduce the
CinciBridge agency integration technology with e-CLAS. Our primary long-term technology
objective is to complete development of e-CLAS for all of our commercial lines of business.
Since 2004, we have been streamlining internal processes and achieving operational
efficiencies in our headquarters commercial lines operations through deployment of i-View,
a policy imaging and workflow system. This system provides online access to electronic
copies of policy files, enabling our underwriters to respond to agent requests and inquiries
more quickly and efficiently. i-View also automates internal workflows through electronic
routing of underwriting and processing work tasks. Sixty percent of non-workers
compensation commercial lines policy files now are administered and retained electronically
in i-View and our field claims representatives can access these records to help them
efficiently verify coverage and process claims. We expect more than 90 percent of
non-workers compensation commercial lines policy files will be retained in i-View by
year-end 2007.
2006 10-K Page 4
Personal Lines Technology Diamond is a real-time personal lines policy processing system,
supporting all six of our personal lines of business and allowing once and done processing.
Diamond incorporates features frequently requested by our agencies such as direct bill and
monthly payment plans, local and headquarters policy printing options, data transfer to and
from popular agency management systems and real-time integration with data from third party
sources needed to calculate final premiums such as insurance scores, MVR reports and address
verification. At year-end 2006, Diamond was in use in 13 states representing approximately
90 percent of our personal lines premium volume. Agents in Pennsylvania and Virginia began
using Diamond in early 2007 with additional states planned for later in the year.
In 2006, we introduced PL-efiles, a policy imaging system, to our personal lines operations.
Through year-end 2006, we had transitioned more than one-third of our Diamond personal lines
files to PL-efiles, replacing paper format with electronic copies of policy documents.
PL-efiles complements the Diamond system by giving personal lines underwriters and support
staff online access to policy documents and data that enable them to respond to agent
requests and inquiries quickly and efficiently.
Claims Technology Our property and casualty claims operation has streamlined processes
and achieved operational efficiencies through the use of CMS, our claims file management
system. Initially deployed in late 2003, CMS allows simultaneous access to claim files by
headquarters and field claims associates. Field and headquarters claims associates use CMS
to process all reported claims in a virtual claim file. We continue to refine the system to
add capabilities to make our associates more effective. During 2006, we issued tablet
computers to our field claims representatives. These units allow our claims representatives
to view and enter information into CMS from any location, including an insureds home or
agents office, and to print claim checks using portable printers. Agent access to selected
CMS information is planned for 2007.
Surety and Executive Risk Technology Advances in automation and streamlined business
processes have enabled us to offer our agencies a more efficient means to process certain
surety bonds. This helps agencies offer a complete package to their commercial clients.
Since 2005, we have introduced CinciBond®, an automated system to process license and permit
surety bonds, to agents in 11 states representing 803 agency reporting locations. CinciBond
enables agents to rate, issue and print bonds at their offices. During 2007, we expect to
complete rollout in remaining states and add other popular surety bond types.
Life Insurance Offerings Round Out Agency Relationships
We support the independent agencies affiliated with our property casualty operations in
their programs to sell life insurance. The products offered by our life insurance subsidiary
round out and protect accounts and
improve account persistency. At the same time, the life operation looks to increase
diversification of revenue and profitability sources for both the agency and our company.
Our property casualty agencies make up the main distribution system for our life insurance
products. We also develop life business from other independent life insurance agencies to
provide us with penetration in geographic markets not served through our property casualty
agencies. We are careful to solicit business from these other agencies in a manner that does
not conflict with or compete with the marketing and sales efforts of our property casualty
agencies. We emphasize up-to-date products, responsive underwriting, high quality service
and competitive pricing.
Programs, Products and Services to Support Agency Growth
We complement the property casualty operations by providing products and services that
help attract and retain high-quality independent insurance agencies. CFC Investment Company
offers equipment and vehicle leases and loans for independent insurance agencies, their
commercial clients and other businesses. It also provides commercial real estate loans to
help agencies operate and expand their businesses. CinFin Capital Management markets asset
management services to agencies and their clients, as well as other institutions,
corporations and high net worth individuals.
When we appoint agencies, we look for organizations with knowledgeable, professional staffs.
In turn, we make an exceptionally strong commitment to assist them in keeping their
knowledge up to date and educating new people they bring on board as they grow. Numerous
activities at our headquarters, in regional and agency locations, and online fulfill this
commitment:
|
|
At our headquarters, we conduct agency management roundtables for agency
principals, as well as our regular schedule of commercial lines, personal lines and
life insurance agent schools and seminars. These generally focus on Cincinnati product
and underwriting information and sales tips. In addition to schools for agents, we have
opened seats for agents in our structured classroom training for new underwriting
associates. Agency staff may return to their agencies after the class or stay and
become fully grounded in Cincinnati philosophy by serving as an associate for a few
years before returning to the agency. |
|
|
|
Associates travel to regional and agency locations to instruct classes and provide
a variety of educational support services. Teams conduct seminars on a variety of
topics, such as marketing seminars to promote cross-marketing of our products.
Cincinnati associates also co-host client seminars with our agencies on a
|
2006 10-K Page 5
|
|
variety of
topics such as risk transfer techniques. These customized programs address liability
issues specific to classes of business, such as contractors or dentists. |
|
|
|
Agency staff can access the Agency Learning Center through CinciLink, our secure
agency-only Web site. The Learning Center offers convenient, online courses and Web
conferences, including Cincinnati product information, Microsoft® Office topics and
general business subjects. Our new producer and customer service representative
curricula guide students through a progression of online courses and classroom
instruction. |
Except travel-related expenses for courses held at our headquarters, most programs are
offered at no cost to our agencies. While that approach may be extraordinary in our industry
today, the result is quality service for our policyholders and increased success for our
independent agencies.
Superior Financial Strength Ratings
In addition to the ratings of our parent company senior debt, independent ratings firms
award our property casualty and life operations insurer financial strength ratings based on
their quantitative and qualitative analyses. These ratings assess an insurers ability to
meet its financial obligations to policyholders and do not necessarily address all of the
matters that may be important to shareholders.
We believe that our strong surplus position and superior insurer financial strength ratings
are clear, competitive advantages in the segment of the insurance marketplace that our
agents serve. Our financial strength supports the consistent, predictable performance that
our policyholders, agents, associates and shareholders have always expected and received,
and it must be able to withstand significant challenges. We seek to ensure that our
performance remains consistent and predictable by aligning agents interests with those of
the company, giving agents outstanding service and compensation and earning their best
business by enhancing their ability to serve the businesses and individuals in their
communities.
As of December 31, 2006, our financial strength ratings were unchanged from those reported
in our 2005 Annual Report on Form 10-K. The outlook from Standard & Poors was raised to
stable from negative.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parent Company |
|
|
Property Casualty Insurance |
|
|
Life Insurance |
|
|
|
|
|
Senior Debt |
|
|
Subsidiaries Financial |
|
|
Subsidiary Financial |
|
|
|
|
|
Rating |
|
|
Strength Ratings |
|
|
Strength Ratings |
|
|
Outlook |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rating |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier |
|
|
|
|
|
A. M. Best Co. |
|
aa- |
|
|
A++ Superior |
|
1 of 16 |
|
|
A+ Superior |
|
|
2 of 16 |
|
|
Stable |
Fitch Ratings |
|
|
A+ |
|
|
|
AA Very Strong |
|
4 of 21 |
|
|
AA Very Strong |
|
|
4 of 21 |
|
|
Stable |
Moodys Investors Services |
|
|
A2 |
|
|
|
Aa3 Excellent |
|
4 of 12 |
|
|
-
- |
|
|
|
- |
|
|
|
Stable |
Standard & Poors Ratings Services |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
AA- Very Strong |
|
4 of 21 |
|
|
AA- Very Strong |
|
|
4 of 21 |
|
|
Stable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A.M. Best Co. On April 28, 2006, A.M. Best affirmed its financial strength rating
(FSR) of A++ (Superior) for our property casualty group, citing its superior
risk-adjusted capitalization, very strong operating performance, network of independent
agents and strong overall underwriting results despite challenges to achieve
profitability in its personal lines business. Concurrently, A.M. Best downgraded its
issuer credit ratings for our property casualty insurance companies to aa+ from aaa,
reflecting the companys investment and geographic risk concentrations at current
rating levels. Additionally, A.M. Best affirmed the FSR of A+ (Superior) and the issuer
credit rating of aa- of The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company. The outlook for all
ratings is stable. |
|
|
|
Fitch Ratings - On September 15, 2006, Fitch affirmed the AA insurer financial
strength ratings of our three property casualty companies and The Cincinnati Life
Insurance Company. Fitch said the ratings are based on the strong financial condition
of our operating subsidiaries, excellent financial flexibility and successful total
return investment strategy. The ratings consider the property casualty groups
investment concentration in a small number of common stocks and geographic
concentration in Ohio and Midwestern states. |
|
|
|
Moodys Investors Service In July 2006, Moodys issued its Analysis, stating that
overall, its Top 10 ratio metrics suggest that our property casualty group continues to
be appropriately positioned within the Aa insurance financial strength rating category.
Further, in its November 2006 comment after our third-quarter earnings announcements,
Moodys said the stable outlook is supported by our conservative financial and
operational leverage profiles and by Moodys belief that our operating model will
enable us to continue to compete effectively in our core markets. Moodys noted that
challenges include the increasingly competitive environment in small and middle market
commercial lines, lagging technology systems, a concentrated portfolio and payment of
sizable common stock dividends that reduce our fixed charge coverage levels. |
|
|
|
Standard & Poors Ratings Services - On July 25, 2006, Standard & Poors Ratings
Services affirmed its AA- (Very Strong) financial strength and counterparty credit
ratings on the property casualty group and The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company. At
the same time, Standard & Poors revised its outlook on the company, our property
casualty operating companies and Cincinnati Life to stable from negative.
|
2006 10-K Page 6
|
|
Standard & Poors said the revised outlook reflected the improved results on our homeowner book of
business, as well as its view of our ability to benefit from corrective actions we have
effected over recent years. Standard & Poors said it believes our unique approach to
agency relationships should drive profitable growth even in a softer pricing
environment. |
Statutory surplus for our property casualty insurance subsidiary was $4.723 billion at
December 31, 2006, with the ratio of property casualty common stock to statutory surplus at
97.3 percent, in line with our targeted sub-100 percent level. At year-end 2005, property
casualty statutory surplus was $4.220 billion, with the ratio of common stock to surplus at
96.4 percent. Life statutory surplus was $479 million at December 31, 2006, with the ratio
of life common stock to statutory adjusted capital and surplus at 88.8 percent. At year-end
2005, life statutory surplus was $451 million, with the ratio of common stock to statutory
adjusted capital and surplus at 83.5 percent.
Cincinnati Lifes statutory adjusted risk-based surplus increased 8.7 percent to $556
million at December 31, 2006, from $511 million a year earlier. Statutory adjusted
risk-based surplus as a percentage of liabilities, a key measure of life insurance company
capital strength, was 37.8 percent at year-end 2006 compared with an estimated industry
average ratio of 10.7 percent. A higher ratio indicates an insurers stronger security for
policyholders and capacity to support business growth.
At year-end 2006 and 2005, the risk-based capital (RBC) for our property casualty and life
operations was exceptionally strong and well above levels that would have required
regulatory action.
We continue to review the risk management and capital requirement changes that rating
agencies have proposed for our industry. Additionally, we began a formal implementation of
enterprise risk management in 2005. Responsibility for enterprise risk management has been
assigned at the officer level, supported by a team of representatives from business areas.
The team reports to our president, our chief executive officer and our board of directors,
as appropriate, on detailed and summary risk assessments, risk metrics and risk plans. Our
use of operational audits, strategic plans and departmental business plans, as well as our
culture of open communications and our fundamental respect for our code of conduct, continue
to help us manage risks on an ongoing basis.
While the potential for volatility exists due to our catastrophe exposures, investment
philosophy and bias toward incremental change, the ratings agencies consistently have
asserted that we have built appropriate financial strength and flexibility to manage that
volatility. We remain committed to strategies that emphasize long-term stability over
short-term benefits that might accrue by quick reaction to changes in market conditions.
For example, through all market and economic cycles we maintain strong insurance company
statutory surplus, a solid, conservative reinsurance program, sound reserving practices and
low interest rate risk, as well as low debt and strong capital at the parent-company level.
Investments at the parent company give us flexibility to support our capitalization policies
for the subsidiaries, improve the ability of the insurance companies to write additional
premiums and maintain high insurer financial strength ratings.
We believe that our property catastrophe reinsurance program provides adequate protection
for large loss events. Our strong capital position would allow the payment of claims if an
event exceeded our reinsurance program. Currently participating on our property per risk and
casualty per-occurrence programs are Hannover Reinsurance Company, Munich Reinsurance
America, Partner Reinsurance Company of the U.S. and Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation
and its subsidiaries, all of which have A.M. Best insurer financial strength ratings of A
(Excellent) or A+ (Superior). Over the past several years, we also modified earthquake
deductibles in selected Midwestern states for both commercial and personal lines property
coverages to reduce our exposure to a single significant catastrophic event.
In 2004, we transferred approximately 32 million shares of our Fifth Third Bancorp (Nasdaq:
FITB) common stock holding to the insurance subsidiary from the parent company to reduce
parent company investment assets. The transfer raised our property casualty statutory
surplus and reduced our ratio of net written premiums to statutory surplus, which was 0.7 at
year-end 2006, 2005 and 2004. This ratio is a common measure of operating leverage used in
the property casualty industry. It serves as an indicator of the companys premium growth
capacity. The estimated property casualty industry net written premium to statutory surplus
ratio was 0.9 at year-end 2006, 1.0 at year-end 2005 and 1.1 at year-end 2004. We do not
intend to leverage our lower ratio following the asset transfer by accelerating growth or
strengthening loss reserves. Rather, the transfer allowed us to retain the financial
flexibility that continues to support our high insurer financial strength ratings.
Growing with Our Agencies
One of our primary objectives is to increase our written premiums more rapidly than the
industry. We believe our agencies are growing more rapidly than the industry, and we seek to
maintain or increase our penetration within each agency as it grows.
To help us maintain or increase our penetration within each agency, we are further improving
service through the creation of smaller marketing territories that permit our local field
marketing representatives to devote
2006 10-K Page 7
more time to each agency relationship. At year-end 2006,
we had 102 field marketing territories, up from 100 at the end of 2005 and 92 at the end of
2004. We continually study the regulatory and competitive environment in states where we
could decide to actively market our property casualty products. In January 2007, we
announced we were working on plans to enter New Mexico and eastern Washington within the
next year. We will soon begin the process by preparing policy forms and rates to submit to
the departments of insurance in those states. Marketing efforts in New Mexico and Washington
will begin following our initial agency appointments.
Another way we seek to increase overall premiums is to expand our agency plant within our
current marketing territories. Our objective is to appoint approximately 50 additional sales
offices, or points of distribution, each year. In measuring progress towards this goal, we
include appointment of new agency relationships with Cincinnati (the primary focus of our
goal). For those that we believe will produce a meaningful amount of new business premiums,
we also include appointment of agencies that merge with a Cincinnati agency and new branch
offices opened by existing Cincinnati agencies. We made 55, 57 and 58 new appointments in
2006, 2005 and 2004 respectively. Of these new appointments, 42, 41, and 48, respectively,
were new relationships. These new appointments and other changes in agency structures led to
a net increase in reporting agency locations of 37 in 2006, 39 in 2005 and 22 in 2004. We
are very careful to protect the franchise for current agencies when selecting and appointing
new agencies.
Achieving Claims Excellence
Our claims philosophy reflects our belief that we will prosper as a company by
responding to claims person to person, paying covered claims promptly, preventing false
claims from unfairly adding to overall premiums and building financial strength to meet
future obligations. We also believe that our company should have the financial strength to
pay claims while also creating value for shareholders, leading to our emphasis on the
establishment of adequate loss reserves.
Superior Claims Service
Our 748 locally based field claims representatives work from their homes, assigned to
specific agencies. They respond personally to policyholders and claimants, typically within
24 hours of receiving an agencys claim report. We believe we have a competitive advantage
because of the person-to-person approach and the resulting high level of service that our
field claims representatives provide. We also help our agencies provide prompt service to
policyholders by giving agencies authority to immediately pay most first-party claims up to
$2,500.
Catastrophe response teams are comprised of volunteers from our experienced field claims
staff. As hurricanes threaten, these associates travel to strategic locations near the
expected impact area. This puts them in position to quickly get to the affected area, set up
temporary offices and start calling on policyholders. Cincinnati takes pride in giving our
field personnel the tools and authority they need to do their jobs. In times of widespread
loss, our field claims representatives confidently and quickly resolve claims, often writing
checks for damages on the same day they inspect the loss. Our Claims Management System
introduced new efficiencies that are especially evident during catastrophes. Electronic
claim files allow for fast initial contact of policyholders and easy sharing of information
between rotating storm teams, headquarters and local field claims representatives.
Cincinnatis claims associates work hard to control costs where appropriate. They have
vendor resources that provide negotiated pricing to our insureds and claimants and that help
us determine appropriate pricing for medical cost-related claims. Our field claims
representatives also are educated continuously on new techniques and repair trends. They can
leverage their local knowledge and experience with area body shops, which helps them
negotiate the right price with any facility the policyholder chooses.
We staff a Special Investigations Unit (SIU) with former law enforcement and claims
professionals who are available to gather facts to uncover potential fraud. While we believe
its our job to pay what is due under each policy, we also want to prevent false claims from
unfairly increasing overall premiums. Our SIU also operates a computer forensic lab, using
sophisticated software to recover data and mitigating the cost of computer-related claims
for business interruption and loss of records.
Loss and Loss Expense Reserves
When claims are made by or against policyholders, any amounts that our property
casualty operations pay or expect to pay for covered claims are termed losses. The costs we
incur in investigating, resolving and processing these claims are termed loss expenses. Our
consolidated financial statements include property casualty loss and loss expense reserves
that estimate the costs of not-yet-paid claims incurred through December 31 of each year.
The reserves include estimates for claims that have been reported to us plus our estimates
for claims that have been incurred but not yet reported called IBNR, along with our estimate
for loss expenses associated with processing and settling those claims. We develop the
various estimates based on individual claim evaluations and statistical projections. We
reduce the loss reserves by an estimate for the
2006 10-K Page 8
amount of salvage and subrogation we expect to recover. For more than 10 years, our annual review has led to savings from favorable
development of loss reserves on prior accident years.
We encourage you to review several sections of the Managements Discussion and Analysis
where we discuss our loss reserves in greater depth. In Item 7, Critical Accounting
Estimates, Property Casualty Loss and
Loss Expense Reserves, Page 35, we discuss our process for analyzing potential losses and
establishing reserves. In Item 7, Property Casualty Insurance
Reserves, Page 63, we review
reserve levels, including 10-year development of our property casualty loss reserves.
Investing for Long-Term Total-Return
While we seek to generate an underwriting profit in our insurance operations, our
investments historically have provided our primary source of net income and contributed to
our financial strength, driving long-term growth in shareholders equity and book value.
Under the direction of the investment committee of the board of directors, our investment
department portfolio managers seek to balance current investment income opportunities and
long-term appreciation so that current cash flows can be compounded to achieve above-average
long-term total return. We invest some portion of cash flow in tax-advantaged fixed-maturity
and equity securities to maximize after-tax earnings. Premium payments, generally received
before claims are made, particularly for casualty business lines, create substantial cash
flow for investment.
Insurance regulatory and statutory requirements established to protect policyholders from
investment risk have always influenced our investment decisions on an individual insurance
company basis. After covering both our intermediate and long-range insurance obligations
with fixed-maturity investments, we historically used available cash flow to invest in
equity securities. Investment in equity securities has played an important role in achieving
our portfolio objectives and has contributed significantly to total net unrealized
investment gains of $5.244 billion (pretax) at year-end 2006. We remain committed to our
long-term equity focus, which we believe is key to our companys long-term growth and
stability.
Our Segments
Consolidated financial results primarily reflect the results of our four reporting
segments. These segments are defined based on financial information we use to evaluate
performance and to determine the allocation of assets.
|
|
Commercial lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Personal lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Life insurance |
|
|
|
Investments |
We also frequently evaluate results for our consolidated property casualty operations, which
is the total of our commercial lines and personal lines segments. Our consolidated property
casualty operations generated an unusually low 69.5 percent of our total revenues in 2006
due to the sale of our Alltel Corporation common stock holding. Revenues, income before
income taxes, and identifiable assets for each segment are shown in a table in Item 8, Note
17 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 102. Some of that information also is
discussed in this section of this report, where we explain the business operations of each
segment. The financial performance of each segment is discussed in the Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations, which begins on
Page 31.
Commercial Lines Property Casualty Insurance Segment
The commercial lines property casualty insurance segment contributed $2.402 billion in
net earned premiums to total revenues and $208 million to income before income taxes in
2006. Commercial lines net earned premiums grew 6.6 percent in 2006, 6.0 percent in 2005 and
11.4 percent in 2004.
Approximately 95 percent of our commercial lines premiums are written to provide accounts
with coverages from more than one of our business lines. As a result, we believe that
commercial lines is best measured and evaluated on a segment basis. However, we provide the
line of business data to summarize growth and profitability trends separately for our
business lines. The seven commercial business lines are:
|
|
Commercial casualty Commercial casualty insurance provides coverage to
businesses against third-party liability from accidents occurring on their premises or
arising out of their operations, including liability coverage for injuries sustained
from products sold as well as coverage for professional services, such as dentistry.
Specialized casualty policies may include liability coverage for employment practices
liability (EPLI), which protects businesses against claims by employees that their
legal rights as employees of the company have been violated, and other acts or failures
to act under specified circumstances as well as excess insurance and umbrella
liability, including personal umbrella written as an endorsement to commercial umbrella
coverages. The commercial casualty business line includes liability coverage written |
2006 10-K Page 9
on both a discounted and non-discounted basis as part of commercial package policies. Our
ceded participation in USAIG, a joint underwriting association, from 2003 and prior is
included in the commercial casualty business line.
|
|
Commercial property Commercial property insurance provides coverage for loss or
damage to buildings, inventory and equipment caused by fire, wind, hail, water, theft
and vandalism as well as business interruption resulting from a covered loss.
Commercial property also includes crime insurance, which provides coverage for losses
due to embezzlement or misappropriation of funds by an employee, and inland marine
insurance, which provides coverage for a variety of mobile equipment, such as builders
risk, contractors equipment, cargo and electronic data processing equipment. Various
property coverages can be written as stand-alone policies or can be added to a package
policy. The commercial property business line includes property coverage written on
both a non-discounted and discounted basis as part of commercial package policies. |
|
|
|
Commercial auto Commercial auto coverages protect businesses against liability
to others for both bodily injury and property damage, medical payments to insureds and
occupants of their vehicles, physical damage to an insureds own vehicle from collision
and various other perils, and damages caused by uninsured motorists. |
|
|
|
Workers compensation Workers compensation coverage protects employers against
specified benefits payable under state or federal law for workplace injuries to
employees. We write workers compensation coverage in all of our active states except
North Dakota, Ohio and West Virginia, where coverage is provided solely by the state
instead of by private insurers. |
|
|
|
Specialty packages Specialty packages include coverages for property, liability
and business interruption tailored to meet the needs of specific industry classes, such
as artisan contractors, dentists, garage operators, financial institutions,
metalworkers, printers, religious institutions, or smaller, main street businesses.
Businessowner policies, which combine property, liability and business interruption
coverages for small businesses, are included in specialty packages. |
|
|
|
Surety and executive risk This business line includes: |
|
o |
|
Contract and commercial surety bonds, which guarantee a payment or
reimbursement for financial losses resulting from dishonesty, failure to perform and
other acts. |
|
|
o |
|
Fidelity bonds, which cover losses that policyholders incur as a result of
fraudulent acts by specified individuals or dishonest acts by employees. |
|
|
o |
|
Director and officer liability insurance, which covers liability for alleged
errors in judgment, breaches of duty and wrongful acts related to activities of
for-profit or nonprofit organizations. Our director and officer liability policy can
optionally include EPLI coverage. |
|
|
Machinery and equipment Specialized machinery and equipment coverage can provide
protection for loss or damage to boilers and machinery, including production and
computer equipment, from sudden and accidental mechanical breakdown, steam explosion,
or artificially generated electrical current. |
Our emphasis is on products that agents can market to small- to mid-size businesses in their
communities. Of our 1,289 reporting agency locations, six market only our surety and
executive risk products and one markets only our personal lines products. The remaining
1,282 locations, located in all 32 states in which we actively do business, market some or
all of our general commercial insurance products.
In 2006, our 10 highest volume commercial lines states generated 67.7 percent of our earned
premiums compared with 67.1 percent in the prior year. Earned premiums in the 10 highest
volume states rose 7.4 percent in 2006 and rose 5.0 percent in the remaining 22 states.
2006 10-K Page 10
Commercial Lines Earned Premiums by State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Percent of |
|
|
Reporting |
|
|
Avg premium |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
premiums |
|
|
total earned |
|
|
agency locations |
|
|
per location |
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
410 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
% |
|
|
219 |
|
|
$ |
1.9 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
9.9 |
|
|
|
116 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
136 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
4.0 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
Tennessee |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
389 |
|
|
|
17.2 |
% |
|
|
224 |
|
|
$ |
1.7 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Pennsylvania |
|
|
164 |
|
|
|
7.3 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
North Carolina |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
1.9 |
|
Iowa |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
Tennessee |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
Commercial Lines Insurance Marketplace
For commercial lines, our competition predominately consists of those companies that
also distribute through independent agents. The independent agencies that market our
commercial lines products typically represent four to 12 standard market insurance carriers,
including both national and regional carriers, some of which may be mutual companies.
Regional carriers traditionally have offered us the greatest competition on small- and
mid-size commercial accounts because they often are familiar with the local market and focus
on differentiating themselves through personal relationships with agencies. National
carriers traditionally have provided formidable competition on large commercial accounts and
have increasingly targeted smaller commercial accounts, marketing a service-center approach
that some agencies find efficient. In our experience, the level of competition varies state
by state and region by region, regardless of the carriers represented within a specific
agency.
Since late 2003, the softening commercial lines marketplace has been characterized by
increased competition in non-coastal markets, particularly for quality new business, and
there are no signs that trend is abating. In 2006, competition for new business continued to
intensify, and we also began to see significant market softening extend to renewals. As
market conditions have softened, we also believe distinctions between regional and national
carriers have blurred.
Over the course of 2006, anecdotal reports of very aggressive pricing became somewhat more
frequent. But on balance we believed the market remained healthy and we continued to see
underwriting taking place and terms and conditions remaining fairly stable. Generally, we
believe carriers are modifying prices rather than changing policy terms and conditions, but
we have begun to see underwriting discipline slip to capture market share in late 2006 and
early 2007.
The hurricane activity that occurred in 2005 is still having significant impacts on the cost
of catastrophe reinsurance and property pricing remains very firm in catastrophe prone
areas. We are uncertain what effect the hurricanes, and the related rise in the cost of
reinsurance, may have on commercial lines pricing in non-coastal areas throughout 2007.
Personal Lines Property Casualty Insurance Segment
The personal lines property casualty insurance segment contributed $762 million in net
earned premiums to total revenues and reported a $27 million loss before income taxes in
2006. Personal lines net earned premiums declined 5.3 percent in 2006 after rising 1.4
percent in 2005 and 6.4 percent in 2004.
We prefer to write personal lines coverage on an account basis that includes both auto and
homeowner coverages as well as coverages from the other personal business line. As a result,
we believe that personal lines is best measured and evaluated on a segment basis. However,
we provide the line of business data to summarize growth and profitability trends separately
for the three business lines:
|
|
Personal auto This business line includes personal auto coverages that protect
against liability to others for both bodily injury and property damage, medical
payments to insureds and occupants of their vehicle, |
2006 10-K Page 11
|
|
physical damage to an insureds
own vehicle from collision and various other perils, and damages caused by uninsured
motorists. In addition, many states require policies to provide first-party personal
injury protection, frequently referred to as no-fault coverage. |
|
|
|
Homeowners This business line includes homeowner coverages that protect against
losses to dwellings and contents from a wide variety of perils, as well as liability
arising out of personal activities both on and off the covered premises. The company
also offers coverage for condominium unit owners and renters. |
|
|
|
Other personal lines This includes the variety of other types of insurance
products we offer to individuals such as dwelling fire, inland marine, personal
umbrella liability and watercraft coverages. |
We market both homeowner and personal auto insurance products through 772 of our 1,289
reporting agency locations in 22 of the 32 states in which we market commercial lines
insurance. We market homeowner products through 22 locations in three additional states
(Maryland, North Carolina and West Virginia.) The remaining 495 locations are in states
where we either do not actively market these products or where we have determined, in
conjunction with agency management, that our personal lines products are not appropriate for
their agencies at this time.
In 2006, our 10 highest volume personal lines states generated 84.7 percent of our earned
premiums compared with 83.3 percent in the prior year. Earned premiums in the 10 highest
volume states declined 3.7 percent in 2006 and declined 13.1 percent in the remaining
states.
Personal Lines Earned Premiums by State
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Percent of |
|
|
Reporting |
|
|
Avg premium |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
premiums |
|
|
total earned |
|
|
agency locations |
|
|
per location |
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
285 |
|
|
|
37.4 |
% |
|
|
204 |
|
|
$ |
1.4 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
8.5 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
1.0 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
8.3 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Alabama |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
Florida |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
2.8 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year ended December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ohio |
|
$ |
299 |
|
|
|
37.2 |
% |
|
|
211 |
|
|
$ |
1.4 |
|
Indiana |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Georgia |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
46 |
|
|
|
1.3 |
|
Illinois |
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
7.0 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
Michigan |
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
|
|
0.6 |
|
Kentucky |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Alabama |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
4.4 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
Wisconsin |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
Virginia |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
Florida |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
Personal Lines Insurance Marketplace
In addition to carriers that market through independent agents, our personal lines
competition also includes carriers that market through captive agents and direct writers,
which our agencies clients may investigate independently. The independent agencies that
market our personal lines products typically represent five to eight standard personal lines
carriers.
Prior to 2003, the industry had experienced several years of rising personal auto and
homeowner rates and stricter enforcement of underwriting standards across the industry.
Since 2003, we have seen increased competition in the personal lines marketplace, driven by
industrywide improvement in results and favorable frequency and severity trends. The
increased competition in the past several years also reflected implementation of tiered
rating systems by a growing number of carriers. Carriers that have adopted these systems use
multiple variables to segment the market, relying in part on credit-based information and
offering a greater number of rate levels.
We expect that competition in the personal auto and homeowners markets will continue to
increase over the next 12 to 24 months. Despite the record level of industrywide catastrophe
losses in 2005 and 2004, many personal lines carriers have reported strong operating results
in the past three years and continue to have healthy capital to support business growth. We
believe these carriers are focused on gaining market share through the introduction of new
products and services, increased advertising expenditures and the use of tiered rating
systems that they believe allow them to target higher quality risks with lower prices.
2006 10-K Page 12
Life Insurance Segment
The life insurance segment contributed $115 million of net earned premiums and a $1
million loss before income taxes in 2006. Life insurance segment profitability is discussed
in detail in Item 7, Life Insurance Results of Operations, Page 54. Life insurance net
earned premiums grew 7.9 percent in 2006, 5.7 percent in 2005 and 5.5 percent in 2004.
The overall mission of our company is supported by The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company.
Cincinnati Life helps meet the needs of our agencies, including increasing and diversifying
agency revenues. We primarily focus on life products that produce revenue growth through a
steady stream of premium payments. By diversifying revenue and profitability for both the
agency and our company, this strategy enhances the already strong relationship built by the
combination of the property casualty and life companies.
Cincinnati Life seeks to become the life insurance carrier of choice for the independent
agencies that work with our property casualty operations. We emphasize up-to-date products,
responsive underwriting and high quality service as well as competitive commissions. At
year-end 2006, approximately 81 percent of our 1,289 property casualty reporting agency
locations offered Cincinnati Lifes products to their clients. We also develop life business
from 507 other independent life insurance agencies. We are careful to solicit business from
these other agencies in a manner that does not conflict with or compete with the marketing
and sales efforts of our property casualty agencies.
Business Lines
Four lines of business term insurance, universal life insurance, worksite products
and whole life insurance account for approximately 90.6 percent of the life insurance
segments revenues:
|
|
Term insurance policies under which a death benefit is payable only if the
insured dies during a specific period of time or term. For policies without a return of
premium provision, no benefit is payable if the insured survives to the end of the
term. For policies with a return of premium provision, a benefit equal to the sum of
all paid premiums is payable if the insured survives to the end of the term. While
premiums are fixed, they must be paid as scheduled. The proposed insured is evaluated
using normal underwriting standards. |
|
|
|
Universal life insurance long-duration life insurance policies. Contract premiums are
neither fixed nor guaranteed; however, the contract does specify a minimum interest
crediting rate and a maximum cost of insurance charge and expense charge. Premiums are
not fixed and may be varied by the contract owner. The cash values available as a loan
collateralized by the cash surrender value to withdrawing policyholders are not
guaranteed and depend on the amount and timing of actual premium payments and the
amount of actual contract assessments. The proposed insured is evaluated using normal
underwriting standards. |
|
|
|
Worksite products term insurance, whole life insurance, universal life and disability
insurance offered to employees through their employer. Premiums are collected by the
employer using payroll deduction. Polices are issued using a simplified underwriting
approach and for smaller face amounts than similar, regularly underwritten policies.
Worksite insurance products provide our property casualty agency force with excellent
cross-serving opportunities for both commercial and personal accounts. Agents report
that offering worksite marketing to employees of their commercial accounts provides a
benefit to the employees at low cost to the employer. Worksite marketing also connects
agents with new customers who may not have previously benefited from receiving the
services of a professional independent insurance agent. |
|
|
|
Whole life insurance policies that provide life insurance for the entire lifetime of
the insured; the death benefit is guaranteed never to decrease and premiums are
guaranteed never to increase. While premiums are fixed, they must be paid as scheduled.
These policies provide guaranteed cash values that are available as a loan
collateralized by the cash surrender value to withdrawing policyholders. The proposed
insured is evaluated using normal underwriting standards. |
In addition, Cincinnati Life markets:
|
|
Disability income insurance provides monthly benefits to offset the loss of income when
the insured person is unable to work due to accident or illness. |
|
|
|
Deferred annuities provide regular income payments that commence after the end of a
specified period or when the annuitant attains a specified age. During the deferral
period, any payments made under the contract accumulate at the crediting rate declared
by the company but not less than a contract-specified guaranteed minimum interest rate.
A deferred annuity may be surrendered during the deferral period for a cash value equal
to the accumulated payments plus interest less the surrender charge, if any. |
|
|
|
Immediate annuities provide some combination of regular income and lump sum payments in
exchange for a single premium. Most of the immediate annuities written by our life
insurance segment are purchased by our property casualty companies to settle casualty
claims. |
2006 10-K Page 13
Life Insurance Marketplace
Our property casualty agencies comprise the main distribution system for our life
insurance products. Other life insurance carriers continue to expand the use of
nontraditional distribution channels such as banks and financial planners as alternatives to
the agency channel. We intend to market solely through independent agencies, with an
emphasis on enhancing our relationships with the agencies affiliated with our property
casualty insurance operations.
When marketing through our property casualty agencies we have several specific competitive
advantages:
|
|
Because our property casualty operations are held in high regard, the property casualty
agencys management is predisposed to consider carefully our proposals to sell our life
products. |
|
|
|
All of our marketing efforts, property casualty and life, are directed by our field
marketing department, which assures consistency of message. Our life field marketing
representatives are available to meet face-to-face with the agency personnel
responsible for life insurance production. |
|
|
|
The resources of our life headquarters underwriters and other associates are available
to the agents and field team to assist in the placement of business. We find fewer and
fewer of our competitors provide direct, personal contact between the agent and the
insurance carrier. |
We continue to emphasize the cross-serving opportunities between worksite marketing of life
insurance products and the property casualty agencys commercial accounts. In both the
property casualty and independent life agency distribution systems we enjoy the advantages
of offering competitive, up-to-date products, providing close personal attention and
exhibiting financial strength and stability.
|
|
We primarily offer products targeted at addressing the needs of businesses that
require key person coverage and individuals who require mortality coverage. |
|
|
|
Term insurance is our largest life insurance product line. We continue to introduce new
term products with features our agents indicate are important, such as a return of
premium rider. Reaction to our term portfolio was favorable in 2006 with approximately
25 percent of applications requesting the return-of-premium feature. |
|
|
|
In 2007 we plan to enhance our term and other life insurance products, including an
expanded worksite product portfolio, and investigate new survivor universal life and
whole life products. The priority is expansion within the insurance agencies marketing
our property casualty insurance products. |
Because of our strong capital position, we can offer a competitive product portfolio
including guaranteed products, giving our agents a marketing edge. Our life insurance
company maintained strong insurer financial strength ratings in 2006: A.M. Best A+
(Superior), Fitch AA (Very Strong) and Standard & Poors AA- (Very Strong). Our life
insurance company has not chosen to establish a Moodys rating.
Offsetting our competitive advantages, we continue to see consolidation within the life
insurance industry and an increased presence of large, well-capitalized carriers. The larger
carriers can offer a broader product line, including variable and equity-indexed products.
We do not offer variable or equity-indexed products because of the associated financial risk. That decision can affect our premium
growth, particularly during times when the stock market is performing well.
Current statutory laws and regulations require redundant reserves, particularly for
preferred risk underwriting classes. These redundant reserves, in turn, depress statutory
earnings and require a large commitment of capital. Redundant reserves are a significant
issue, not just for our life insurance operations, but for all writers of term insurance and
universal life with secondary guarantees. However, larger carriers may be able to better
absorb or may be able to securitize the statutory reserve strain associated with
competitively priced term insurance and universal life with secondary guarantees.
The National Association of Insurance Commissioners recognizes the problems caused by
redundant reserves and is considering a principles-based reserving system rather than the
current formulaic system. While still capturing all material risks, a principles-based
system would allow a company to use its own experience, subject to credibility standards and
appropriate margins for uncertainty. Also, under the proposed principles-based system, the
insurer would fully document and disclose all its assumptions and methods to regulatory
officials.
Investments Segment
The investment segment contributed $1.254 billion of our total revenues in 2006,
primarily from net investment income and realized investment gains and losses from
investment portfolios managed for the holding company and each of the operating
subsidiaries. After deducting interest credited to contract holders of the life insurance
segment, the investments segment contributed $1.200 billion of income before income taxes,
or 90.3 percent of our total income before income taxes.
2006 10-K Page 14
The fair value (market value) of our investment portfolio was $13.699 billion and $12.657
billion at year-end 2006 and 2005, respectively. The cash we generate from insurance
operations historically has been invested in three broad categories of investments:
|
|
Fixed-maturity investments Includes taxable and tax-exempt bonds and redeemable
preferred stocks |
|
|
|
Equity investments Includes common and nonredeemable preferred stocks |
|
|
|
Short-term investments Primarily commercial paper |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
|
At December 31, 2005 |
|
(In millions) |
|
Book value |
|
|
Fair value |
|
|
Book value |
|
|
Fair value |
|
|
Taxable fixed maturities |
|
$ |
3,357 |
|
|
$ |
3,389 |
|
|
$ |
3,304 |
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
Tax-exempt fixed maturities |
|
|
2,382 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
2,083 |
|
|
|
2,117 |
|
Common equities |
|
|
2,400 |
|
|
|
7,564 |
|
|
|
1,961 |
|
|
|
6,936 |
|
Preferred equities |
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
170 |
|
Short-term investments |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
8,455 |
|
|
$ |
13,699 |
|
|
$ |
7,590 |
|
|
$ |
12,657 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
During 2006, our allocation of cash flows for new fixed-maturities and equity
investments more closely approximated our historical levels. The primary reason for the
increase in the market value of the common equity portfolio in 2006 was market appreciation
of our holdings. The sale of our Alltel common stock and other equity holdings more than offset new equity
purchases. In 2005 and the second half of 2004, almost all of our insurance subsidiarys
available cash flow was used to purchase fixed-maturity investments. Our objective was to
bring the property casualty subsidiarys ratio of common stock to statutory surplus in line
with our historic sub-100 percent level. The ratio of common stock to statutory surplus for
the property casualty insurance subsidiary portfolio was 97.3 percent at year-end 2006
compared with 96.4 percent at year-end 2005 and 103.5 percent at year-end 2004.
During the same period, we took actions to reduce the parent companys ratio of investment
assets to total assets for the parent company below 40 percent, for the reasons we discuss
in Item 1A, Risk Factors, Page 20. The ratio of investment assets to total assets for the
parent company was 31.5 percent at year-end 2006 compared with 33.9 percent at year-end 2005
and 36.3 percent at year-end 2004.
Going forward, we also will take into consideration insurance department regulations and
ratings agency comments, as well as the trend in these ratios, to determine what portion of
new cash flow should be invested in equity securities at the parent and insurance subsidiary
levels.
Fixed-maturity and Short-term Investments
By maintaining a well diversified fixed-maturity portfolio, we attempt to reduce
overall risk. We invest new money in the bond market on a continuous basis, targeting what
we believe to be optimal risk-adjusted after-tax yields. Risk, in this context, includes
interest rate, call, reinvestment rate, credit and liquidity risk. We do not make a
concerted effort to alter duration on a portfolio basis in response to anticipated movements
in interest rates. By continuously investing in the bond market, we build a broad,
diversified portfolio that we believe mitigates the impact of adverse economic factors. In
recent years, we have taken into account the trend toward a flatter corporate yield curve by
purchasing higher-quality corporate bonds with intermediate maturities as well as tax-exempt
municipal bonds and U.S. agency paper. Our focus on long-term total return may result in
variability in the levels of realized and unrealized investment gains or losses from one
period to the next.
We place a strong emphasis on purchasing current income-producing securities for the
insurance companies portfolios. Within the fixed-maturity portfolio, we invest in a blend
of taxable and tax-exempt securities to minimize our corporate taxes. With the exception of
U.S. agency paper (government-sponsored entities), no individual issuers securities
accounted for more than 0.8 percent of the fixed-maturity portfolio at December 31, 2006.
Taxable Fixed-maturities
Our taxable fixed-maturity portfolio (at fair value) includes:
|
|
$972 million in U.S. agency paper, which is rated AAA by both Moodys and Standard
& Poors. |
|
|
|
$1.818 billion in investment-grade corporate bonds that have a Moodys rating at or
above Baa 3 or a Standard & Poors rating at or above BBB-. |
|
|
|
$321 million in high-yield corporate bonds that have a Moodys rating below Baa 3
or a Standard & Poors rating below BBB-. |
|
|
|
$278 million in convertible bonds and redeemable preferred stocks. |
We seek to balance current income with potential changes in market value as well as changes
in credit risk when determining whether or not to hold these securities to maturity.
Similar to the equity portfolio, the taxable fixed-maturity portfolio is most heavily
concentrated in the financials sector, including banks, brokerage, finance and investment
and insurance companies. The financials sector
2006 10-K Page 15
represented 27.2 percent and 27.7 percent, respectively, of book value and fair value of the taxable fixed-maturity portfolio at
December 31, 2006, compared with 26.1 percent and 26.6 percent of book value and fair value
at December 31, 2005. Although it is our largest concentration in a single sector, we
believe our percentage in the financials sector is below average for the corporate bond
market as a whole. No other sector or industry accounted for more than 10 percent of the
taxable fixed-maturity portfolio.
Tax-exempt Fixed-maturities
We traditionally have purchased municipal bonds focusing on schools and essential
services, such as sewer, water or others. While no single municipal issuer accounted for
more than 1.1 percent of the tax-exempt municipal bond portfolio at December 31, 2006, there
are higher concentrations within individual states. Holdings in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan,
Ohio and Texas accounted for 61.9 percent of the municipal bond portfolio at year-end 2006.
Fixed-maturity and Short-term Portfolio Ratings
Our investments in U.S. agency paper and insured municipal bonds over the past several
years have led to a significant rise in the percentage of A and higher rated fixed-maturity
and short-term holdings, based on fair value. The majority of our non-rated securities are
tax-exempt municipal bonds from smaller municipalities that chose not to pursue a credit
rating. Credit ratings as of December 31 for the fixed-maturity and short-term portfolio
were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
|
At December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Percent |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
value |
|
|
to total |
|
|
value |
|
|
to total |
|
|
Moodys Ratings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aaa, Aa, A |
|
$ |
4,039 |
|
|
|
68.5 |
% |
|
$ |
3,651 |
|
|
|
65.8 |
% |
Baa |
|
|
1,086 |
|
|
|
18.4 |
|
|
|
1,094 |
|
|
|
19.7 |
|
Ba |
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
324 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
B |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Caa |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
Ca |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
C |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
Non-rated |
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,900 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
5,551 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standard & Poors Ratings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
AAA, AA, A |
|
$ |
3,631 |
|
|
|
61.5 |
% |
|
$ |
3,233 |
|
|
|
58.3 |
% |
BBB |
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
17.7 |
|
|
|
1,112 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
BB |
|
|
310 |
|
|
|
5.3 |
|
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
6.4 |
|
B |
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
2.2 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
CCC |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
CC |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
D |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
Non-rated |
|
|
774 |
|
|
|
13.1 |
|
|
|
733 |
|
|
|
13.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,900 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
5,551 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attributes of the fixed-maturity portfolio include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
Weighted average yield-to-book value |
|
5.3 % |
|
5.4% |
Weighted average maturity |
|
8.7 yrs |
|
9.5 yrs |
Effective duration |
|
5.1 yrs |
|
5.2 yrs |
|
We discuss the maturity of our fixed-maturity portfolio in Item 8, Note 2 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 90.
Equity Investments
Our equity investment portfolio includes both common stocks and nonredeemable preferred
stocks. Approximately 82.4 percent of the equity portfolio is made up of a core group of
common stocks that we monitor closely to gain an in-depth understanding of their
organizations and industries. The portfolio also includes a broader group of smaller
positions that are a source of trading flexibility and other risk management advantages.
Following the sale of our Alltel common stock holding, average dividend yield-to-cost for
our equity investments declined to 9.9 percent at December 31, 2006, compared with 11.7
percent at December 31, 2005.
Common Stocks
At December 31, 2006, 32.7 percent of our common stock holdings (measured by fair
value) were held at the parent company level. Our common stock investments generally are
securities with annual dividend yields
2006 10-K Page 16
ranging from 1.5 percent to 4.0 percent and with histories of dividend increases. Other criteria we evaluate include increasing sales and
earnings, proven management and a favorable outlook. When investing in common stock, we seek
to identify some companies in which we can accumulate more than 5 percent of their
outstanding shares. At year-end 2006, we held more than 5 percent of three companies: Fifth
Third, FirstMerit Corporation and Piedmont Natural Gas Company.
Those holdings are part of a core group of common stocks in which we hold a fair value of at
least $100 million each. At year-end 2006, there were 13 holdings in that core group.
Largest Common Stock Holdings
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of and for the year ended December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned |
|
|
Earned |
|
|
|
Actual |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Percent of |
|
|
dividend |
|
|
dividend to |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
cost |
|
|
value |
|
|
fair value |
|
|
income |
|
|
fair value |
|
|
Fifth Third Bancorp |
|
$ |
283 |
|
|
$ |
2,979 |
|
|
|
39.4 |
% |
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
|
3.9 |
% |
Exxon Mobil Corporation |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
9.1 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
The Procter & Gamble Company |
|
|
192 |
|
|
|
469 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
National City Corporation |
|
|
171 |
|
|
|
358 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
PNC Financial Services Group, Inc. |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
348 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
AllianceBernstein Holding L.P. |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
U.S. Bancorp |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Johnson & Johnson |
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Wyeth |
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
Wells Fargo & Company |
|
|
96 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
3.0 |
|
Piedmont Natural Gas Company, Inc. |
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
2.0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Sky Financial Group, Inc. |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
1.8 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
FirstMerit Corporation |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
1.7 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
All other common stock holdings |
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
1,137 |
|
|
|
15.1 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,400 |
|
|
$ |
7,564 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
$ |
241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In January 2006, we sold 12,700,164 shares of our holdings of Alltel after selling
475,000 shares in December 2005. Alltel had been our second largest common stock holding.
Alltel was an excellent investment for the company for over 40 years, bringing an increasing
flow of dividend income and healthy market value appreciation. Because of the restructuring
that Alltel announced in late 2005, we determined that it no longer met our investment
parameters.
This emphasis on a small group of equities and long-term investment horizon has resulted in
significant concentrations within the portfolio, as this buy-and-hold strategy over many
years has built up significant accumulated unrealized appreciation. At year-end 2006, the
largest industry concentrations within our common stock holdings were the financials sector at 66.6 percent of total fair value and the
healthcare sector at 7.9 percent.
Nonredeemable Preferred Stocks
We evaluate preferred stocks similar to the evaluation we make for fixed-maturity
investments, seeking attractive relative yields. We generally focus on investment-grade
preferred stocks issued by companies that have a strong history of paying common dividends,
which provides us with another layer of protection. Additionally, when possible we seek out
preferred stocks that offer a dividend received deduction.
Additional information regarding the composition of investments is included in Item 8, Note
2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 90.
Other
We report as Other the operations of the parent company, CFC Investment Company and
CinFin Capital Management Company (excluding investment activities) as well as other income
of our insurance subsidiary. As of December 31, 2006, CFC Investment Company had 2,897
accounts and $108 million in receivables, compared with 2,815 accounts and $105 million in
receivables at December 31, 2005. As of December 31, 2006, CinFin Capital had 64
institutional, corporate and individual clients and $960 million under management, compared
with 64 and $864 million at December 31, 2005. Assets under management rose because a single
account placed additional funds with CinFin Capital in 2006.
Regulation
State Regulation
The business of insurance primarily is regulated by state law. Although our insurance
subsidiaries are domiciled in Ohio and primarily subject to Ohio insurance laws and
regulations, we also are subject to state regulatory authorities of all states in which we
write insurance. The state laws and regulations that have the most significant effect on our
insurance operations and financial reporting are discussed below.
2006 10-K Page 17
|
|
Insurance Holding Company Regulation Our subsidiaries primarily engage in the
property casualty insurance business and secondarily in the life insurance business,
both subject to regulation as an insurance holding company system by the State of Ohio.
These regulations require that we annually furnish financial and other information
about the operations of the individual companies within the holding company system. All
transactions within a holding company affecting insurers must be fair and equitable.
Notice to the state insurance commissioner is required prior to the consummation of
transactions affecting the ownership or control of an insurer and prior to certain
material transactions between an insurer and any person or entity in its holding
company group. In addition, some of those transactions cannot be consummated without
the commissioners prior approval. |
|
|
|
Subsidiary Dividends The dividend-paying capacity of our insurance subsidiaries
is regulated by the laws of Ohio, the domiciliary state. This regulation requires an
insurance subsidiary to provide a 10-day advance informational notice to the Ohio
insurance department prior to payment of any dividend or distribution to its
shareholders (all of our smaller insurance subsidiaries are 100 percent owned by The
Cincinnati Insurance Company, which is 100 percent owned by Cincinnati Financial
Corporation). Ordinary dividends must be paid from earned surplus, which is the amount
of unassigned funds set forth in an insurance subsidiarys most recent statutory
financial statement. |
|
|
|
The Ohio Department of Insurance must give prior approval before the payment of an
extraordinary dividend by an insurance subsidiary to shareholders. You can find
information about the dividends paid by our insurance subsidiary in 2006 in Item 8, Note
8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 93. |
|
|
|
Insurance Operations All of our insurance subsidiaries are subject to licensing
and supervision by departments of insurance in the states in which they do business.
The nature and extent of such regulations vary, but generally have their source in
statutes that delegate regulatory, supervisory and administrative powers to state
insurance departments. Such regulations, supervision and administration of the
insurance subsidiaries include, among others, the standards of solvency which must be
met and maintained; the licensing of insurers and their agents; the nature and
limitations on investments; deposits of securities for the benefit of policyholders;
regulation of policy forms and premium rates; policy cancellations and non-renewals;
periodic examination of the affairs of insurance companies; annual and other reports
required to be filed on the financial condition of insurers or for other purposes;
requirements regarding reserves for unearned premiums, losses and other matters; the
nature of and limitations on dividends to policyholders and shareholders; the nature
and extent of required participation in insurance guaranty funds; and the involuntary assumption of
hard-to-place or high-risk insurance business, primarily workers compensation insurance. |
|
|
|
Insurance Guaranty Associations Each state has insurance guaranty association
laws under which the associations may assess life and property casualty insurers doing
business in the state for certain obligations of insolvent insurance companies to
policyholders and claimants. Typically, states assess each member insurer in an amount
related to the insurers proportionate share of business written by all member insurers
in the state. Our insurance subsidiaries received a net refund of $500,000 and $3
million from guaranty associations in 2006 and 2005. We cannot predict the amount and
timing of any future assessments or refunds on our insurance subsidiaries under these
laws. |
|
|
|
Shared Market and Joint Underwriting Plans State insurance regulation requires
insurers to participate in assigned risk plans, reinsurance facilities and joint
underwriting associations, which are mechanisms that generally provide applicants with
various basic insurance coverages when they are not available in voluntary markets.
Such mechanisms are most commonly instituted for automobile and workers compensation
insurance, but many states also mandate participation in FAIR Plans or Windstorm Plans,
which provide basic property coverages. Participation is based upon the amount of a
companys voluntary market share in a particular state for the classes of insurance
involved. Underwriting results related to these organizations, which tend to be adverse
to our company, have been immaterial to our results of operations. |
|
|
|
Statutory Accounting For public reporting, insurance companies prepare financial
statements in accordance with GAAP. However, certain data also must be calculated
according to statutory accounting rules as defined in the NAICs Accounting Practices
and Procedures Manual. |
|
|
|
While not a substitute for any GAAP measure of performance, statutory data frequently is
used by industry analysts and other recognized reporting sources to facilitate
comparisons of the performance of insurance companies. |
|
|
|
Insurance Reserves State insurance laws require that property casualty and life
insurance subsidiaries analyze the adequacy of reserves annually. Our appointed
actuaries must submit an opinion that reserves are adequate for policy claims-paying
obligations and related expenses. |
|
|
|
Risk-Based Capital Requirements The NAICs risk-based capital (RBC) requirements
for property casualty and life insurers serve as an early warning tool for the NAIC and
the state regulators to identify companies that may be undercapitalized and may merit
further regulatory action. The NAIC has a standard formula for |
2006 10-K Page 18
|
|
annually assessing RBC. The formula for calculating RBC for property casualty companies takes into account
asset and credit risks but places more emphasis on underwriting factors for reserving
and pricing. The formula for calculating RBC for life insurance companies takes into
account factors relating to insurance, business, asset and interest rate risks. |
Federal Regulation
Although the federal government and its regulatory agencies generally do not directly
regulate the business of insurance, federal initiatives often have an impact. Some of the
current and proposed federal measures that may significantly affect our business are
discussed below.
|
|
The Terrorism Risk Insurance Act of 2002 (TRIA) TRIA was signed into law on
November 26, 2002, and extended on December 22, 2005, in a revised form. TRIA provides
a temporary federal backstop for losses related to the writing of the terrorism peril
in property casualty insurance policies. TRIA now is scheduled to expire December 31,
2007. Under regulations promulgated under this statute, insurers are required to offer
terrorism coverage for certain lines of property casualty insurance, including
property, commercial multi-peril, fire, ocean marine, inland marine, liability,
aircraft, surety and workers compensation. In the event of a terrorism event defined
by TRIA, the federal government will reimburse terrorism claim payments subject to the
insurers deductible. The deductible is calculated as a percentage of subject written
premiums for the preceding calendar year. Our deductible was $318 million (17.5 percent
of 2005 subject premiums) in 2006, $328 million (15 percent of 2004 subject premiums)
in 2005 and $199 million (10 percent of 2003 subject premiums) in 2004. For 2007, the
deductible is an estimated $388 million (20.0 percent of 2006 subject premiums). |
|
|
|
Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) We protect
consumer health information pursuant to regulations promulgated under HIPAA.
Regulations effective April 14, 2003, require health care providers such as doctors and
hospitals, as well as health and long-term care insurers and health care
clearinghouses, to institute physical and procedural safeguards to protect the health
records of patients and insureds. Effective October 16, 2003, additional regulations
required health plans to electronically transmit and receive standardized health care
information. These rules and regulations have had a minimal effect on us, as our health insurance writings are limited to our
self-funded health plan for our associates and a small number of run-off medical and
hospital expense insurance policies. We do not actively market health, medical and
hospital expense insurance policies. |
|
|
|
Office on Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) Subject to an Executive Order signed on
September 24, 2001, intended to thwart financing of terrorists and sponsors of
terrorism, financial institutions were required to block and report transactions and
attempted transactions between their organization and persons and organizations named
in a list published by OFAC. We currently use a combination of software, third-party
vendor and manual searches to accomplish our transaction blocking and reporting
activities. |
|
|
|
Investment Advisers Act of 1940 Our subsidiary, CinFin Capital Management
Company, operates an investment advisory business and is therefore subject to
regulation by the SEC as a registered investment adviser under the Investment Advisers
Act of 1940. This law imposes certain annual reporting, recordkeeping, client
disclosure and compliance obligations on CinFin Capital Management. |
2006 10-K Page 19
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Our business involves various risks and uncertainties that may affect achievement of
our business objectives. Many of the risks could have ramifications across our integrated
business activities. For example, while risks related to setting insurance rates and
establishing and adjusting loss reserves are insurance activities, errors in these areas
could have an impact on our investment activities. The following discussion should be viewed
as a starting point for understanding the significant risks we face. It is not a definitive
summary of their potential impact or of our strategies to manage and control the risks.
Please see Item 7, Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results
of Operations, Page 31, for a discussion of those strategies.
The risks and uncertainties below are not the only ones we face. There are additional risks
and uncertainties that we currently do not believe are material. There also may be risks and
uncertainties of which we are not aware. If any risks or uncertainties discussed here
develop into actual events, they could have a material adverse effect on our business,
financial condition or results of operations. In that case, the market price of our common
stock could decline materially.
Readers should carefully consider this information together with the other information we
have provided in this report and in other reports and materials we file periodically with
the Securities and Exchange Commission as well as news releases and other information we
disseminate publicly.
We rely exclusively on independent insurance agents to distribute our products.
We market our products through independent, non-exclusive insurance agents. These
agents are not obligated to promote our products and can and do sell our competitors
products. We must offer insurance products that meet the needs of these agencies and their
clients. We need to maintain good relationships with the agencies that market our products.
If we do not, these agencies may market our competitors products instead of ours, which may
lead to us having a less desirable mix of business and could affect our results of
operations.
Events or conditions that could diminish a competitive advantage that our independent
agencies enjoy:
|
|
Downgrade of the financial strength ratings of our insurance subsidiaries. We
believe our strong insurer financial strength ratings, in particular the A++ rating
from A.M. Best of our property casualty insurance subsidiaries, are an important
competitive advantage. Only 17 other insurance groups, or 1.6 percent of all insurance
groups, qualify for the A++, A.M. Bests highest rating. If our property casualty
ratings were downgraded, our agents might find it more difficult to market our products
or might choose to emphasize the products of other carriers. |
|
|
|
Concerns that doing business with us is difficult or perceptions that our level of
service is no longer a distinguishing characteristic in the marketplace. This could
occur if agents or policyholders believe that we were no longer providing the prompt,
reliable personal service that has long been a distinguishing characteristic of our
insurance operations. |
|
|
|
Delays in the development, implementation, performance and benefits of technology
projects and enhancements or independent agent perceptions that our technology
solutions are inadequate to match their needs. |
A reduction in the number of independent agencies marketing our products, the failure of
these agencies to successfully market our products or the choice of these agencies to reduce
their writings of our products could affect our results of operations if we were unable to
replace them with agencies that produce adequate premiums.
Further, policyholders may choose a competitors product rather than our own because of real
or perceived differences in price, terms and conditions, coverage or service. If the quality
of the independent agencies with which we do business were to decline, that also might cause
policyholders to purchase their insurance through different agencies or channels. Increased
comfort in Internet purchasing could further reduce independent agencies writings of
personal lines products.
Please see Item 1, Our Business and Our Strategy, Page 1, for a discussion of our
relationships with independent insurance agents.
Competition
could adversely affect our ability to sell policies at rates we deem adequate.
The insurance industry is cyclical and intensely competitive. From time to time, the
insurance industry goes through prolonged periods of intense competition during which it is
more difficult to attract new business and maintain profitability. Competition in our
insurance business is based on many factors, including:
|
|
Competitiveness of premiums charged |
|
|
|
Underwriting and pricing methodologies that allow insurers to identify and flexibly
price risks |
|
|
|
Underwriting discipline |
|
|
|
Terms and conditions of insurance coverage |
|
|
|
Speed at which products are brought to market |
2006 10-K Page 20
|
|
Technological innovation |
|
|
|
Ability to control expenses |
|
|
|
Adequacy of financial strength ratings by independent ratings agencies such as A.M.
Best |
|
|
|
Quality of services provided to agents and policyholders |
|
|
|
Claims satisfaction and reputation |
If we were unable to compete effectively because of one or more of these factors, our
premium writings could decline and our results of operations and financial condition could
be materially adversely affected.
Please see Item 7, Commercial Lines, Personal Lines and Life Insurance Results of
Operations, Page 42, Page 49, and Page 54, for a discussion of our competitive position in
the insurance marketplace.
Managing
technology initiatives and meeting new data security requirements are significant challenges.
While technology can streamline many business processes and ultimately reduce the cost
of operations, technology initiatives present short-term cost and implementation risks. In
addition, we may have inaccurate expense projections, implementation schedules or
expectations regarding the efficacy of the end product. These issues could escalate over
time.
Data security is subject to increasing regulation. We face rising costs and competing time
constraints in meeting compliance requirements of new and proposed regulations. Computer
viruses, hackers and other external hazards could expose our data systems to security
breaches. These increased risks and expanding regulatory requirements could expose us to
data loss litigation, damages and significant increases in compliance costs.
Please see Item 1, Technology Solutions, Page 4, for a discussion of our technology
initiatives.
The
effects of changes in industry practices and regulations on our business are uncertain.
As industry practices and legal, judicial, social and other environmental conditions
change, unexpected and unintended issues related to insurance pricing, claims and coverage
may emerge. These issues may adversely affect our business by impeding our ability to obtain
adequate rates for covered risks, extending coverage beyond our underwriting intent or by
increasing the number or size of claims. In some instances, unforeseeable emerging and
latent claim and coverage issues may not become apparent until some time after we have
issued the insurance policies that could be affected by the changes. As a result, the full
extent of liability under our insurance contracts may not be known for many years after a
policy is issued. The effects of such changes could adversely affect our results of
operations.
Please see
Item 7, Property Casualty and Life Insurance Reserves, Page 63 and Page 69, for a
discussion of our reserving practices.
Our
loss reserves, our largest liability, are based on estimates and could be inadequate to cover our actual losses.
Our financial statements are prepared using GAAP. These principles require us to make
estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts reported in the Consolidated Financial
Statements and accompanying Notes. Actual results could differ materially from those
estimates. For a discussion of the significant accounting policies we use to prepare our
financial statements and the material implications of uncertainties associated with the
methods, assumptions and estimates underlying our critical accounting policies, please refer
to Item 7, Property Casualty Insurance Loss And Loss Expense Reserves, Page 35, and Item 8,
Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 85.
Our most critical accounting estimate is loss reserves. Loss reserves are the amounts we
expect to pay for covered claims and expenses we incur to settle those claims. The loss
reserves we establish in our financial statements represent an estimate of amounts needed to
pay and administer claims arising from insured events that have occurred, including events
that have not yet been reported to us. Loss reserves are estimates and are inherently
uncertain; they do not and cannot represent an exact measure of liability. Accordingly, our
loss reserves for past periods could prove to be inadequate to cover our actual losses and
related expenses. Any changes in these estimates are reflected in our results of operations
during the period in which the changes are made. An increase in our loss reserves would
decrease earnings, while a decrease in our loss reserves would increase earnings.
The estimation process for unpaid loss and loss expense obligations involves uncertainty by
its very nature. We continually review the estimates and adjust the reserves as facts
regarding individual claims develop, additional losses are reported and new information
becomes known. Adjustments due to loss development on prior years are reflected in the
calendar year in which they are identified.
Unforeseen losses, the type and magnitude of which we cannot predict, may emerge in the
future. These additional losses could arise from changes in the legal environment,
catastrophic events, increases in loss severity or frequency, or other causes. Such future
losses could be substantial.
2006 10-K Page 21
Please see
Item 7, Property Casualty and Life Insurance Reserves, Page 63 and Page 69, for a
discussion of our reserving practices.
We
could experience an unusually high level of losses due to catastrophic or terrorism events or risk concentrations.
Our financial condition, cash flow and results of operations depend on our ability to
underwrite and set rates accurately for a full spectrum of risks. We establish our pricing
based on assumptions regarding the level of losses that will occur within classes of
business, geographic regions and other criteria. A number of factors could cause our
assumptions regarding future losses to be inaccurate.
In the normal course of our business, we provide coverage against perils for which estimates
of losses are highly uncertain, in particular catastrophic and terrorism events.
Catastrophes can be caused by a number of events, including hurricanes, tornadoes,
windstorms, earthquakes, hailstorms, explosions, severe winter weather and fires. Due to the
nature of these events, we are unable to predict precisely the frequency or potential cost
of catastrophe occurrences. The extent of losses from a catastrophe is a function of both
the total amount of insured exposure in the area affected by the event and the severity of
the event.
We have catastrophe exposure to:
|
|
Hurricanes in the gulf and southeastern coastal regions. |
|
|
|
Earthquakes in the New Madrid fault zone, which lies within the central Mississippi
valley, extending from northeast Arkansas through southeast Missouri, western Tennessee
and western Kentucky to southern Illinois, southern Indiana and parts of Ohio. |
|
|
|
Tornado, wind and hail in the Midwest and Southeast and, to a certain extent, the
mid-Atlantic. |
We have identified terrorism exposure to general commercial risks in the metropolitan
Chicago area as well as small co-op utilities, small shopping malls and small colleges
throughout our 32 active states.
Additionally, our life insurance subsidiary could be adversely affected in the event of a
terrorist event or an epidemic such as the avian flu, particularly if the epidemic were to
affect a broad range of the population beyond just the very young or the very old.
Our results of operations would be adversely affected if the level of losses we experienced
over a period of time exceeded our actuarially determined expectations. In addition, our
financial condition would be adversely affected if we were required to sell securities prior
to maturity or at unfavorable prices to pay an unusually high level of loss and loss
expenses. Securities pricing might be even less favorable if a number of insurance companies
needed to sell securities during a short period of time because of unusually high losses
from catastrophic events.
Our geographic concentration ties our performance to business, economic and regulatory
conditions in certain states. We market our property casualty insurance product in 32
states, but our business is concentrated in the Midwest and Southeast. We also have exposure
in states where we do not actively market insurance when clients of our independent agencies
have business or properties in multiple states.
The Cincinnati Insurance Company also participates in three assumed reinsurance treaties
with two reinsurers that spread the risk of very high catastrophe losses among many
insurers. In 2007, we have exposure of up to $8 million of assumed losses in three layers,
from $875 million to $1.500 billion, from a single event under an assumed reinsurance treaty
for Munich Re Group. The other two assumed reinsurance treaties are immaterial.
In the event of a severe catastrophic event or terrorist attack elsewhere in the world, our
insurance losses may be immaterial. However, the companies in which we invest might be
severely affected, which could affect our financial condition and results of operations. A
catastrophe event also could affect our operations by damaging our headquarters facility or
disrupting our associates ability to perform their assigned tasks.
Please see
Item 7, Property Casualty and Life Insurance Reserves, Page 63 and Page 69, for a
discussion of our reserving practices.
Our
ability to obtain or collect on our reinsurance protection could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We buy property casualty and life reinsurance coverage to mitigate the liquidity risk
of an unexpected rise in claims severity or frequency from catastrophic events or a single
large loss. The availability, amount and cost of reinsurance depend on market conditions and
may vary significantly. If we are unable to obtain reinsurance on acceptable terms and in
appropriate amounts, our business and financial condition may be adversely affected.
In addition, we are subject to credit risk with respect to our reinsurers. Although we
purchase reinsurance to manage our risks and exposures to losses, this reinsurance does not
discharge our direct obligations under the policies we write. We would remain liable to our
policyholders even if we were unable to recover what we believe we are entitled to receive
under our reinsurance contracts. Reinsurers might refuse or fail to pay losses that we cede
to them, or they might delay payment. For long-term cases, the creditworthiness of our
reinsurers may change before we can recover amounts to which we are entitled. A reinsurers
insolvency, inability or
2006 10-K Page 22
unwillingness to make payments under the terms of its reinsurance
agreement with our insurance subsidiaries could have a material adverse effect on our
financial position, results of operations and cash flows.
Prior to 2003, we participated in USAIG, a joint underwriting association of individual
insurance companies that collectively functions as a worldwide insurance market for all
types of aviation and aerospace accounts. At year-end 2006, 35.5 percent, or $242 million,
of our total reinsurance receivables were related to USAIG, primarily for September 11,
2001, events. Although more than 99 percent of the reinsurance recoverables associated with
USAIG are backed by securities on deposit, if we are unable to collect these receivables,
our financial position and results of operations could be materially affected. We no longer
participate in new business generated by USAIG and its members.
Please see Item 7, 2006 Reinsurance Programs, Page 69, for a discussion of our reinsurance
treaties.
Our
ability to realize our investment objectives could affect our financial condition, our results of operations or cash flows.
We invest premiums received from policyholders and other available cash to generate
investment income and capital appreciation, maintaining sufficient liquidity to pay covered
claims and operating expenses, service our debt obligations and pay dividends. At year-end
2006, our investment portfolio was $13.699 billion, or 79.5 percent of our total assets. In
2006, our investment operations contributed 27.6 percent of our revenue and 94.3 percent of
our total income before income taxes.
Investment income is an important component of our revenues and net income. The ability to
achieve our investment objectives is affected by factors that are beyond our control, such
as inflation, economic growth, interest rates, world political conditions, terrorism attacks
or threats and other widespread unpredictable events. These events may adversely affect the
economy generally and could cause our investment income or the value of securities we own to
decrease. A significant decline in our investment income could have an adverse effect on our
net income, and thereby on our shareholders equity and our policyholders surplus. For more
detailed discussion of risks associated with our investments, please refer to Item 7A,
Qualitative and Quantitative Disclosures About Market Risk, Page 72.
Our investment performance also could suffer because of the types of investments, industry
groups and/or individual securities in which we choose to invest. Market value changes
related to these choices could cause a material change in our financial condition or results
of operations.
One of our investments, Fifth Third, accounted for 25.7 percent of our shareholders equity
at year-end 2006 and dividends earned from our Fifth Third investment were 20.2 percent of
our investment income in 2006. If Fifth Thirds common stock price were to decline
significantly, our financial condition could be materially affected. If Fifth Third were to
decrease or discontinue its dividend, our results of operations and cash flows could be
materially affected.
Because we currently own more than 10 percent of Fifth Thirds outstanding shares, we are
limited in the amount of Fifth Third stock we could sell in any given period. This
limitation could lead us to hold a sizeable position in Fifth Third even if it would no
longer meet our investment parameters. This could result in a variety of adverse
consequences depending on the reason we had concluded Fifth Third no longer met our
investment parameters. For example, if Fifth Third were to stop paying dividends on its
common stock, we would not be able to quickly sell a part of our holdings to reinvest in
other income-earning investments, which would have a material effect on our results of
operations.
Please see
Item 1, Investments Segment, Page 14, and Item 7, Investments Results of
Operations, Page 56, and Liquidity and Capital Resources, Page 59, for discussion of our
investment activities.
Our
status as an insurance holding company with no direct operations could affect our ability to pay dividends in the future.
Cincinnati Financial Corporation is a holding company that transacts substantially all
of its business through its subsidiaries. Our primary assets are the stock in our operating
subsidiaries and our investments. Consequently, our cash flow to pay cash dividends and
interest on our long-term debt depends on dividends we receive from our operating
subsidiaries and income earned on investments held at the parent-company level.
Dividends paid to us by our insurance subsidiary are restricted by the insurance laws of
Ohio, our domiciliary state. These laws establish minimum solvency and liquidity thresholds
and limits. Currently, the maximum dividend that may be paid without prior regulatory
approval is limited to the greater of 10 percent of statutory surplus or 100 percent of
statutory net income for the prior calendar year, up to the amount of statutory unassigned
surplus as of the end of the prior calendar year. Dividends exceeding these limitations may
be paid only with prior approval of the Ohio Department of Insurance. Consequently, at
times, we might not be able to receive dividends from our insurance subsidiary or we might
not receive dividends in the amounts necessary to meet our debt obligations or to pay
dividends on our common stock. This could affect our financial position.
Please see Item 1, Regulation, Page 17, and Item 8, Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements, Page 93, for discussion of insurance holding company dividend regulations.
2006 10-K Page 23
We
could make investment decisions or experience market value
fluctuations that trigger restrictions applicable to the parent company under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
Compared with other insurance holding companies, we hold a significant level of
investment assets at the parent company level. If these investment assets grow to account
for more than 40 percent of parent companys total assets, excluding assets of our
subsidiaries, we might become subject to regulation under the Investment Company Act of
1940. Our operations are limited by the constraint that investment securities held at the
holding company level should remain below the 40 percent threshold described above. Efforts
to stay below the threshold could result in:
|
|
Disposal of otherwise desirable investment securities, possibly under undesirable
conditions. Such dispositions could result in a lower return on investment, loss of
investment income, and if we were unable to manage the timing of the dispositions, we
also might realize unnecessary capital gains, which would increase our annual tax
payment. |
|
|
|
Limited opportunities to purchase equity securities that hold the potential for
market value appreciation, which could hamper book value growth over the long term. |
|
|
|
Maintenance of a greater portion of our portfolio of equity securities at the
insurance subsidiary, which would cause the parent to be more reliant on its
subsidiaries for cash to fund parent-company obligations, including shareholder
dividends and interest on long-term debt. |
If the parent companys investment assets were to exceed the 40 percent ratio to its total
assets, excluding investment in its subsidiaries, and if it were determined that the holding
company was an unregistered investment company, the holding company might be unable to
enforce contracts with third parties, and third parties could seek rescission of
transactions with the holding company undertaken during the period that it was an
unregistered investment company, subject to equitable considerations set forth in the
Investment Company Act. In addition, the holding company could become subject to monetary
penalties or injunctive relief, or both, in an action brought by the SEC.
Please see Item 8, Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 99, for discussion
of the Investment Company Act of 1940.
Our
business depends on the uninterrupted operation of our facilities, systems and business functions.
Our business depends on our associates ability to perform necessary business
functions, such as processing new and renewal policies and claims. We increasingly rely on
technology and systems to accomplish these business functions in an efficient and
uninterrupted fashion. Our inability to access our headquarters facilities or a failure of
technology, telecommunications or other systems could significantly impair our ability to
perform such functions on a timely basis. If sustained or repeated, such a business
interruption or system failure could result in a deterioration of our ability to write and
process new and renewal business, serve our agents and policyholders, pay claims in a timely
manner or perform other necessary business functions. This could result in a materially
adverse effect on our operating results and financial condition.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
None
2006 10-K Page 24
Item 2. Properties
Cincinnati Financial Corporation owns our headquarters building located on 100 acres of
land in Fairfield, Ohio. This building contains approximately 800,000 total square feet. The
property, including land, is carried in our financial statements at $71 million as of
December 31, 2006, and is classified as land, building and equipment, net, for company use.
John J. & Thomas R. Schiff & Co. Inc., a related party, occupies approximately 6,750 square
feet (1 percent).
Construction of a 690,000 total square foot underground garage and third office tower at our
headquarters building began in early 2005. We estimate a completion date of September 2008
for the project. We believe this estimated $100 million expansion will accommodate our
business needs for the foreseeable future. The construction project is on schedule and on
budget. As of December 31, 2006, construction costs totaled $41 million, which is classified
as land, building and equipment, net, for company use.
Cincinnati Financial Corporation owns the Fairfield Executive Center, which is located on
the northwest corner of our headquarters property. This is a four-story office building
containing approximately 124,000 square feet. The property is carried in the financial
statements at $7 million as of December 31, 2006, and is classified as land, building and
equipment, net, for company use. CFC and our subsidiaries occupy approximately 90 percent of
the rentable square feet and unaffiliated tenants occupy approximately 10 percent.
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company owns a four-story office building in Springdale, Ohio,
approximately four miles from our headquarters. It contains approximately 102,000 rentable
square feet. This property is carried in the financial statements at $3 million as of
December 31, 2006, and is classified as other invested assets. At year-end 2006, two tenants
occupied approximately 37 percent of the rentable square feet. The remaining space is
available for lease. The property is available for sale.
In 2006, The Cincinnati Insurance Company purchased an unoccupied building on 16 acres of
land in Springfield Township, Ohio, approximately six miles from our headquarters. We plan
to renovate the 51,000 square foot building to serve as a data processing center and a
disaster recovery center. The property, including land, is carried on our financial
statements at $3 million as of December 31, 2006, and is classified as land, building and
equipment, net, for company use.
Item 3. Legal Proceedings
Neither the company nor any of our subsidiaries is involved in any material litigation
other than ordinary, routine litigation incidental to the nature of its business.
Item 4. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders of Cincinnati Financial during
the fourth quarter of 2006.
2006 10-K Page 25
Part II
Item 5.
Market for the Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
Cincinnati Financial Corporation had approximately 12,000 shareholders of record as of
December 31, 2006. Many of our independent agent representatives and most of the 4,048
associates of our subsidiaries own the companys common stock. We are unable to accurately
quantify those holdings because many are beneficially held.
Our common shares are traded under the symbol CINF on the Nasdaq Global Select Market. The
common stock prices and dividend data below reflects the 5 percent stock dividend paid April
26, 2005.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Source: Nasdaq Global Select Market) |
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
Quarter: |
|
1st |
|
|
2nd |
|
|
3rd |
|
|
4th |
|
|
|
1st |
|
|
2nd |
|
|
3rd |
|
|
4th |
|
|
|
|
|
High |
|
$ |
45.56 |
|
|
$ |
47.01 |
|
|
$ |
48.44 |
|
|
$ |
49.07 |
|
|
|
$ |
43.92 |
|
|
$ |
43.12 |
|
|
$ |
42.64 |
|
|
$ |
45.95 |
|
Low |
|
|
42.07 |
|
|
|
41.43 |
|
|
|
45.93 |
|
|
|
44.25 |
|
|
|
|
40.84 |
|
|
|
38.38 |
|
|
|
39.00 |
|
|
|
39.91 |
|
Period-end close |
|
|
42.07 |
|
|
|
47.01 |
|
|
|
48.12 |
|
|
|
45.31 |
|
|
|
|
41.53 |
|
|
|
39.56 |
|
|
|
41.89 |
|
|
|
44.68 |
|
Cash dividends declared |
|
|
0.335 |
|
|
|
0.335 |
|
|
|
0.335 |
|
|
|
0.335 |
|
|
|
|
0.290 |
|
|
|
0.305 |
|
|
|
0.305 |
|
|
|
0.305 |
|
|
|
|
|
Our ability to pay cash dividends may depend on the ability of our insurance subsidiary
to pay dividends to the parent company. The dividend restrictions of our insurance company
subsidiaries are discussed in Item 8, Note 8 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page
93.
Information regarding securities authorized for issuance under our equity compensation plans
appears in the Proxy Statement under Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity
Compensation Plans. This portion of the Proxy Statement is incorporated herein by
reference. Additional information about share-based compensation granted under our equity
compensation plans is available in Item 8, Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements,
Page 100.
The board of directors has authorized share repurchases since 1996. We discuss the board
authorization in Item 7, Uses of Capital, Page 63. In 2006, we repurchased a total of
2,646,787 shares.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total number of shares |
|
|
Maximum number of |
|
|
|
Total number |
|
|
Average |
|
|
purchased as part of |
|
|
shares that may yet be |
|
|
|
of shares |
|
|
price paid |
|
|
publicly announced |
|
|
purchased under the |
|
Month |
|
purchased(1) |
|
|
per share |
|
|
plans or programs(2) |
|
|
plans or programs |
|
|
January 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0.00 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9,466,035 |
|
February 1-28, 2006 |
|
|
537,322 |
|
|
|
44.12 |
|
|
|
537,322 |
|
|
|
8,928,713 |
|
March 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
1,316,978 |
|
|
|
43.97 |
|
|
|
1,312,678 |
|
|
|
7,616,035 |
|
April 1-30, 2006 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
7,616,035 |
|
May 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
7,616,035 |
|
June 1-30, 2006 |
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
45.89 |
|
|
|
150,000 |
|
|
|
7,466,035 |
|
July 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0.00 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
7,466,035 |
|
August 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
31,666 |
|
|
|
45.98 |
|
|
|
31,666 |
|
|
|
7,434,369 |
|
September 1-30, 2006 |
|
|
113,598 |
|
|
|
46.23 |
|
|
|
110,900 |
|
|
|
7,323,469 |
|
October 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
27,345 |
|
|
|
48.44 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
7,323,469 |
|
November 1-30, 2006 |
|
|
484,021 |
|
|
|
45.15 |
|
|
|
458,221 |
|
|
|
6,865,248 |
|
December 1-31, 2006 |
|
|
46,000 |
|
|
|
44.29 |
|
|
|
46,000 |
|
|
|
6,819,248 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Totals |
|
|
2,706,930 |
|
|
|
44.48 |
|
|
|
2,646,787 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes 34,343 acquired in 2006, primarily in satisfaction of withholding taxes due
upon exercise of stock options. |
|
(2) |
|
The current repurchase program was announced on August 19, 2005, and became
effective on September 1, 2005. It replaced a program which had been in effect since
1999. No repurchase program has expired during the period covered by the above table. |
All of the repurchases reported in the table above were repurchased under our 2005
program, which was approved for 10 million shares. At the time the 1999 program, which was
for 17 million shares, was superseded by the 2005 program, it had 2,739,942 shares
remaining. Neither of the programs had an expiration date but no further repurchases will
occur under the 1999 program.
2006 10-K Page 26
Cumulative Total Return
As depicted in the graph below, the fiveyear total return on a $100 investment made
December 31, 2001, assuming the reinvestment of all dividends, was 49.4 percent for
Cincinnati Financial Corporations common stock compared with 71.4 percent for the Standard
& Poors Composite 1500 Property & Casualty Insurance Index and 35.0 percent for the
Standard & Poors 500 Index.
|
|
The Standard & Poors Composite 1500 Property & Casualty Insurance Index includes
28 companies: Ace Ltd., Allstate Corporation, AMBAC Financial Group, Berkley (W R)
Corporation, Chubb Corporation, Cincinnati Financial Corporation, Fidelity National
Financial Inc., First American Corporation, Hanover Insurance Group, Infinity Property
Casualty Corporation, Landamerica Financial Group, MBIA Inc., Mercury General
Corporation, Ohio Casualty Corporation, Old Republic International Corporation,
Philadelphia Consolidated Holding Corporation, Proassurance Corporation, Progressive
Corporation, RLI Corporation, Safeco Corporation, Safety Insurance Group, SCPIE
Holdings Inc., Selective Insurance Group Inc., St. Paul Travelers Companies Inc.,
Stewart Information Services, United Fire & Casualty Company, XL Capital Ltd. and
Zenith National Insurance Corp. |
|
|
|
The Standard & Poors 500 Index includes a representative sample of 500 leading
companies in a cross section of industries of the U.S. economy. Although this index
focuses on the large capitalization segment of the market, it is widely viewed as a
proxy for the total market. |
Total Return Analysis
CFC vs. Market Indices
December 31 Totals
2006 10-K Page 27
Item 6. Selected Financial Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
(In millions except per share data) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
Consolidated Income Statement Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,278 |
|
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
|
$ |
2,748 |
|
Investment income, net of expenses |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
465 |
|
Realized investment gains and losses |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
(41 |
) |
Total revenues |
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
|
3,767 |
|
|
|
3,614 |
|
|
|
3,181 |
|
Net income |
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
374 |
|
|
Net income per common share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
5.36 |
|
|
$ |
3.44 |
|
|
$ |
3.30 |
|
|
$ |
2.11 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.28 |
|
|
|
2.10 |
|
Cash dividends per common share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Declared |
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
1.205 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
Paid |
|
|
1.31 |
|
|
|
1.162 |
|
|
|
1.02 |
|
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
Shares Outstanding |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average, diluted |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
|
178 |
|
|
Consolidated Balance Sheet Data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invested assets |
|
$ |
13,759 |
|
|
$ |
12,702 |
|
|
$ |
12,677 |
|
|
$ |
12,485 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
400 |
|
|
|
372 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
17,222 |
|
|
|
16,003 |
|
|
|
16,107 |
|
|
|
15,509 |
|
Loss and loss expense reserves |
|
|
3,896 |
|
|
|
3,661 |
|
|
|
3,549 |
|
|
|
3,415 |
|
Life policy reserves |
|
|
1,409 |
|
|
|
1,343 |
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
420 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
6,808 |
|
|
|
6,086 |
|
|
|
6,249 |
|
|
|
6,204 |
|
Book value per share |
|
|
39.38 |
|
|
|
34.88 |
|
|
|
35.60 |
|
|
|
35.10 |
|
|
Property Casualty Insurance Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,919 |
|
|
$ |
2,653 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
1,576 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
1,537 |
|
|
|
1,444 |
|
Loss and loss expense reserves |
|
|
3,860 |
|
|
|
3,629 |
|
|
|
3,514 |
|
|
|
3,386 |
|
Investment income, net of expenses |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
245 |
|
Loss ratio |
|
|
51.9 |
% |
|
|
49.2 |
% |
|
|
49.8 |
% |
|
|
56.1 |
% |
Loss expense ratio |
|
|
11.6 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
11.6 |
|
Expense ratio |
|
|
30.8 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
29.7 |
|
|
|
27.0 |
|
Combined ratio |
|
|
94.3 |
% |
|
|
89.2 |
% |
|
|
89.8 |
% |
|
|
94.7 |
% |
|
One-time charges or adjustments:
2006 The company sold its holdings in Alltel Corporation common stock. The sale
contributed $647 million (pretax) to realized investment gains and revenues and $412 million
(after tax), or $2.35 per share, to net income.
2003 As the result of a settlement negotiated with a vendor, pretax results included the
recovery of $23 million of the $39 million one-time, pretax charge incurred in 2000.
2000 The company recorded a one-time charge of $39 million, pretax, to write down
previously capitalized costs related to the development of software to process property
casualty policies.
2000 The company earned $5 million in interest in the first quarter from a $303 million
single-premium bank-owned life insurance (BOLI) policy booked at the end of 1999 that was
segregated as a Separate Account effective April 1, 2000. Investment income and realized
investment gains and losses from separate accounts generally accrue directly to the contract
holder and, therefore, are not included in the companys consolidated financials.
2006 10-K Page 28
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 |
|
2001 |
|
2000 |
|
1999 |
|
1998 |
|
1997 |
|
1996 |
|
$ 2,478 |
|
$ |
2,152 |
|
|
$ |
1,907 |
|
|
$ |
1,732 |
|
|
$ |
1,613 |
|
|
$ |
1,516 |
|
|
$ |
1,423 |
|
445 |
|
|
421 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
368 |
|
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
327 |
|
(94 |
) |
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
48 |
|
2,843 |
|
|
2,561 |
|
|
|
2,331 |
|
|
|
2,128 |
|
|
|
2,054 |
|
|
|
1,942 |
|
|
|
1,809 |
|
238 |
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
242 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
$ 1.33 |
|
$ |
1.10 |
|
|
$ |
0.67 |
|
|
$ |
1.40 |
|
|
$ |
1.31 |
|
|
$ |
1.64 |
|
|
$ |
1.21 |
|
1.32 |
|
|
1.07 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
|
|
|
1.28 |
|
|
|
1.61 |
|
|
|
1.17 |
|
0.81 |
|
|
0.76 |
|
|
|
0.69 |
|
|
|
0.62 |
|
|
|
0.55 |
|
|
|
0.50 |
|
|
|
0.44 |
|
0.80 |
|
|
0.74 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.60 |
|
|
|
0.54 |
|
|
|
0.49 |
|
|
|
0.43 |
|
|
180 |
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
186 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
$11,226 |
|
$ |
11,534 |
|
|
$ |
11,276 |
|
|
$ |
10,156 |
|
|
$ |
10,296 |
|
|
$ |
8,778 |
|
|
$ |
6,340 |
|
343 |
|
|
286 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
128 |
|
14,122 |
|
|
13,964 |
|
|
|
13,274 |
|
|
|
11,795 |
|
|
|
11,484 |
|
|
|
9,867 |
|
|
|
7,397 |
|
3,176 |
|
|
2,887 |
|
|
|
2,473 |
|
|
|
2,154 |
|
|
|
2,055 |
|
|
|
1,937 |
|
|
|
1,881 |
|
917 |
|
|
724 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
885 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
482 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
420 |
|
|
426 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
5,598 |
|
|
5,998 |
|
|
|
5,995 |
|
|
|
5,421 |
|
|
|
5,621 |
|
|
|
4,717 |
|
|
|
3,163 |
|
31.43 |
|
|
33.62 |
|
|
|
33.80 |
|
|
|
30.35 |
|
|
|
30.58 |
|
|
|
25.71 |
|
|
|
17.19 |
|
|
$ 2,391 |
|
$ |
2,073 |
|
|
$ |
1,828 |
|
|
$ |
1,658 |
|
|
$ |
1,543 |
|
|
$ |
1,454 |
|
|
$ |
1,367 |
|
1,317 |
|
|
1,060 |
|
|
|
920 |
|
|
|
835 |
|
|
|
458 |
|
|
|
442 |
|
|
|
424 |
|
3,150 |
|
|
2,894 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
2,093 |
|
|
|
1,979 |
|
|
|
1,889 |
|
|
|
1,824 |
|
234 |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
204 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
190 |
|
61.5 |
% |
|
66.6 |
% |
|
|
71.1 |
% |
|
|
61.6 |
% |
|
|
65.4 |
% |
|
|
58.3 |
% |
|
|
61.6 |
% |
11.4 |
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
13.8 |
|
26.8 |
|
|
28.2 |
|
|
|
30.4 |
|
|
|
28.6 |
|
|
|
29.6 |
|
|
|
30.0 |
|
|
|
28.2 |
|
99.7 |
% |
|
104.9 |
% |
|
|
112.8 |
% |
|
|
100.2 |
% |
|
|
104.3 |
% |
|
|
98.4 |
% |
|
|
103.6 |
% |
|
2006 10-K Page 29
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10-K Page
|
Item 7.
|
|
Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition |
|
|
|
|
|
|
and Results of Operations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Introduction
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
Executive Summary
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
Critical Accounting Estimates
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
Results of Operations
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
Consolidated Property Casualty Insurance Results of Operations
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
Commercial Lines Insurance Results of Operations
|
|
|
42 |
|
|
|
Personal Lines Insurance Results of Operations
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
Life Insurance Results of Operations
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
Investments Results of Operations
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
Liquidity and Capital Resources
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
Sources of Liquidity
|
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
Uses of Liquidity
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
Property Casualty Insurance Reserves
|
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
Life Insurance Reserves
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
2006 Reinsurance Programs
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
Safe Harbor Statement
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk |
|
|
Introduction
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
Fixed-maturity Investments
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
Short-term Investments
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
Equity Investments
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
Unrealized Investment Gains and Losses
|
|
|
75 |
|
2006 10-K Page 30
Item 7. Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations
Introduction
The purpose of Managements Discussion and Analysis is to provide an understanding of
Cincinnati Financial Corporations consolidated results of operations and financial
position. Managements Discussion and Analysis should be read in conjunction with Item 6,
Selected Financial Data, Pages 28 and 29, and Item 8, Consolidated Financial Statements and
related Notes, beginning on Page 78. We present per share data on a diluted basis unless
otherwise noted and we have adjusted those amounts for all stock splits and dividends.
We begin with an executive summary of our results of operations and outlook, as well as
details on critical accounting policies and estimates. Periodically, we refer to estimated
industry data so that we can give information on our performance versus the overall
insurance industry. Unless otherwise noted, the industry data is prepared by A.M. Best, a
leading insurance industry statistical, analytical and financial strength rating
organization. Information from A.M. Best is presented on a statutory basis. When we provide
our results on a comparable statutory basis, we label it as such; all other company data is
presented on a GAAP basis.
Executive Summary
Cincinnati Financial Corporation is the parent company of the nations 23rd
largest property casualty insurer, based on statutory net written premium volume through the
first six months of 2006, the most recent period for which this information is available. We
primarily market commercial lines and personal lines property casualty insurance products
through a select group of independent insurance agencies in 32 states. As we discussed in
the business description in Item 1, we believe three characteristics distinguish our company
and allow us to build shareholder value:
|
|
We cultivate relationships with the independent insurance agents who market our
policies and we make our decisions at the local level |
|
|
|
We achieve claims excellence, covering the spectrum from our response to reported
claims to our approach to establishing reserves for not-yet-paid claims |
|
|
|
We invest for long-term total return, using available cash flow to purchase equity
securities after covering insurance liabilities by purchasing fixed-maturity securities |
We provide additional detail on these subjects in the Results of Operations and Liquidity
and Capital Resources sections of this discussion.
Among the factors that influence the consolidated results of operations and financial
position of the company, we consider our relationships with independent insurance agents to
be the most significant. We seek to be an indispensable partner in each agencys success. To
continue to achieve our performance targets, we must maintain these strong relationships,
write a significant portion of each agencys business and attract new agencies.
We believe consistently applying our long-term strategies rather than taking short-term
actions will allow us to address these challenges. We seek to meet our agents needs, with
an eye toward solutions and approaches that will give us an advantage for five, 10 or more
years. As we appoint new agencies, we are looking to build relationships that will grow as
successfully as those we have had for 40 or 50 years.
In 2006, we did not achieve some of our objectives for creating shareholder value. For the
year, we reached record levels of new business and total property casualty insurance
premiums in the face of growing competition. Business policyholders continued to respond
favorably to their local independent agents presentation of the Cincinnati value
proposition. In the second half of the year, agents and personal lines policyholders
responded to new pricing for Cincinnatis personal lines products with higher customer
retention rates and rising new business. Further, our equity-focused investment strategy led
to another year of record investment income and record book value.
However, other factors dampened our enthusiasm for those favorable results. Nine catastrophe
events, primarily storms affecting our policyholders in the Midwest, led to a record level
of catastrophe losses even as the industry experienced a lighter catastrophe year. Loss
severity crept upward. And ongoing investment in our people and our infrastructure, including technology and systems to make it easier for
agents to do business with our company, contributed to expenses rising more rapidly than
premiums.
Finally, 2006 earnings reflected the adoption of stock option expensing and, as anticipated,
savings from favorable development of prior period losses below the unusually high level in
2005.
We look beyond 2006 with a measure of optimism. We remain committed to providing a stable
market for our agents high quality business, underwriting this business carefully and
producing steady value for our shareholders, as represented by the board of directors
recent decision to increase our 2007 indicated annual
2006 10-K Page 31
cash dividend by 6 percent, which would mark the 47th consecutive year of increase in that measure. We believe we
can achieve above-industry-average growth in written premiums and industry-leading
profitability over the long term by building on our proven strategies: strong agency
relationships, local underwriting, quality claims service, solid reserves and total return
investing.
Over our 56 year history, our growth largely has been driven by increasing our share of the
business written by the agencies that market our products, growth of those agencies and, to
a lesser extent, appointment of new agencies and our periodic entry into new states. During
2007, we expect to make more than 50 new agency appointments, including our initial
appointments in two new states: New Mexico and Washington.
Over the years, we have been able to increase our share of our agencies business by making
available insurance products that meet the needs of the individuals and businesses in their
communities. In recent years, our agents have indicated their desire to have Cincinnati
available as a market for commercial accounts that require the flexibility of excess and
surplus lines coverage.
Generally, excess and surplus lines insurance carriers provide insurance that is unavailable
to businesses in the standard market due to market conditions or due to characteristics of
the insured that are caused by nature, the insureds history or the nature of their
business.
We have studied the option of providing excess and surplus lines coverage for several years
and believe it could contribute to our long-term objectives. Among the potential benefits,
we could gain opportunities to compete for additional accounts by having more flexibility in
pricing and policy terms and conditions.
In 2007, we will take the initial steps necessary to incorporate a new excess and surplus
subsidiary and determine its structure. During the year we will appoint a team to begin
researching and developing the appropriate terms and conditions, rates and underwriting
guidelines. We anticipate little, if any, premium contribution from excess and surplus lines
in 2007.
Below we review highlights of our financial results for the past three years and measures of
the success of our efforts to create shareholder value. Detailed discussion of these topics
appears in Results of Operations, Page 40, and the Liquidity and Capital Resources, Page 59.
Corporate Financial Highlights
Income Statement and Per Share Data
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Twelve months ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions except share data) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Income statement data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,278 |
|
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
Investment income, net of expenses |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
Realized investment gains and losses (pretax) |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
1,026.1 |
|
|
|
(33.1 |
) |
Total revenues |
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
|
3,767 |
|
|
|
3,614 |
|
|
|
20.8 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
Net income |
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
|
|
54.5 |
|
|
|
3.1 |
|
Per share data (diluted) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
5.30 |
|
|
$ |
3.40 |
|
|
$ |
3.28 |
|
|
|
55.9 |
|
|
|
3.7 |
|
Cash dividends declared |
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
|
1.205 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding |
|
|
175,451,341 |
|
|
|
177,116,126 |
|
|
|
178,376,848 |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
(0.7 |
) |
|
Revenues rose in 2006 and 2005. The growth in 2006 primarily reflected the sale of our
Alltel common stock holdings. In both years, rising pretax investment income offset slowing
consolidated property casualty earned premium growth.
Net income and net income per share reached record levels in 2006 and 2005. A number of
factors contributed to net income:
|
|
The consolidated property casualty underwriting profit declined in 2006 due to
higher catastrophe losses, increased loss severity and less savings from favorable
development of prior period losses as well as higher underwriting expenses.
Underwriting profitability was healthy in 2005. The factors behind these changes are
discussed in the Results of Operations. |
|
|
|
Realized investment gains and losses are integral to our financial results over the
long term. We have substantial discretion in the timing of investment sales and,
therefore, the gains or losses that will be recognized in any period. That discretion
generally is independent of the insurance underwriting process. Also, applicable
accounting standards require us to recognize gains and losses from certain changes in
fair values of securities and embedded derivatives without actual realization of those
gains and losses. Security sales led to realized investment gains in the past three
years. |
|
o |
|
2006 Raised net income by $434 million, or $2.48 per share. The sale of
our Alltel common stock holding contributed $412 million, or $2.35 per share, of the
gain. |
2006 10-K Page 32
|
o |
|
2005 Raised net income by $40 million, or 23 cents per share. |
|
|
0 |
|
2004 Raised net income by $60 million, or 34 cents per share. |
|
|
Weighted average shares outstanding may fluctuate from period to period because we
regularly repurchase shares under board authorizations and we issue shares when
associates exercise stock options. At year-end 2006, weighted average shares
outstanding on a diluted basis had declined 2 million from year-end 2005. |
The board of directors is committed to steadily increasing cash dividends and periodically
authorizing stock dividends and splits. Cash dividends declared per share rose 11.2 percent
and 16.1 percent in 2006 and 2005.
Balance Sheet Data and Performance Measures
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
|
At December 31, |
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(Dollars in millions except share data) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Balance sheet data |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Invested assets |
|
$ |
13,759 |
|
|
$ |
12,702 |
|
|
$ |
12,677 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
17,222 |
|
|
|
16,003 |
|
|
|
16,107 |
|
Short-term debt |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
791 |
|
Shareholders equity |
|
|
6,808 |
|
|
|
6,086 |
|
|
|
6,249 |
|
Book value per share |
|
|
39.38 |
|
|
|
34.88 |
|
|
|
35.60 |
|
Debt-to-capital ratio |
|
|
11.0 |
% |
|
|
11.5 |
% |
|
|
11.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
|
Performance measures |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Comprehensive income |
|
$ |
1,057 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
$ |
287 |
|
Return on equity |
|
|
14.4 |
% |
|
|
9.8% |
|
|
|
9.4 |
% |
Return on equity based on comprehensive income |
|
|
16.4 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
Invested assets and total assets rose in 2006 on new investments and appreciation in
the equity portfolio. Invested assets and total assets were flat in 2005 as strong cash flow
for new investments was offset by lower unrealized investment gains.
Comprehensive income is net income plus the year-over-year difference in unrealized gains on
investments. In 2006, comprehensive income rose because of higher unrealized gains in the
investment portfolio. In 2005 and 2004, comprehensive income was lower because of reduced
unrealized gains primarily due to a decline in the market value of our Fifth Third
investment.
Return on equity rose in 2006 due to higher realized gains on investments. Return on equity
based on comprehensive income grew in 2006 due to the increase in accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Our ratio of long-term debt to capital (long-term debt plus shareholders equity) declined
in 2006 due to the increase in shareholders equity due to higher accumulated other
comprehensive income.
Property Casualty Highlights
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Property casualty highlights |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
3,178 |
|
|
$ |
3,076 |
|
|
$ |
2,997 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
3,058 |
|
|
|
2,919 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
Underwriting profit |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
330 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
(45.2 |
) |
|
|
10.8 |
|
GAAP combined ratio |
|
|
94.3 |
% |
|
|
89.2% |
|
|
|
89.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statutory combined ratio |
|
|
93.9 |
|
|
|
89.0 |
|
|
|
89.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The trend in overall written premium growth reflected the competitive and market factors
discussed in Item 1, Commercial Lines and Personal Lines Property Casualty Insurance Segments,
Page 9 and Page 11. In each of the past three years, our overall written premium growth rate
has exceeded that of the industry. Industry net written premiums were estimated to grow 2.6
percent in 2006 and 4.4 percent in 2004, but declined 0.2 percent in 2005. In the past three
years, industry premium trends have been obscured by the reinsurance sector, where premiums
were estimated to have risen 25.1 percent in 2006 after declining 28.2 percent in 2005.
Our consolidated property casualty insurance underwriting profit declined in 2006 after
rising in 2005, matching the trend in our combined ratio. (The combined ratio is the
percentage of each premium dollar spent on claims plus all expenses the lower the ratio,
the better the performance.) 2006 performance was tempered by higher catastrophe losses,
increased loss severity and less savings from favorable development on prior period losses
as well as higher underwriting expenses.
2006 10-K Page 33
The estimated industry average statutory combined ratios were 93.3 percent, 100.8
percent and 98.5 percent for 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The 144.9 percent estimated
reinsurance sector combined ratio obscured the industry combined ratio in 2005.
We also measure a variety of non-financial metrics for our property casualty operations. For
example, we monitor our rank within our reporting agency locations. In 2005, we ranked No. 1
or No. 2 by premium volume in 75 percent of the locations that have marketed our products
for more than five years. Other measures include subdivision of territories and new agency
appointments. We ended 2006 with 102 field territories, subdividing three new territories
and merging one into the surrounding regions. As discussed in Item 1, Growing with Our
Agencies, Page 7, we made 55 new agency appointments in 2006, 42 of which were new
relationships. These new appointments and other changes in agency structures led to a net
increase in reporting agency locations of 37 in 2006.
Agent satisfaction with our technology solutions is, and will continue to be, a requirement
for maintaining our strong relationships with these agencies. In 2006, we made additional
progress in implementing technology solutions that we believe should make it easier for
agencies to do business with us. Among other milestones, we have deployed our new commercial
lines policy processing system to agencies in seven states for use in processing new and
renewal businessowners policies. We also deployed our personal lines policy processing
system in six additional states and continued to make important upgrades and enhancements.
Measuring Our Success in 2007 and Beyond
We use a variety of metrics to measure the success of our strategies:
|
|
Maintaining our strong relationships with our established agencies, writing a
significant portion of each agencys business and attracting new agencies In 2007, we
expect to continue to rank No. 1 or No. 2 by premium volume in approximately 75 percent
or more of the locations that have marketed our products for more than five years. We
expect to improve service to our agencies by subdividing or creating four field
territories in 2007. We also expect to appoint another 50 agencies. We are working on
plans to enter New Mexico and eastern Washington within the next year and will soon
begin the process by preparing policy forms and rates to submit to the departments of
insurance in those states. |
|
|
|
In 2007, we expect to make further progress in our efforts to improve service to and
communication with our agencies through our expanding portfolio of software. In
particular, we will continue to deploy our commercial lines and personal lines quoting
and policy processing systems that allow our agencies and our field and headquarters
associates to collaborate on new and renewal business more efficiently and give our
agencies choice and control. We discuss our technology plans for 2007 in Item 1,
Technology Solutions, Page 4. |
|
|
|
Achieving above-industry-average growth in property casualty statutory net written
premiums and maintaining industry-leading profitability by leveraging our regional
franchise and proven agency-centered business strategy We believe growth in our
consolidated property casualty written premiums may be in the low single digits in 2007
compared with the 3.3 percent increase in 2006. |
|
|
|
Legislative and regulatory developments in early 2007 added to the uncertainty that
already existed for the insurance industry in Florida. In February 2007, we asked our
agents that they not send us new business submissions. This request, which extends to
all lines of insurance and other business areas, may result in lower 2007 premium
growth. It does not affect policies in force, which we will continue to support and
address at renewal, in line with our current underwriting guidelines and in compliance
with Florida rules and regulations. We continue to assess the changing insurance
environment in Florida and hope to resume writing policies in the state as the market
stabilizes. |
|
|
|
Overall industry premium growth is projected to be 0.1 percent in 2007, which includes
an estimated 18.6 percent reinsurance sector growth rate. Net written premiums for the
commercial lines industry are expected to be flat in 2007 while the personal lines
sector is expected to grow 1.2 percent. |
|
|
|
Our combined ratio estimate for 2007 is 97 percent to 99 percent on either a GAAP or
statutory basis compared with 94.3 percent on a GAAP basis in 2006. The year-over-year
increase reflects four assumptions: |
|
o |
|
Catastrophe losses should contribute approximately 5.5 percentage points to
the combined ratio. We think this is an appropriate estimate based on our
reinsurance treaty retention and catastrophe loss experience in recent years. |
|
|
o |
|
Savings from favorable reserve development in line with our historical
norms. Savings from favorable development on prior period reserves averaged about 2
percentage points between 2000 and 2003. Between 2004 and 2006, the average rose to
an unusually high level of approximately 5 percentage points. |
|
|
o |
|
Loss ratio deterioration as pricing becomes even more competitive and loss
severity increases. |
2006 10-K Page 34
|
o |
|
Higher other underwriting expenses as we continue to invest in people and
technology. We believe the consolidated property casualty 2007 underwriting expense
ratio could be approximately 31.5 percent. |
For these reasons, we may not achieve our objective of an industry-leading combined
ratio in 2007. The projected industry average 2007 combined ratio is 96.8 percent.
|
|
Pursuing a total return investment strategy that generates both strong investment
income growth and capital appreciation In 2007, we are estimating pretax investment
income growth to be in the range of 6.5 percent to 7.0 percent. This outlook is based
on the higher anticipated level of dividend income from equity holdings, the investment
of insurance operations cash flow and the current portfolio attributes. |
|
|
|
We do not establish annual capital appreciation targets. Over the long term, our target
is to have the equity portfolio outperform the Standard & Poors 500 Index. In 2006, our
compound annual equity portfolio return was 16.1 percent, compared with a compound
annual total return of 15.8 percent for the Index. Over the five years ended December
31, 2006, our compound annual equity portfolio return was 2.0 percent compared with a
compound annual total return of 6.2 percent for the Index. Our equity portfolio
underperformed the market for the five-year period because of the decline in the market
value of our holdings of Fifth Third common stock between 2002 and 2005. |
|
|
|
Increasing the total return to shareholders through a combination of higher earnings
per share, growth in book value and increasing dividends We do not announce annual
targets for earnings per share or book value. Over the long term, we look for our
earnings per share growth to outpace that of a peer group of national and regional
property casualty insurance companies. Long-term book value growth should exceed that
of our equity portfolio. |
|
|
|
The board of directors is committed to steadily increasing cash dividends and
periodically authorizing stock dividends and splits. In February 2007, the board
increased the indicated annual dividend rate 6.0 percent, marking the 47th
consecutive year of increases in our indicated dividend rate. We believe our record of
dividend increases is matched by only 11 other publicly traded corporations. |
|
|
|
Over the long-term, we seek to increase earnings per share, book value and dividends at
a rate that would allow long-term total return to our shareholders to exceed that of the
Standard & Poors Composite 1500 Property Casualty Insurance Index. Over the past five
years, our total return to shareholders of 49.4 percent was below the 71.4 percent
return for that Index. |
|
|
|
Maintaining financial strength by keeping the ratio of debt to capital below 15
percent and purchasing reinsurance to provide investment flexibility Based on our
present capital requirements, we do not anticipate a material increase in debt levels
during 2007. As a result, we believe our debt-to-capital ratio will remain
approximately 11 percent. |
|
|
|
In December 2006, we finalized our property casualty reinsurance program for 2007,
updating it to maintain the balance between the cost of the program and the level of
risk we retain. Under the new program, our 2007 reinsurance premiums are expected to be
$22 million higher than in 2006. |
|
|
|
We provide more detail on our reinsurance programs in 2007 Reinsurance Programs, Page
69. |
Factors supporting our outlook for 2007 are discussed below in the Results of Operations for
each of the four business segments.
Critical Accounting Estimates
Cincinnati Financial Corporations financial statements are prepared using GAAP. These
principles require management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts
reported in the Consolidated Financial Statements and accompanying Notes. Actual results
could differ materially from those estimates.
The significant accounting policies used in the preparation of the financial statements are
discussed in Item 8, Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 85. In
conjunction with that discussion, material implications of uncertainties associated with the
methods, assumptions and estimates underlying the companys critical accounting policies are
discussed below. The audit committee of the board of directors reviews the annual financial
statements with management and the independent registered public accounting firm. These
discussions cover the quality of earnings, review of reserves and accruals, reconsideration
of the suitability of accounting principles, review of highly judgmental areas including
critical accounting policies, audit adjustments and such other inquiries as may be
appropriate.
Property Casualty Insurance Loss and Loss Expense Reserves
Overview
Our most significant estimates relate to our reserves for property casualty loss and
loss expenses. We believe that the stability of our business makes our historical data the
most important source for establishing adequate reserve levels. We base reserve estimates on
company experience and information from internal analyses and obtain additional information from the appointed actuary. When reviewing
reserves, we analyze historical data
2006 10-K Page 35
and estimate the effect of various loss factors. We
believe that the following represent the primary risks to our ability to estimate loss
reserves accurately:
|
|
Court decisions or legislation that result in unanticipated coverage expansions on past and existing policies |
|
|
|
Changes in medical inflation and mortality rates that affect workers compensation claims |
|
|
|
Changes in claim cost trends, including the effects of general economic and tort
cost inflation, not reflected in the historical data used to estimate loss reserves |
|
|
|
Changes in reinsurance coverage, not reflected in reserving data, that affect the
companys net payments and net case reserves |
|
|
|
Payment and reporting pattern changes attributable to the implementation of a new
claims management system and to the use of a claims mediation process that promotes
earlier liability settlement resolution |
|
|
|
Reporting pattern changes attributable to case reserving practices, particularly
with respect to workers compensation claims |
|
|
|
Absence of cost-effective methods for accurately assessing asbestos and
environmental claim liabilities (see Property Casualty Insurance Reserves, Asbestos and
Environmental Reserves, Page 66, for discussion of related reserve levels and trends) |
Any of these factors could cause our ultimate loss experience to be better or worse than
reserves held, and the difference could be material. To the extent that reserves are
inadequate and strengthened, the amount of such increase is treated as a charge in the
period that the deficiency is recognized, raising the loss and loss expense ratio and
reducing earnings. To the extent that reserves are redundant and released, the amount of the
release is a credit in the period that the redundancy is recognized, reducing the loss and
loss expense ratio and increasing earnings.
A reserve change of $32 million would have a 1 percentage point effect on the loss and loss
expense ratio, based on 2006 earned premiums, a $21 million effect on income and a 12 cent
effect on net income per share.
Establishing Reserves
Reserves are established for the total of unpaid loss and loss expenses, including
estimates for claims that have been reported, estimates for claims that have been incurred
but not yet reported (IBNR) and estimates of loss expenses associated with processing and
settling those claims. Reserves are determined for the various lines of business. Loss
reserves are reduced by anticipated salvage and subrogation recoveries.
We establish case reserves for claims that have been reported within the parameters of
coverage provided in the policy. Individual case reserves greater than $35,000 established
by field claims representatives are reviewed by experienced headquarters claims supervisors
while case reserves greater than $100,000 also are reviewed by headquarters claims managers.
The estimates reflect the informed judgment and experience of our claims associates based on
general insurance reserving practices and their experience with the company. Case reserves
are reviewed on a 90-day cycle, or more frequently if specific circumstances require, based
on events such as the status of ongoing negotiations.
The anticipated effect of inflation is implicitly considered when estimating reserves for
loss and loss expenses. While anticipated cost increases due to inflation are considered in
estimating ultimate claim costs, increases in average severity of claims are caused by a
number of factors that vary by individual type of policy. Average severity projections are
based on historical trends adjusted for anticipated changes in underwriting standards,
policy provisions and general economic trends. We do not discount any of our property
casualty loss and loss expense reserves.
In 2001, we began to establish higher initial case reserves on serious injury claims. The
higher reserves reflect experience indicating the likelihood that juries would ignore
significant liability issues in cases involving seriously injured claimants.
In 2000, we began using a claims mediation process that promotes earlier liability
settlement resolution. By 2004, we had introduced the program into several states, which has
provided favorable results.
To review IBNR reserves on an annual basis, we use a variety of tools, including actuarial
and statistical methods. These may include but are not limited to:
|
|
The Case Incurred Development Method |
|
|
|
The Paid Development Method |
|
|
|
The Bornhuetter-Ferguson Method |
|
|
|
Probability Trend Family Models |
2006 10-K Page 36
Supplemental statistical information is compiled and reviewed to aid in the application of
actuarial methods and models. The supplemental data also is used to evaluate the
reasonableness of estimates derived from the actuarial methods and models. This information
includes:
|
|
Industry loss frequency and severity and premium trends |
|
|
|
Past, present and anticipated product pricing |
|
|
|
Anticipated premium growth |
|
|
|
Other quantifiable trends |
|
|
|
Projected ultimate loss ratios |
We conduct our thorough evaluation of the adequacy of reserves as of the end of the third
quarter of each year. As a result, the most significant refinements in reserves historically
have been implemented in the fourth quarter. In 2006, we began conducting a detailed
supplemental review as of the end of the fourth quarter of each year in parallel with the
outside actuarial review. Less detailed, periodic reviews of reserve adequacy are made at
the other quarter ends. A loss review committee, including internal actuaries and
representatives from management of multiple operating departments, is responsible for the
quarterly review process.
The internal actuaries provide a point estimate and a range to summarize their analysis. At
year-end 2006 and 2005, IBNR reserves differed from the internal actuarial point estimate by
less than 2 percent of our loss and loss expense reserve.
Adjusting Reserves
While we believe that reported reserves provide for all unpaid loss and loss expense
obligations, the estimation processes involve a number of variables and assumptions. We
believe this uncertainty is mitigated by the historical stability of our book of business
and by our periodic reviews of estimates. As loss experience develops and new information
becomes known, the reserves are reviewed and adjusted as appropriate. In this process, we
monitor trends in the industry, cost trends, relevant court cases, legislative activity and
other current events in an effort to ascertain new or additional exposures to loss. If we
determine that reserves established in prior years were not sufficient or were excessive,
the change is reflected in current-year results.
Actuarial Review
As part of our internal processes, we utilize an appointed actuary to provide
management with an opinion regarding an acceptable range for adequate statutory reserves
based on generally accepted actuarial guidelines.
Historically, we have established adequate reserves that have fallen in the upper half of
the appointed actuarys range. This approach has resulted in recognition of reserve
redundancies for the past 10 years, as we discuss in Development of Loss and Loss Expenses,
Page 64. Modestly redundant reserves support our business strategy to retain high financial
strength ratings and remain a market for agencies business in all market conditions.
The appointed actuary conducts a thorough evaluation of the adequacy of reserves as of the
end of the third quarter of each year and conducts a supplemental review of full-year data
at year-end.
Asset Impairment
Fixed-maturity and equity investments are our largest assets. The companys asset
impairment committee continually monitors these investments and all other assets for signs
of other-than-temporary and/or permanent impairment. The committee monitors significant
decreases in the market value of the assets, changes in legal factors or in the business
climate, an accumulation of costs in excess of the amount originally expected to acquire or
construct an asset, uncollectability of all other assets, or other factors such as
bankruptcy, deterioration of creditworthiness, failure to pay interest or dividends or signs
indicating that the carrying amount may not be recoverable.
The application of our impairment policy resulted in other-than-temporary impairment charges
and write-offs of investments that reduced our income before income taxes by $1 million in
both 2006 and 2005 and $6 million in 2004.
Our portfolio managers constantly monitor the status of their assigned portfolios for
indications of potential problems that may be possible impairment issues. If a security is
trading below book value, the portfolio managers even more closely scrutinize the security.
Such declines often occur in conjunction with events taking place in the overall economy and
market, combined with events specific to the industry or operations of the issuing
corporation. These specific criteria include quantitative measurements such as a declining
trend in market value, the extent of the market value decline and the length of time the
value of the security has been depressed, as well as qualitative measures such as pending
events and issuer liquidity. Generally, these declines in valuation are greater than might be anticipated when viewed in the context
of overall economic and
2006 10-K Page 37
market conditions. We provide information regarding valuation of our
invested assets in Item 8, Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 90.
Impairment charges are recorded for other-than-temporary declines in value, if, in the asset
impairment committees judgment, there is little expectation that the value will be recouped
in the foreseeable future. A security valued between 90 percent and 100 percent of book
value will not be monitored separately by the committee. These assets generally are at this
value because of interest rate-driven factors. A security valued below 90 percent of book
value is reported to the asset impairment committee. A security valued below 70 percent of
book value is defined as distressed.
Distressed securities receive additional scrutiny. Effective January 1, 2006, a security
will be written down in the event of a declining market value for four consecutive quarters
with quarter-end market value below 70 percent of book value, or when a securitys market
value is 70 percent below book value for three consecutive quarters. A sudden and severe
drop in market value that does not otherwise meet the above criteria is reviewed for
possible immediate impairment.
When evaluating other-than-temporary impairments, the committee considers the companys
intent and ability to retain a security for a period adequate to recover a significant
percentage of cost. Because of the companys investment philosophy and strong
capitalization, it can hold securities that have the potential to recover value until their
scheduled redemption, when they might otherwise be deemed impaired. In addition to
evaluating the securitys current valuation, the impairment committee reviews objective
evidence that indicates the potential for a recovery in value. Information is evaluated
regarding the security, such as financial performance, near term prospects and the financial
condition of the region and industry in which the entity operates.
Securities that have already been impaired are evaluated based on their adjusted book value
and further written down, if deemed appropriate. The decision to sell or write down a
security with impairment indications reflects, at least in part, managements opinion that
the security no longer meets the companys investment objectives. We provide detailed
information about securities trading in a continuous loss position at year-end 2006 in Item
7A, Unrealized Investment Gains and Losses, Page 75. An other-than-temporary decline in the
fair value of a security is recognized in net income as realized investment losses.
Permanent impairment charges (write-offs) are defined as those for which management believes
there is little potential for future recovery, for example, following the bankruptcy of the
issuing corporation. A permanent decline in the fair value of a security is written off at
the time when facts and circumstances indicate such write-down is warranted, and is
reflected in realized investment losses.
Other-than-temporary and permanent impairments are distinct from the ordinary fluctuations
seen in the value of a security when considered in the context of overall economic and
market conditions. Securities considered to have a temporary decline would be expected to
recover their market value, which may be at maturity. Under the same accounting treatment as
market value gains, temporary declines (changes in the fair value of these securities) are
reflected on our balance sheet in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax, and
have no impact on reported net income.
Life Insurance Policy Reserves
We establish the reserves for traditional life insurance policies based on expected
expenses, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal rates and investment yields, including a
provision for uncertainty. Once these assumptions are established, they generally are
maintained throughout the lives of the contracts. We use both our own experience and
industry experience adjusted for historical trends in arriving at our assumptions for
expected mortality, morbidity and withdrawal rates. We use our own experience and historical
trends for setting our assumptions for expected expenses. We base our assumptions for
expected investment income on our own experience adjusted for current economic conditions.
We establish reserves for our universal life, deferred annuity and investment contracts
equal to the cumulative account balances, which include premium deposits plus credited
interest less charges and withdrawals. Some of our universal life insurance policies contain
no-lapse guarantee provisions. For these policies, we establish a reserve in addition to the
account balance based on expected no-lapse guarantee benefits and expected policy
assessments.
Employee Benefit Pension Plan
We have a defined benefit pension plan covering substantially all employees.
Contributions and pension costs are developed from annual actuarial valuations. These
valuations involve key assumptions including discount rates and expected return on plan
assets, which are updated each year. Any adjustments to these assumptions are based on
considerations of current market conditions. Therefore, changes in the related pension costs
or credits may occur in the future due to changes in assumptions.
Key assumptions used in developing the 2006 net pension obligation were a 5.75 percent
discount rate and rates of compensation increases ranging from 4 percent to 6 percent. Key
assumptions used in developing the
2006 10-K Page 38
2006 net pension expense were a 5.50 percent discount
rate, an 8 percent expected return on plan assets and rates of compensation increases
ranging from 5 percent to 7 percent.
In 2006, the net pension expense was $19 million. In 2007, we expect a net pension expense
of $21 million, primarily as a result of increased service costs, which are expected to more
than offset a 0.25 percent reduction in the discount rate.
Holding all other assumptions constant, a 0.5 percentage point decline in the discount rate
would lower our 2007 net income before income taxes by $2 million. Likewise, a 0.5
percentage point decline in the expected return on plan assets would lower our 2006 income
before income taxes by $1 million.
In addition, the fair value of the plan assets exceeded the accumulated benefit obligation
by $8 million at year-end 2006 and $8 million at year-end 2005. The fair value of the
plan assets was less than the projected plan benefit obligation by $58 million at
year-end 2006 and $62 million at year-end 2005. The 2005 accumulated benefit obligation and
projected benefit obligation amounts were increased by
$6 million and $9 million,
respectively, to include the companys supplemental retirement plan (SERP). Market
conditions and interest rates significantly affect future assets and liabilities of the
pension plan.
Deferred Acquisition Costs
We establish a deferred asset for costs that vary with, and are primarily related to,
acquiring property casualty and life business. These costs are principally agent
commissions, premium taxes and certain underwriting costs, which are deferred and amortized
into income as premiums are earned. Deferred acquisition costs track with the change in
premiums. Underlying assumptions are updated periodically to reflect actual experience.
Changes in the amounts or timing of estimated future profits could result in adjustments to
the accumulated amortization of these costs.
For property casualty policies, deferred acquisition costs are amortized over the terms of
the policies. For life policies, acquisition costs are amortized into income either over the
premium-paying period of the policies or the life of the policy, depending on the policy
type.
Contingent Commission Accrual
Another significant estimate relates to our accrual for property casualty contingent
(profit-sharing) commissions. We base the contingent commission accrual estimates on
property casualty underwriting results and on supplemental information. Contingent
commissions are paid to agencies using a formula that takes into account agency
profitability and other factors, such as prompt monthly payment of amounts due to the
company. Due to the complexity of the calculation and the variety of factors that can affect
contingent commissions for an individual agency, the amount accrued can differ from the
actual contingent commissions paid. The contingent commission accrual of $95 million in 2006
contributed 3.0 percentage points to the property casualty combined ratio. If contingent
commissions paid were to vary from that amount by 5 percent, it would affect 2007 net income
by $3 million (after tax), or 2 cents per share, and the combined ratio by approximately 0.1
percentage points.
Separate Accounts
We issue life contracts, referred to as bank-owned life insurance policies (BOLI).
Based on the specific contract provisions, the assets and liabilities for some BOLIs are
legally segregated and recorded as assets and liabilities of the separate accounts. Other
BOLIs are included in the general account. For separate account BOLIs, minimum investment
returns and account values are guaranteed by the company and also include death benefits to
beneficiaries of the contract holders.
Separate account assets are carried at fair value. Separate account liabilities primarily
represent the contract holders claims to the related assets and also are carried at the
fair value of the assets. Generally, investment income and realized investment gains and
losses of the separate accounts accrue directly to the contract holders and, therefore, are
not included in our Consolidated Statements of Income. However, each separate account
contract includes a negotiated realized gain and loss sharing arrangement with the company.
This share is transferred from the separate account to our general account and is recognized
as revenue or expense. In the event that the asset value of contract holders accounts is
projected below the value guaranteed by the company, a liability is established through a
charge to our earnings.
For our most significant separate account, written in 1999, realized gains and losses are
retained in the separate account and are deferred and amortized to the contract holder over
a five-year period, subject to certain limitations. Upon termination or maturity of this
separate account contract, any unamortized deferred gains and/or losses will revert to the
general account. In the event this separate account holder were to exchange the contract for
the policy of another carrier in 2007, the account holder would pay a surrender charge equal
to 4 percent of the contracts account value. Since year five, the surrender charge has
decreased 2 percent each policy year and will fall to 0 percent in policy year 11.
2006 10-K Page 39
At year-end 2006, net unamortized realized gains amounted to $2 million. In accordance with
this separate account agreement, the investment assets must meet certain criteria
established by the regulatory authorities to whose jurisdiction the group contract holder is
subject. Therefore, sales of investments may be mandated to maintain compliance with these
regulations, possibly requiring gains or losses to be recorded, and charged to the general
account. Potentially, losses could be material; however, unrealized losses in the separate
account portfolio were less than $6 million at year-end 2006.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Information regarding recent accounting pronouncements is provided in Item 8, Note 1 to
the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 85. We have determined that recent accounting
pronouncements have not had nor are they expected to have any material impact on our
consolidated financial statements.
Results of Operations
The consolidated results of operations reflect the operating results of each of our
four segments along with the parent company and other non-insurance activities. The four
segments are:
|
|
Commercial lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Personal lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Life insurance |
|
|
|
Investments operations |
We measure profit or loss for our property casualty and life segments based upon
underwriting results (profit or loss), which represent net earned premium less loss and loss
expenses and underwriting expenses on a pretax basis. We also measure aspects of the
performance of our commercial lines and personal lines segments on a combined property
casualty insurance operations basis. Underwriting results and segment pretax operating
income are not a substitute for net income determined in accordance with GAAP.
For the combined property casualty insurance operations as well as the commercial lines and
personal lines segments, statutory accounting data and ratios are key performance indicators
that we use to assess business trends and to make comparisons to industry results, since
GAAP-based industry data generally is not readily available. We also use statutory
accounting data and ratios as key performance indicators for our life insurance operations.
We do not believe that inflation has had a material effect on consolidated results of
operations, except to the extent that inflation may affect interest rates. We continue to
monitor market trends in construction costs that could affect claim payments and
headquarters construction costs.
Investments held by the parent company and the investment portfolios for the property
casualty and life insurance subsidiaries are managed and reported as the investments
segment, separate from the underwriting businesses. Net investment income and net realized
investment gains and losses for our investment portfolios are discussed in the Investments
Results of Operations.
The calculations of segment data are described in more detail in Item 8, Note 17 of the
Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 102. The following sections review results of
operations for each of the four segments. Commercial Lines Insurance Results of Operations
begins on Page 42, Personal Lines Insurance Results of Operations begins on Page 49, Life
Insurance Results of Operations begins on Page 54, and Investments Results of Operations
begins on Page 56. We begin with an overview of our consolidated property casualty
operations, which is the total of our commercial lines and personal lines segments.
2006 10-K Page 40
Consolidated Property Casualty Insurance Results of Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
3,178 |
|
|
$ |
3,076 |
|
|
$ |
2,997 |
|
|
|
3.3 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,919 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
|
|
|
4.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
1,833 |
|
|
|
1,685 |
|
|
|
1,605 |
|
|
|
8.8 |
|
|
|
5.0 |
|
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
37.9 |
|
|
|
(14.8 |
) |
Commission expenses |
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
592 |
|
|
|
583 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
1.6 |
|
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
363 |
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
13.9 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
Policyholder dividends |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
208.1 |
|
|
|
(52.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting profit |
|
$ |
181 |
|
|
$ |
330 |
|
|
$ |
298 |
|
|
|
(45.2 |
) |
|
|
10.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios as a percent of earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
58.0 |
% |
|
|
55.1 |
% |
|
|
55.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
5.5 |
|
|
|
4.1 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses |
|
|
63.5 |
|
|
|
59.2 |
|
|
|
60.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission expenses |
|
|
18.8 |
|
|
|
19.4 |
|
|
|
20.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
11.5 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
|
|
9.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholder dividends |
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined ratio |
|
|
94.3 |
% |
|
|
89.2 |
% |
|
|
89.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In addition to the factors discussed in Commercial Lines and Personal Lines Insurance
Results of Operations, Page 42 and Page 49, growth and profitability for the property
casualty insurance operations were affected by:
|
|
New business written directly by agencies New business written directly by
agencies was $357 million, $314 million and $330 million in 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively. New business levels reflected market conditions for commercial and
personal lines as well as the advantages of our agency relationship strategy. |
|
|
|
Savings from favorable development on prior period reserves reduced the combined
ratio by 3.7 percentage points in 2006 compared with 5.2 and 6.7 percentage points in
2005 and 2004. The unusually high level of savings in 2004 partially reflected the
release of uninsured motorist/underinsured motorist (UM/UIM) reserves following an Ohio
Supreme Court decision in late 2003 to limit its 1999 Scott-Pontzer vs. Liberty Mutual
decision. |
|
|
|
The adoption of stock option expensing increased the 2006 combined ratio by 0.5
percentage points. |
|
|
|
Catastrophe losses contributed 5.5, 4.1 and 5.1 percentage points to the combined
ratio in 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. Catastrophe losses in 2006 included wind
and hail losses in March, April and October, with incurred losses of $37 million, $37
million and $38 million, respectively. Of the almost 13,000 catastrophe claims reported
through January 31, 2007, for all catastrophes in 2006, more than 95 percent are
already closed. Our field claims representatives prompt responses and personal
approach reflect positively on our agents, supporting their marketing efforts. The
following table shows catastrophe losses incurred, net of reinsurance, for the past
three years as well as the effect of loss development on prior period catastrophe
events. |
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Companies do not appoint agencies to actively market property
casualty insurance in Louisiana, Mississippi or Texas. Our 2005 Hurricane Katrina and
Rita losses included losses associated with commercial accounts written by agents in
other states to cover locations and vehicles in multiple states, including Louisiana,
Mississippi and Texas. |
|
|
|
Hurricane Katrina losses also included $18 million of assumed losses. The Cincinnati
Insurance Company participates in three assumed reinsurance treaties with two reinsurers
that spread the risk of very high catastrophe losses among many insurers. The assumed
losses from Hurricane Katrina included $16 million under a treaty with the Munich Re
Group to assume 2 percent of property losses between $400 million and $1.2 billion from
a single event. Munich Re has reserved its Hurricane Katrina losses above $1.2 billion.
In 2006, we reduced our participation in the Munich Re assumed reinsurance treaty to 1
percent as discussed in Item 1A, Risk Factors, Page 20. |
2006 10-K Page 41
Catastrophe Losses Incurred
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions, net of reinsurance) |
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial |
|
Personal |
|
|
Dates |
|
Cause of loss |
|
Region |
|
lines |
|
lines |
|
Total |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mar. 11-13
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
37 |
|
Apr. 2-3
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Apr. 6-8
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
South
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
Apr. 13-15
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
South
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Jun. 18-22
|
|
Wind, hail, flood
|
|
South
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Jul. 19-21
|
|
Wind, hail, flood
|
|
South
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Aug. 23-25
|
|
Wind, hail, flood
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Oct. 2-4
|
|
Wind, hail, flood
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
Nov. 30 Dec. 3
|
|
Wind, hail, ice, snow
|
|
Midwest, South
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Other 2006 catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Development on 2005 and prior catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calendar year incurred total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
89 |
|
|
$ |
86 |
|
|
$ |
175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jan. 4-6
|
|
Wind, ice, snow
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
May 6-12
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Jul. 9-11
|
|
Hurricane Dennis
|
|
South
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Aug. 25-26
|
|
Hurricane Katrina
|
|
South
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
Sep. 20-24
|
|
Hurricane Rita
|
|
South
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Oct. 24
|
|
Hurricane Wilma
|
|
South
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
Nov. 6
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Nov. 15-16
|
|
Wind
|
|
Midwest, South
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Other 2005 catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Development on 2004 and prior catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calendar year incurred total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
76 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
$ |
127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
May 17-19
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
10 |
|
May 21-27
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, South
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
Jul. 12-14
|
|
Wind, hail
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, South
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Aug. 13-14
|
|
Hurricane Charley
|
|
South
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Sep. 3-4
|
|
Hurricane Frances
|
|
South
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Sep. 15-21
|
|
Hurricane Jeanne
|
|
Mid-Atlantic, South
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Sep. 25-29
|
|
Hurricane Ivan
|
|
Midwest, Mid-Atlantic, South
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
Dec. 22-25
|
|
Wind, ice, snow
|
|
Midwest, South
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Other 2004 catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Development on 2003 and prior catastrophes
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calendar year incurred total
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
71 |
|
|
$ |
77 |
|
|
$ |
148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The discussions of property casualty insurance segments provide additional detail
regarding these factors.
Commercial Lines Insurance Results Of Operations
Overview Three-year Highlights
Performance highlights for the commercial lines segment include:
|
|
Premiums Although competition in our commercial markets continued to increase, our
written premium growth rate increased in 2006, reflecting our agency relationships,
strong new business growth, healthy policy retention rates, more accurate risk
classification, insurance-to-value initiatives, higher reinsurance treaty retentions
and exposure growth due to the healthy economy. These more than offset our deliberate
decisions not to write or renew certain business and the loss of some accounts due to
competition. In the more competitive pricing environment we have been careful to
maintain our underwriting discipline for both renewal and new business. We believe that
our written premium growth rate continues to exceed the average for the overall
commercial lines industry, which was estimated at 1.0 percent in 2006 after declining
0.4 percent in 2005. Earned premium growth remained relatively steady over the period. |
|
|
|
Combined ratio Our commercial lines combined ratio rose to 91.3 percent in 2006
largely because of softer pricing, increasing loss severity, less savings from
favorable development on prior period reserves and the adoption of stock option
expensing. The combined ratio was very strong in 2005 and 2004. We continue to focus on
sound underwriting fundamentals and seek to obtain adequate premiums per policy. A
single large loss in 2005 increased the ratio in that year by 1.0 percentage point. We
discuss large |
2006 10-K Page 42
|
|
losses and other factors affecting the combined ratio beginning on Page
44. We discuss the savings from favorable loss reserve development by commercial lines
of business on Page 47. |
|
|
|
Our commercial lines statutory combined ratio was 90.8 percent in 2006 compared with
87.1 percent in 2005 and 83.7 percent in 2004. By comparison, the estimated industry
commercial lines combined ratio was 94.3 percent in 2006, 99.7 percent in 2005 and 102.5
percent in 2004. We believe our results are trending differently than the overall
industry because the industry experienced unusually high catastrophe losses in 2004 and
2005 and unusually low catastrophe losses in 2006. |
Growth and Profitability
As competition in commercial markets has increased, we have focused on maintaining our
pricing discipline for both renewal and new business. Our independent agents continued to
report steady pressure on pricing during 2006 and communicated that winning new business and
retaining renewals required more pricing flexibility and careful risk selection.
We believe our strong new business growth in 2006 and 2005 primarily was due to the local
relationships and efforts of our agents and the field marketing teams that work with them.
Our field associates are in our agents offices emphasizing the Cincinnati value
proposition, calling on prospects with those agents, carefully evaluating risk exposure and
working up their best quotes for good accounts.
For our renewal business, our headquarters underwriters talk regularly with agents. Our
field teams are available to assist the headquarters underwriters by holding renewal review
meetings with agency staff to verify that each commercial account retains the
characteristics that caused us to write the business initially. For quality risks, our
commercial underwriters are offering policyholders the convenience of policy extensions of
one and two additional years. Policy extensions provide:
|
|
Retention of the terms and conditions that policyholders originally selected, backed
by our superior claims service and our A++ rating from A.M. Best Co. |
|
|
|
Stable rates on some of the shorter-tail coverages within the policies. |
We intend to remain a stable market for our agencies best business, and believe that our
case-by-case approach gives us a clear advantage. Our independent agents, field marketing
representatives and headquarters underwriters work together to select risks and respond
appropriately to local pricing trends. Historically, they have proven capable of balancing
risk and price to achieve growth over the longer term.
Staying abreast of evolving market conditions is a critical function, accomplished in both
an informal and a formal manner. Informally, our field marketing representatives and
underwriters are in constant receipt of market intelligence from the agencies with which
they work. Formally, our commercial lines product management group and field marketing
associates complete periodic market surveys to obtain competitive intelligence. This market
information helps identify the top competitors by line of business or specialty program and
also identifies our market strengths and weaknesses. The analysis encompasses pricing,
breadth of coverage and underwriting/eligibility issues.
In addition to reviewing our competitive position, our product management group and our
underwriting audit group review compliance with our underwriting standards as well as the
pricing adequacy of our commercial insurance programs and coverages. Further, our research
and development department analyzes opportunities and develops new products, new coverage
options and improvements to existing insurance products.
In 2006, strong new business activity, higher policy retention rates and higher premiums per
policy led to net written premium growth in all of our commercial lines of business, with
commercial auto rising slightly. In 2005, growth largely was driven by higher commercial
casualty premiums with commercial auto premiums declining. Commercial auto is one of the
first lines to experience pricing pressure because it often represents the largest portion
of insurance costs for commercial policyholders. Commercial auto also is one of the larger,
annually priced components of our three-year policies.
From 2004 through 2006, we experienced no growth in overall commercial lines policy counts
as growth in accounts with premiums above $10,000 offset a decline in the number of smaller
accounts. Agency emphasis and technology considerations were the primary reasons for the
shift.
For new business, our field marketing associates and agents are working together to select
risks and respond appropriately to local pricing trends. New commercial lines business was
$324 million in 2006, up from $282 million in both 2005 and 2004.
We discuss growth by commercial lines of business on Page 47.
2006 10-K Page 43
Commercial Lines Results
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
2,442 |
|
|
$ |
2,290 |
|
|
$ |
2,186 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
2,402 |
|
|
$ |
2,254 |
|
|
$ |
2,126 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
1,377 |
|
|
|
1,222 |
|
|
|
1,083 |
|
|
|
12.7 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
16.6 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Commission expenses |
|
|
444 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
|
423 |
|
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
|
3.6 |
|
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
228 |
|
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
17.8 |
|
|
|
13.5 |
|
Policyholder dividends |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
208.1 |
|
|
|
(52.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting profit |
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
285 |
|
|
$ |
338 |
|
|
|
(27.0 |
) |
|
|
(15.6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios as a percent of earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
57.3 |
% |
|
|
54.2 |
% |
|
|
50.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses |
|
|
61.0 |
|
|
|
57.6 |
|
|
|
54.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission expenses |
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
19.5 |
|
|
|
19.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
10.1 |
|
|
|
9.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policyholder dividends |
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined ratio |
|
|
91.3 |
% |
|
|
87.4 |
% |
|
|
84.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Over the past three years, we have continued to focus on seeking and maintaining
adequate premium per exposure as well as pursuing non-pricing means of enhancing longer-term
profitability. These have included identifying the exposures we have for each risk and
making sure we offer appropriate coverages, terms and conditions and limits of insurance. We
continue to adhere to our underwriting guidelines, to re-underwrite books of business with
selected agencies and to update policy terms and conditions, where necessary. In addition,
we continue to leverage our strong local presence. Our field marketing representatives meet
with local agencies to reaffirm agreements on the extent of frontline renewal underwriting
they will perform. Loss control, machinery and equipment and field claims representatives
continue to conduct on-site inspections. Field claims representatives prepare full risk
reports on any account reporting a loss above $100,000 or on any risk of concern. These
actions have helped to mitigate rising loss severity.
We describe the significant cost components for the commercial lines segment below.
Loss and Loss Expenses (excluding catastrophe losses)
Loss and loss expenses include both net paid losses and reserve changes for unpaid
losses as well as the associated loss expenses. We believe more competitive market
conditions and softer pricing contributed to the rise in the loss and loss expense ratio
excluding catastrophe losses between 2004 and 2006. In addition, 2005 results include a
single large loss that was insufficiently covered through our facultative reinsurance
programs, which increased 2005 loss and loss expenses by $22 million, net of reinsurance, or
1.0 percentage points. Savings from favorable loss reserve development moved lower over the
three years, which we discuss by commercial lines of business on Page 47.
Re-underwriting our commercial lines book of business in the early 2000s has had a positive
impact on loss cost trends such as frequency of loss, resulting in significant savings from
favorable reserve development. The favorable development in 2005 and 2004 also was due to a
headquarters claims department initiative, begun in 2001, to establish higher initial case
reserves on severe injury claims. The higher reserves reflect our experience that juries
often ignore significant liability issues in cases involving seriously injured claimants as
well as trends in medical cost inflation and life expectancies. These higher initial amounts
produce case reserves that reflect our full exposure more accurately. But some claims settle
before reaching a jury and some juries make awards that are less than the worst-case
scenario.
Another factor in the rise in the loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophe losses
in 2006 was increasing loss severity, reflected primarily by an increase in new losses and
case reserve increases greater than $250,000. In total, commercial lines new losses and
reserve increases greater than $250,000 rose to 21.3 percent of annual earned premiums in
2006 from 16.8 percent in 2005 and 14.9 percent in 2004. Those amounts included an increase
in new losses greater than $1 million. Our analysis indicated no unexpected concentration of
these losses and reserve increases by risk category, geographic region, policy inception,
agency or field marketing territory. We believe loss severity generally is rising, but we
cannot
predict the magnitude of future increases. Severe injury was frequently the cause for new
losses greater than $1 million. We continue to analyze factors that could be contributing to
a rise in severe injuries.
2006 10-K Page 44
Commercial Lines Losses by Size
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Losses $1 million or more |
|
$ |
180 |
|
|
$ |
124 |
|
|
$ |
80 |
|
|
|
45.3 |
|
|
|
54.3 |
|
Losses $250 thousand to $1 million |
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
32.3 |
|
|
|
1.2 |
|
Development and case reserve increases of $250 thousand or more |
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
149 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
29.5 |
|
|
|
12.7 |
|
Other losses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
561 |
|
|
|
596 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
(5.7 |
) |
|
|
11.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses incurred excluding catastrophe losses |
|
|
1,073 |
|
|
|
974 |
|
|
|
852 |
|
|
|
10.3 |
|
|
|
14.2 |
|
Catastrophe losses |
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
16.6 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses incurred |
|
$ |
1,162 |
|
|
$ |
1,050 |
|
|
$ |
923 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
|
|
13.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios as a percent of earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses $1 million or more |
|
|
7.5 |
% |
|
|
5.5 |
% |
|
|
3.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses $250 thousand to $1 million |
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
4.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development and case reserve increases of $250 thousand or more |
|
|
8.0 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
|
|
6.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other losses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
23.4 |
|
|
|
26.4 |
|
|
|
25.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss ratio excluding catastrophe losses |
|
|
44.7 |
|
|
|
43.2 |
|
|
|
40.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe losses |
|
|
3.7 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
3.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loss ratio |
|
|
48.4 |
% |
|
|
46.6 |
% |
|
|
43.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe Loss and Loss Expenses
Commercial lines catastrophe losses have been relatively stable as a percentage of net
earned premiums over the past three years.
Commission Expenses
Commercial lines commission expense as a percent of earned premium declined by 1.0 and
0.4 percentage points in 2006 and 2005, respectively, primarily due to lower profit-sharing
commissions on lower overall underwriting profits. Profit-sharing, or contingent,
commissions are calculated on the profitability of an agencys aggregate book of business,
taking into account longer-term profit, with a percentage for prompt payment of premiums and
other criteria, and reward the agencies efforts. These profit-based commissions generally
fluctuate with our loss and loss expenses.
A refinement and subsequent release of a contingent commission over accrual from 2004 in the
first three months of 2005 was responsible for 0.3 percentage points of the decline in 2005.
The refinement reflected the use of final 2004 financial data to calculate the contingent
commissions paid in 2005. Our 2006 contingent commission accrual reflected our estimate of
the profit-sharing commissions that will be paid to our agencies in early 2007.
Underwriting Expenses
Non-commission underwriting expenses rose to 11.1 percent of earned premiums in 2006
from 10.1 percent in 2005 and 9.4 percent in 2004. We continue to invest in our associates
and technology, which is contributing to an increase in other underwriting expenses. Higher
technology expense contributed 0.3 and 0.1 percentage points to the increase in 2006 and
2005. Higher staffing expense contributed 0.9 percentage points to the increase in 2006,
with stock option expense accounting for 0.5 percentage points of that amount.
Policyholder Dividends
Policyholder dividend expense was 0.7 percent of earned premium in 2006 compared with
0.2 percent in 2005 and 0.5 percent in 2004. The increase in 2006 was a result of higher
paid dividends and increased accrual for future dividends. The increased accrual reflects
the improved profitability of workers compensation policies with respect to recent policy
years.
Line of Business Analysis
Approximately 95 percent of our commercial lines premiums relate to accounts with
coverages from more than one of our business lines. As a result, we believe that commercial
lines is best measured and evaluated on a segment basis. However, we provide the line of
business data to summarize growth and profitability trends separately for our business
lines.
2006 10-K Page 45
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
2005-2004 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Change % |
|
Change % |
|
Commercial casualty: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
838 |
|
|
$ |
779 |
|
|
$ |
708 |
|
|
|
7.7 |
|
|
|
10.0 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
831 |
|
|
|
759 |
|
|
|
686 |
|
|
|
9.5 |
|
|
|
10.7 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
321 |
|
|
|
45.8 |
|
|
|
(5.9 |
) |
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
53.0 |
% |
|
|
39.8 |
% |
|
|
46.8 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
53.0 |
|
|
|
39.8 |
|
|
|
46.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial property: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
505 |
|
|
$ |
476 |
|
|
$ |
455 |
|
|
|
6.1 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
(5.9 |
) |
|
|
24.9 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
57.5 |
% |
|
|
64.2 |
% |
|
|
54.5 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
43.6 |
|
|
|
49.3 |
|
|
|
42.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial auto: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
450 |
|
|
$ |
448 |
|
|
$ |
458 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
Earned premiums |
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
|
|
(0.9 |
) |
|
|
1.5 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
236 |
|
|
|
1.5 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
61.5 |
% |
|
|
60.1 |
% |
|
|
52.4 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
60.6 |
|
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
|
52.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Workers compensation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
379 |
|
|
$ |
338 |
|
|
$ |
320 |
|
|
|
12.1 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
313 |
|
|
|
299 |
|
|
|
251 |
|
|
|
4.7 |
|
|
|
18.9 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
85.4 |
% |
|
|
90.9 |
% |
|
|
80.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
85.4 |
|
|
|
90.9 |
|
|
|
80.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Specialty packages: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
144 |
|
|
$ |
138 |
|
|
$ |
135 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
3.2 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
|
|
14.6 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
66.3 |
% |
|
|
67.0 |
% |
|
|
59.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
54.9 |
|
|
|
61.8 |
|
|
|
47.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Surety and executive risk: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
97 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
$ |
85 |
|
|
|
15.3 |
|
|
|
(0.1 |
) |
Earned premiums |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
16.3 |
|
|
|
(0.8 |
) |
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
72.2 |
|
|
|
27.9 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
50.7 |
% |
|
|
34.2 |
% |
|
|
26.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
50.7 |
|
|
|
34.2 |
|
|
|
26.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Machinery and equipment: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
|
8.7 |
|
|
|
6.8 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
|
|
8.0 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
98.7 |
|
|
|
17.1 |
|
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
42.0 |
% |
|
|
22.4 |
% |
|
|
20.6 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
41.6 |
|
|
|
22.5 |
|
|
|
20.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accident year loss data provides current estimates of incurred loss and loss
expenses for the past three accident years. Accident year data classifies losses according
to the year in which the corresponding loss event occurred, regardless of when the losses
are actually reported, booked or paid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accident Year |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial casualty |
|
$ |
540 |
|
|
$ |
420 |
|
|
$ |
359 |
|
Commercial property |
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
Commercial auto |
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
281 |
|
|
|
269 |
|
Workers compensation |
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
Specialty packages |
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
Surety and executive risk |
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses ratio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial casualty
|
|
|
64.9 |
% |
|
|
55.4 |
% |
|
|
52.4 |
% |
Commercial property |
|
|
56.6 |
|
|
|
64.2 |
|
|
|
59.3 |
|
Commercial auto |
|
|
66.1 |
|
|
|
61.4 |
|
|
|
59.8 |
|
Workers compensation |
|
|
82.8 |
|
|
|
77.4 |
|
|
|
79.8 |
|
Specialty packages |
|
|
64.7 |
|
|
|
58.6 |
|
|
|
61.2 |
|
Surety and executive risk |
|
|
44.4 |
|
|
|
48.3 |
|
|
|
36.2 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
39.2 |
|
|
|
28.6 |
|
|
|
18.6 |
|
Over the past three years, results for the business lines within the commercial lines
segment have reflected our emphasis on underwriting and obtaining adequate pricing for
covered risks, as discussed above.
2006 10-K Page 46
Commercial Casualty
Commercial casualty is our largest business line. Commercial casualty net written
premium growth slowed in 2006, but remained above the overall growth rate for commercial
lines. While casualty pricing continues to become more competitive, new business is strong.
We also are seeing a boost from the healthy business economy over the past several years as
well as related exposure growth.
The commercial casualty loss and loss expense ratio rose in 2006 after improving in 2005,
but remained within the range we consider appropriate. In each of the last three calendar
years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses has been the primary reason for the
fluctuations in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 12.0 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 22.5 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 20.0 percentage points. |
Over the three years, flat commercial umbrella loss costs helped produce savings through
favorable development on prior period reserves. Factors that contributed to the flat loss
cost trend included commercial lines re-underwriting efforts, Ohio judicial decisions
regarding underinsured/uninsured motorist claims and a claims mediation process that
promoted earlier liability settlement resolution, which also contributed to lower loss cost
trends for our other general liability coverages. Once these commercial lines and claims
initiatives are fully implemented, loss cost trends could be expected to return to normal
levels.
Another factor that helped produce savings through favorable development was the
headquarters claims department initiative to establish higher initial case reserves on
serious injury claims. The higher reserves reflect our experience indicating the likelihood
that juries would ignore significant liability issues in cases involving seriously injured
claimants as well as trends in medical cost inflation and life expectancies.
In large part because this business line also includes umbrella coverages, the accident year
loss and loss expense ratio can fluctuate significantly on a year-over-year basis.
Commercial Property
Commercial property is our second largest business line. Commercial property net
written premiums rose in 2006 and 2005. The primary reason for the more rapid growth in 2006
was a $5 million ceded reinsurance reinstatement premium in 2005 to restore affected layers
of our property catastrophe reinsurance program following Hurricane Katrina. This added 1.2
percentage points to the 2006 growth rate.
The commercial property loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophe losses improved in
2006 after rising in 2005 and remained within the range we consider appropriate. In each of
the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses contributed
to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.9 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 3.5 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.3 percentage points. |
In addition, the large loss discussed on Page 42 added 5.0 percentage points to the 2005
ratio.
Commercial Auto
Commercial auto net written premiums rose slightly in 2006 after declining 2.2 percent
in 2005. We are beginning to see the impact of the downward pressure on pricing on
underwriting results. Commercial auto is one of the business lines that we renew and price
annually, so market trends may be reflected here more quickly than in other lines.
Commercial auto also is generally one of the larger components of the typical package.
As a result of our underwriting activities and moderating industrywide severity and
frequency trends, the loss and loss expense ratio for commercial auto remained at an
acceptable level in 2006 and 2005 despite increasing due to pricing pressures. The increase
in the loss and loss expense ratio in 2006 also reflected a 2.9 percentage point rise in the
ratio of $1 million plus losses to commercial auto earned premiums.
In each of the last three calendar years, favorable development on prior period losses, due
to commercial lines re-underwriting efforts and favorable frequency and severity trends,
contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 4.6
percentage points. |
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 5.0
percentage points. |
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 10.5
percentage points, including 4.6 percentage points due to the release of UM/UIM
reserves. |
2006 10-K Page 47
Workers Compensation
In 2006 and 2005, workers compensation written premiums rose more rapidly than our
total commercial lines written premiums. Workers compensation premiums are benefiting from
the healthy business economy and related payroll growth. Premiums also are benefiting from
initiatives to modestly expand our workers compensation business in selected states. We
cannot offer workers compensation coverage in Ohio, our highest volume state, because it is
provided solely by the state instead of private insurers.
We pay a lower commission rate on workers compensation business, which means this line has
a higher loss and loss expense breakeven point than our other commercial business lines.
The workers compensation loss and loss expense ratio rose in 2005 after remaining steady
for several years and remained above our target levels in 2006. The 2005 rise largely was
due to a higher level of reserve strengthening for older accident years. The ratio remained
above our target level in 2006 because of modest reserve strengthening and seven new losses
greater than $1 million, primarily in the second half of the year. The seven losses in 2006
totaled $18 million and added 4.9 percentage points to the workers compensation loss and
loss expense ratio. There was only one similarly sized loss, for $1.6 million, in 2005 and
none in 2004.
Our philosophy is to establish case reserves when we learn of a loss to reflect our best
estimate of ultimate payouts. The higher initial reserves established in 2006 for newly
reported claims demonstrate our commitment to applying our claims reserving philosophy to
this business line.
In 2006, we also reviewed each of our established workers compensation case reserves above
$100,000 in light of current trends in medical cost inflation and estimated payout periods.
The review led to the allocation of approximately $60 million to case reserves held for
specific claims from accident years going back as much as 20 years. Reductions to IBNR
reserves offset approximately $44 million of those reserve increases. We had raised workers
compensation IBNR reserves in 2005, in light of the trends identified in the workers
compensation market. However, small shifts in medical cost inflation and payout periods
could have a significant effect on our potential future liability compared with our current
projections.
Activity in the reserves for prior period losses in the past three years included:
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 2.6
percentage points, as discussed above. |
|
|
2005 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 12.9
percentage points. The reserve strengthening primarily was due to medical cost
inflation and longer estimated payout periods compared with our original projections. |
|
|
2004 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 4.9
percentage points, which also was due to medical cost inflation. |
Specialty Packages
Specialty packages net written premiums rose in 2006 and 2005. The rollout we have
begun of our commercial lines policy processing system should help us meet changing
agency needs and address pricing, technology and service systems other carriers have
introduced for similar products in recent years.
The loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophe losses improved in 2006 after rising
in 2005, but remained within the range we consider appropriate. In each of the last three
calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses contributed to the
fluctuations in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 1.6 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 10.9 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 3.7 percentage points. |
Surety and Executive Risk
Surety and executive risk net written premiums rose in 2006 and were unchanged in 2005.
Healthy economic activity drove the 2006 growth.
The loss and loss expense ratio rose in 2006 and 2005; however, surety and executive risk
losses can fluctuate significantly, and we do not believe that the increases indicate any
new trend or risk.
Director and officer liability coverage accounted for 59.0 percent of surety and executive
risk premiums in 2006 compared with 61.7 percent in 2005 and 65.7 percent in 2004. Our
director and officer liability policies are offered primarily to nonprofit organizations,
reducing the risk associated with this line of business. As of
December 31, 2006, two of our in-force director and officer liability policies covered
Fortune 500 companies, 36 covered publicly traded companies (excluding banks and savings and
loans) and 57 covered banks and savings and loans with more than $500 million in assets.
2006 10-K Page 48
In each of the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses
contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 21.1
percentage points due to case reserves additions for director and officer liability
claims. |
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 5.4
percentage points. |
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 9.3
percentage points. |
Machinery and Equipment
Machinery
and equipment net written premiums rose in 2006 and 2005.
Marketing by machinery and equipment and field marketing representatives contributed to the
2006 growth.
The loss and loss expense ratio rose in 2006; however, machinery and equipment losses can
fluctuate significantly, and we do not believe that the increase indicates any new trend or
risk.
In each of the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses
contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.8 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 3.7 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 1.3 percentage points. |
Commercial Lines Insurance Outlook
Industrywide commercial lines written premiums are expected to decline approximately
1.0 percent in 2007. During 2006, agents again reported that renewal pricing pressure had
risen and new business pricing was requiring even more flexibility and more careful risk
selection. During 2006, we continued to need to use credits more frequently to retain
renewals of quality business the larger the account, the higher the credits, with
variations by geographic region and class of business. By year-end 2006, our field marketing
representatives reported pricing down about 10 percent to 15 percent on average to write the
same piece of new business we would have quoted in 2005. By comparison, 5 percent to 10
percent rate declines seem to be typical for renewal business.
We intend to continue to market our products to a broad range of business classes, price our
products adequately and take a package approach. We intend to maintain our underwriting
selectivity and carefully manage our rate levels as well as our programs that seek to
accurately match exposures with appropriate premiums. We will continue to evaluate each risk
individually and to make decisions regarding rates, the use of three-year commercial
policies and other policy terms on a case-by-case basis, even in lines and classes of
business that are under competitive pressure. New marketing territories created over the
past several years and new agency appointments will contribute to commercial lines growth.
We believe our approach should allow us to continue to underwrite commercial lines business
profitably in 2007, but we do not believe favorable reserve development will contribute to
underwriting profits as much in 2007 as in the past three years. In addition, underwriting
expenses are rising. We discuss our overall outlook for our property casualty insurance
operations in Measuring Our Success in 2007 and Beyond, Page 34.
Personal Lines Insurance Results of Operations
Overview Three-year Highlights
Performance highlights for the personal lines segment include:
|
|
Premiums As competition in our personal lines markets continued to increase and we
continued to work to generate consistent profitability in our personal lines market,
our written premiums declined again in 2006, reflecting lower new business and policy
retention rates through the first half of the year and lower pricing in the second half
of the year. Industry average written premium growth was estimated at 2.0 percent for
2006, 3.7 percent for 2005 and 6.6 percent for 2004. |
|
|
|
Personal lines new business premiums written directly by agencies increased 1.6 percent
to $33 million in 2006 after declining 33.9 percent to $32 million in 2005 and 19.9
percent to $48 million in 2004. |
|
|
|
Combined ratio After improving substantially in 2005, the combined ratio increased
in 2006 due to higher catastrophe losses, less savings from favorable development on
prior period reserves, an increase in loss severity and higher expenses. Lower earned
premiums exacerbated the year-over-year comparisons. Our personal lines statutory
combined ratio was 103.6 percent in 2006 compared with 94.3 percent in 2005 and 104.6
percent in 2004. By comparison, the estimated industry personal lines combined ratio
was 92.0 percent in 2006, 97.6 percent in 2005 and 94.9 percent in 2004. We believe
our results are trending differently than the overall industry because of the
competitive and pricing factors discussed below. |
2006 10-K Page 49
Growth and Profitability
Personal lines insurance is a strategic component of our overall relationship with many
of our agencies and an important component of agency relationships with their clients. We
believe agents recommend Cincinnati personal insurance products for their value-oriented
clients who seek to balance quality and price and are attracted by Cincinnatis superior
claims service and the benefits of our package approach.
In late 2004, price competition returned to the personal lines market as insurers leveraged
the higher profitability and stronger financial positions that were the outcome of
industrywide increases in homeowner rates and stricter enforcement of underwriting standards
between 2000 and 2003.
When price competition emerged in 2004, we were in the early stages of a program to improve
profitability for our homeowner line by raising rates and making changes to our policy terms
and conditions. We raised our personal lines rates in some territories too high to allow our
agents to market the benefits of a Cincinnati policy, leading to declines in our policy
retention rates and lower new business levels between 2002 and 2005.
We opted to delay certain rate changes to address the competitive situation until mid-2005
because we felt it was more important to fully commit our programming resources to
completing necessary modifications and upgrades to our then-new Diamond policy processing
system. During that time period, other carriers began making more aggressive use of
segmented pricing models, offering lower rates for higher quality accounts.
When some important system modifications were completed in mid-2005, we began filing rate
and credit changes to better position our products in the market, but written premiums, new
business and retention rates continued to decline.
During the 2003 to 2005 period, we also were introducing Diamond in our higher volume
states, which may have contributed to lower growth rates. The focus required by our agencies
to convert to our newer technology and make the necessary adaptations to their work flows
may have diverted their resources from new business efforts. Diamond gives agencies
additional choices to consider for their business operations and for policyholders. Agents
are growing more familiar with the new options and work flow, and many now are seeing
benefits from efficiencies as they renew business through the system.
During 2005 and 2006, we increased the systems processing power and availability and
offered additional functionality requested by agency staff. For example, we began offering
convenient account billing to direct bill customers, invoicing for multiple policies at one
time, and electronic funds transfer, which accommodates new monthly payment plans. We
continue to respond to agency requests for enhancements as we prepare Diamond for additional
states.
In mid-2006, we introduced a limited program of policy credits to incorporate insurance
scores into homeowner and personal auto pricing. These were intended to improve our ability
to compete for our agents highest quality personal lines accounts, increasing the
opportunity for our agents to market the advantages of our personal lines products and
services to their clients.
The policy credits contributed to increases in new business for both personal auto and
homeowner for the first time in several years. The new credit structure also led to improved
retention of current business. However, new business did not rise sufficiently to offset the
lower prices that our current personal lines policyholders received at renewal with these
policy credits. As a result, total net written premiums continued to decline in the second
half of 2006. To build on the new business and retention trends of the second half of 2006,
we will need to monitor the competitiveness of our personal auto and homeowner rates on an
ongoing basis and make refinements as necessary.
Strategies to accelerate our personal lines growth are discussed in Personal Lines Outlook,
Page 54. We discuss premium trends by personal lines of business on Page 53.
2006 10-K Page 50
Personal Lines Results
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
736 |
|
|
$ |
786 |
|
|
$ |
811 |
|
|
|
(6.4 |
) |
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
762 |
|
|
$ |
804 |
|
|
$ |
793 |
|
|
|
(5.3 |
) |
|
|
1.4 |
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
522 |
|
|
|
(1.5 |
) |
|
|
(11.3 |
) |
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
69.8 |
|
|
|
(34.2 |
) |
Commission expenses |
|
|
152 |
|
|
|
154 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
(1.6 |
) |
|
|
(3.6 |
) |
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
4.2 |
|
|
|
24.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting profit (loss) |
|
$ |
(27 |
) |
|
$ |
45 |
|
|
$ |
(40 |
) |
|
|
(160.0 |
) |
|
|
214.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios as a percent of earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
59.9 |
% |
|
|
57.6 |
% |
|
|
65.9 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe loss and loss expenses |
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses |
|
|
71.2 |
|
|
|
63.9 |
|
|
|
75.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commission expenses |
|
|
19.9 |
|
|
|
19.2 |
|
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Underwriting expenses |
|
|
12.5 |
|
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
9.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Combined ratio |
|
|
103.6 |
% |
|
|
94.4 |
% |
|
|
105.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
In 2006, we did not achieve the profit levels we had hoped to realize, following the
improvement of the personal lines combined ratio in 2005. Instead, higher catastrophe losses
and other factors caused the 2006 combined ratio to rise.
We describe the significant cost components for the personal lines segment below.
Loss and Loss Expenses (excluding catastrophe losses)
Loss and loss expenses include both net paid losses and reserve changes for unpaid
losses as well as the associated loss expenses. The change in the loss and loss expense
ratio excluding catastrophe losses between 2004 and 2006 largely was due to pricing and loss
cost trends. Increased loss severity was seen primarily in higher new losses and case
reserve increases greater than $250,000. In total, personal lines new losses and case
reserve increases greater than $250,000 were 11.1 percent of annual earned premiums in 2006
compared with 8.2 percent in 2005 and 10.2 percent in 2004. Personal lines new losses and
case reserve increases declined as a percent of earned premiums in 2005, in part because of
higher rates per exposure. Our analysis indicated no unexpected concentration of these
losses and case reserve increases by risk category, geographic region, policy inception,
agency or field marketing territory. In 2006, homeowner fires, which spiked in the third
quarter, were the most frequent cause for new losses greater than $1 million. We believe
loss severity generally is rising, but we cannot predict the magnitude of future increases.
Savings from favorable loss reserve development moved lower over the three years, which we
discuss by personal lines of business on Page 53.
Personal Lines Losses by Size
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Losses $1 million or more |
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
|
79.1 |
|
|
|
(26.0 |
) |
Losses $250 thousand to $1 million |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
14.5 |
|
|
|
(19.9 |
) |
Development and case reserve increases of $250 thousand or more |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
16.8 |
|
|
|
(7.7 |
) |
Other losses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
309 |
|
|
|
339 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
(8.9 |
) |
|
|
(8.5 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses incurred excluding catastrophe losses |
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
405 |
|
|
|
452 |
|
|
|
(3.0 |
) |
|
|
(10.2 |
) |
Catastrophe losses |
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
69.8 |
|
|
|
(34.2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total losses incurred |
|
$ |
479 |
|
|
$ |
456 |
|
|
$ |
529 |
|
|
|
5.1 |
|
|
|
(13.7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ratios as a percent of earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses $1 million or more |
|
|
3.0 |
% |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
|
2.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses $250 thousand to $1 million |
|
|
5.2 |
|
|
|
4.3 |
|
|
|
5.4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Development and case reserve increases of $250 thousand or more |
|
|
2.9 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
|
|
2.6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other losses excluding catastrophes |
|
|
40.5 |
|
|
|
42.2 |
|
|
|
46.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss ratio excluding catastrophe losses |
|
|
51.6 |
|
|
|
50.4 |
|
|
|
57.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe losses |
|
|
11.3 |
|
|
|
6.3 |
|
|
|
9.7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loss ratio |
|
|
62.9 |
% |
|
|
56.7 |
% |
|
|
66.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Catastrophe Loss and Loss Expenses
Personal lines catastrophe losses, net of reinsurance and before taxes, contributed 5
percentage points more to the combined ratio in 2006 because of an increase of $35 million
in incurred catastrophe losses and lower earned premium. The majority of these losses
related to wind and hail from storms in Indiana and Ohio.
2006 10-K Page 51
Commission Expenses
Personal lines commission expense as a percent of earned premium rose by 0.7 percentage
points in 2006 after declining by 0.9 percentage points in 2005. The 2006 change was
primarily due to higher profit-sharing commissions resulting from accrual and allocation
adjustments. Profit-sharing, or contingent, commissions are calculated on the profitability
of an agencys aggregate book of business, taking into account longer-term
profit, with a percentage for prompt payment of premiums and other criteria, and reward the
agencies efforts. These profit-based commissions generally fluctuate with our loss and loss
expenses.
A refinement and subsequent release of a contingent commission over accrual from 2004 in the
first three months of 2005 was responsible for 0.2 percentage points of the decline in 2005.
The refinement reflected the use of final 2004 financial data to calculate the contingent
commissions paid in 2005. Our 2006 contingent commission accrual reflected our estimate of
the profit-sharing commissions that will be paid to our agencies in early 2007.
Underwriting Expenses
Non-commission underwriting expenses increased 1.2 percentage points in 2006 and 2.0
percentage points in 2005. We continue to invest in our associates and technology, which is
contributing to an increase in non-commission underwriting expenses. Higher technology
expense contributed 0.8 and 0.5 percentage points to the increase in 2006 and 2005. Higher
staffing expense contributed 0.8 to the increase in 2006, with stock option expense
accounting for 0.5 percentage points of that amount. Increases in those amounts in 2006 were
offset partially by savings in taxes, licenses and fees. The increase in 2005 reflected an
unfavorable deferred acquisition cost comparison of 1.0 percentage points due to premium
declines.
Line of Business Analysis
We prefer to write personal lines coverage on an account basis that includes both auto
and homeowner coverages as well as coverages from the other personal business line. As a
result, we believe that personal lines is best measured and evaluated on a segment basis.
However, we provide the line of business data to summarize growth and profitability trends
separately for the three business lines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
2006-2005 |
|
2005-2004 |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Change % |
|
Change % |
|
Personal auto: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
359 |
|
|
$ |
409 |
|
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
|
(12.4 |
) |
|
|
(9.6 |
) |
Earned premiums |
|
|
385 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
|
|
(11.2 |
) |
|
|
(4.0 |
) |
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
(3.5 |
) |
|
|
(13.0 |
) |
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
65.0 |
% |
|
|
59.9 |
% |
|
|
66.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
62.2 |
|
|
|
59.3 |
|
|
|
65.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Homeowner: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
290 |
|
|
$ |
288 |
|
|
$ |
270 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
6.7 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
2.3 |
|
|
|
10.4 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
240 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
247 |
|
|
|
12.4 |
|
|
|
(13.4 |
) |
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
83.0 |
% |
|
|
75.5 |
% |
|
|
96.3 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
59.3 |
|
|
|
58.6 |
|
|
|
69.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other personal: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
87 |
|
|
$ |
89 |
|
|
$ |
88 |
|
|
|
(2.0 |
) |
|
|
1.3 |
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
(1.1 |
) |
|
|
3.4 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
31.6 |
|
|
|
(27.6 |
) |
Loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
59.4 |
% |
|
|
44.6 |
% |
|
|
63.7 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense ratio excluding catastrophes |
|
|
52.0 |
|
|
|
41.6 |
|
|
|
60.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accident year loss data provides current estimates of incurred loss and loss
expenses for the past three accident years. Accident year data classifies losses according
to the year in which the corresponding loss event occurred, regardless of when the losses
are actually reported, booked or paid.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accident year |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personal Auto |
|
$ |
248 |
|
|
$ |
272 |
|
|
$ |
303 |
|
Homeowner |
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
255 |
|
Other Personal |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses ratio: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personal Auto |
|
|
64.5 |
% |
|
|
62.8 |
% |
|
|
67.3 |
% |
Homeowner |
|
|
81.5 |
|
|
|
77.6 |
|
|
|
99.6 |
|
Other Personal |
|
|
88.0 |
|
|
|
65.4 |
|
|
|
74.4 |
|
2006 10-K Page 52
Personal Auto
Written and earned premiums for the personal auto line declined in 2006 and 2005. As
noted above, the decline primarily was due to price competition in some states and
territories, which resulted in lower policy renewal retention and significantly lower new
business levels through mid-2006. We continue to monitor and modify selected rates and
credits to address our competitive position.
The loss and loss expense ratio for personal auto has remained satisfactory. For selected
agencies, we use re-underwriting programs to review and to strengthen underwriting
standards, such as requiring motor vehicle reports for insured drivers. We work with
agencies to develop strategies to increase the companys penetration of the agencys
personal lines business. The rise in the ratio in 2006 was due to price reductions.
In each of the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period losses
contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.6 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 1.9 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.2 percentage points. |
Homeowner
The growth rate of written and earned premiums for the homeowner line slowed over the
three-year period. As discussed above, until mid-2006, the benefit of rate increases in 2004
and 2005 was being increasingly offset by lower policy renewal retention rates and
significantly lower new business levels. Earned premiums rose more rapidly because of the
benefit of higher written premium growth in earlier periods.
We began a strategic shift in 2004 to a more conventional one-year homeowner policy term
from our traditional three-year policy term. We are transitioning to one-year policies in
conjunction with the state-by-state deployment of Diamond, our personal lines policy
processing system. One-year policies allow us to modify rates, terms and conditions more
promptly in response to market changes. At year-end 2006, approximately 85 percent of all
homeowner policies had been converted to a one-year term, up from approximately 56 percent
at year-end 2005. We are continuing to renew homeowner policies for three-year terms in five
states that currently account for less than 1 percent of total personal lines premiums.
The loss and loss expense ratio for the homeowner line excluding catastrophe losses rose in
2006 after improving in 2005. The increase in 2006 reflected a higher contribution from
large losses. In each of the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior
period losses also contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Reserve strengthening raised the loss and loss expense ratio by 1.5 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 0.4 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 2.7 percentage points. |
We continue to seek to improve homeowner results so that this line achieves profitability.
Since we generally do not allocate non-commission expenses to individual business lines, to
measure homeowner profitability, we now assume total commission and underwriting expenses
would contribute approximately 33 percentage points to our homeowner combined ratio, up from
a 32 percent assumption in prior years. Lower levels of premium growth affected our ability
to attain our expense ratio target in 2006 and may continue to do so in the future.
We also assume catastrophe losses as a percent of homeowner earned premium would be in the
range of 17 percent. Over the past three years, catastrophe losses have averaged 22.2
percent of homeowner earned premiums. We did not change our catastrophe loss assumption
because the geographic concentration of these losses has been unusual in the past three
years.
We had hoped that by 2007 the full benefit of our pricing and underwriting actions would be
reflected in homeowner results and this line would be approaching breakeven. Pricing changes
enacted in mid-2006, however, have slowed our progress toward overall homeowner
profitability.
Other Personal
Other personal written premiums were down slightly in 2006 after rising slightly in
2005. Lower retention and new business for homeowner and personal auto during 2005 and the
first half of 2006 contributed to the decline, since most of our other personal coverages
are endorsed to homeowner or auto policies.
The loss and loss expense ratio for other personal rose in 2006 due to higher personal
umbrella and dwelling fire losses in the second quarter. Personal umbrella losses can
fluctuate significantly, and we do not believe that the increase indicated any new trend or
risk. In each of the last three calendar years, activity in the reserves for prior period
losses also contributed to the changes in the loss and loss expense ratio.
|
|
2006 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 28.6 percentage points. |
|
|
|
2005 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 28.7 percentage points. |
2006 10-K Page 53
|
|
2004 Favorable development lowered the loss and loss expense ratio by 18.9 percentage points. |
Personal Lines Insurance Outlook
Industry experts currently anticipate industrywide personal lines written premiums will
rise approximately 1.2 percent in 2007. While the rise in new business levels and policy
retention rates in the second half of 2006 are positive indications for our personal lines
business, we believe our growth rate will be below that of the industry in 2007.
We are pursuing a number of strategies in our personal lines business to achieve our
long-term objectives for this segment:
|
|
Competitive rates In mid-2006, we introduced insurance scores into our program of
policy credits for homeowner and personal auto pricing. That action led to the
increased new business for both personal auto and homeowners in the second half of
2006. It also led to improved retention of current business. While these pricing
refinements have reduced premiums per policy, we believe they present an opportunity to
attract our agents more quality conscious clientele. |
|
|
|
Policy characteristics In keeping with industry practices, most of our homeowner
products no longer automatically provide guaranteed full replacement cost coverage in
our basic policies. We add specific charges for some optional coverages previously
included at no charge, such as limited replacement cost and water damage coverages.
Policyholders who need the water damage protection now can select the amount of
coverage that meets their needs. However, these changes and our transition to one-year
homeowner policies have diminished some of the factors that distinguished our products. |
|
|
|
Diamond introduction The Diamond system is in use by agencies writing
approximately 90 percent of personal lines premium volume. We believe the system
ultimately will make it easier for agents to place personal auto, homeowner and other
personal lines business with us, while greatly increasing policy-issuance and
policy-renewal efficiencies and providing direct-bill capabilities. Agents using
Diamond chose direct bill for 47 percent and headquarters printing for 81 percent of
policy transactions in 2006. |
|
|
|
New agencies The availability of Diamond should help us increase the number of
agencies that offer our personal lines products, which also should contribute to
personal lines growth and geographic diversity. We currently market both homeowner and
personal auto insurance products through 772 of our 1,289 reporting agency locations in
22 of the 32 states where we market commercial lines insurance. We market homeowner
products through 22 locations in three additional states (Maryland, North Carolina and
West Virginia). |
|
|
|
During 2007, we hope to add personal lines for 30 to 35 agency locations in the 13
states in which Diamond is in use that currently market only our commercial lines
products. During 2007, our field teams and personal lines associates are contacting
these agencies to re-introduce them to our personal lines product line and technology.
Expanding into these agencies would provide additional sources of premiums and help
geographically diversify our personal lines portfolio. |
We identify several other factors that may affect the personal lines combined ratio in 2007
and beyond. Personal lines underwriters continue to focus on insurance-to-value initiatives
to verify that policyholders are buying the correct level of coverage for the value of the
insured risk, and we are carefully maintaining underwriting standards. However, if premiums
decline more than we expect, the personal lines expense ratio may be higher than the 2006
level, because some of our costs are relatively fixed, such as our planned investments in
technology. We discuss our overall outlook for the property casualty insurance operations in
Measuring Our Success in 2007 and Beyond, Page 34.
Life Insurance Results of Operations
Overview Three-year Highlights
Performance highlights for the life insurance segment include:
|
|
Revenues Revenue growth has accelerated over the past three years as gross
in-force policy face amounts increased to $56.971 billion at year-end 2006 from $51.493
billion at year-end 2005 and $44.921 billion at year-end 2004. |
|
|
|
Profitability The life insurance segment reports a small GAAP loss because its
investment income is included in investment segment results, except investment income
credited to contract holders (interest assumed in life insurance policy reserve
calculations). The segment operating profit declined in 2006 after improving in 2005
due to: |
|
o |
|
Higher mortality expenses compared with the year-earlier periods
principally due to growth in life insurance in force. Mortality experience remained
within pricing guidelines. |
|
|
o |
|
Adoption of stock option expensing, which added approximately $1 million to
2006 other operating expenses. |
2006 10-K Page 54
|
|
At the same time, we recognize that assets under management, capital appreciation and
investment income are integral to evaluation of the success of the life insurance
segment because of the long duration of life products. For that reason, we also evaluate
GAAP data, including all investment activities on life insurance-related assets, which
grew 32.6 percent in 2006 to $63 million and 23.8 percent in 2005 to $47 million. The
life insurance company portfolio had pretax realized investment gains of $45 million in
2006 compared with $17 million in 2005 and $9 million in 2004. |
Life Insurance Results
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
|
|
Written premiums |
|
$ |
161 |
|
|
$ |
205 |
|
|
$ |
193 |
|
|
|
(21.3 |
) |
|
|
6.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
106 |
|
|
$ |
101 |
|
|
|
7.9 |
|
|
|
5.7 |
|
Separate account investment management fees |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
18.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
7.6 |
|
|
|
6.0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contract holders benefits incurred |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
20.1 |
|
|
|
7.2 |
|
Investment interest credited to contract holders |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
Operating expenses incurred |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
(1.8 |
) |
|
|
(0.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total benefits and expenses |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
103 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
16.1 |
|
|
|
0.8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance segment profit (loss) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
|
(115.4 |
) |
|
|
334.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Growth
We offer term, whole life and universal life products, fixed annuities and disability
income products.
Total statutory life insurance net written premiums were $161 million in 2006 compared with
$205 million in 2005 and $193 million in 2004. Total statutory written premiums for life
insurance operations for all periods include life insurance, annuity and accident and health
premiums. The change primarily was due to:
|
|
Statutory written premiums for term and other life insurance products rose 12.7
percent to $127 million for 2006 and declined 4.2 percent to $113 million for 2005. |
|
|
|
Statutory written annuity premiums declined $58 million in 2006 and increased $18
million in 2005. Since late 2005, we have de-emphasized annuities because of an
unfavorable interest rate environment. |
Fee income from universal life products declined 14.9 percent to $23 million in 2006 and
rose 2.7 percent in 2005 to $27 million. Separate account investment management fee income
contributed $3 million, $4 million and $3 million to total revenues in 2006, 2005 and 2004.
In 2006, our life insurance segment experienced a 0.3 percent rise in life applications
submitted and a 10.6 percent increase in gross face amounts issued, primarily due to
continued strong sales of term insurance marketed through the companys property casualty
agency force.
Over the past several years, we have worked to maintain a portfolio of straightforward and
up-to-date products, primarily under the LifeHorizons banner. Our product development
efforts emphasize death benefit protection and guarantees.
Distribution expansion within our property casualty insurance agencies remains a high
priority. In the past several years, we have added life field marketing representatives for
the western and northeastern states.
Profitability
Life segment expenses consist principally of:
|
|
Contract holders benefits incurred related to traditional life and
interest-sensitive products accounted for 70.3 percent of 2006 total benefits and
expenses, 66.0 percent of 2005 total benefits and expenses and 64.3 percent of 2004
total benefits and expenses. |
|
|
|
Operating expenses incurred, net of deferred acquisition costs, accounted for 29.7
percent of 2006 total benefits and expenses, 34.0 percent of 2005 total benefits and
expenses and 35.7 percent of 2004 total benefits and expenses. Stock option expense
added $1 million, or 0.7 percentage points, to expenses in 2006. |
Life segment profitability depends largely on premium levels, the adequacy of product
pricing, underwriting skill and operating efficiencies. Life segment results include only
investment interest credited to contract holders (interest assumed in life insurance policy
reserve calculations). The remaining investment income is
reported in the investment segment results. The life investment portfolio is managed to earn
target spreads between earned investment rates on general account assets and rates credited
to policyholders. We consider the value of assets under management and investment income for
the life investment portfolio as key performance indicators for the life insurance segment.
We seek to maintain a competitive advantage with respect to benefits paid and reserve
increases by consistently achieving better than average claims experience due to skilled
underwriting. Commissions paid by the life insurance operation are on par with industry
averages. During the past several years, we have invested
2006 10-K Page 55
in imaging and workflow technology
and have significantly improved application processing. We have achieved efficiencies while
maintaining our service standards.
Life Insurance Outlook
As the life insurance company seeks to improve penetration of our property casualty
agencies, our objective is to increase premiums and contain expenses. Term insurance is our
largest life insurance product line. We continue to introduce new term products with
features our agents indicate are important. In addition, we introduced new universal life
products including cash value accumulation products for adults and children.
Marketplace and regulatory changes continued to affect the availability of cost-effective
reinsurance for term life insurance. We are addressing this situation by retaining no more
than a $500,000 exposure, ceding the balance using excess over retention mortality coverage
and retaining the policy reserve.
Because of the conservative nature of statutory reserving principles, retaining the policy
reserve requires a large commitment of capital and reduces statutory earnings. However, we
believe the long-term profitability of term life insurance serves to enhance GAAP results.
Although the exact timing and details are uncertain, the NAIC continues to make progress
toward comprehensive reforms of statutory reserving principles, as we discuss in 2007
Reinsurance Programs, Page 69.
In the future, we expect that assets under management, capital appreciation and investment
income, which are reported in investment segment results, will continue to be integral to
our evaluation of the success of the life insurance operations. While life insurance segment
profit may continue to fluctuate near break-even, when we also consider life insurance
investment activities, we continue to believe the life insurance operations will continue to
provide a steady income stream to help offset the fluctuations of the property casualty
insurance business.
Investments Results of Operations
Overview Three-year Highlights
The investment segment contributes investment income and realized gains and losses to
results of operations. Investments provide our primary source of pretax and after-tax
profits.
|
|
Investment income Pretax investment income reached a new record in 2006, rising
8.4 percent from the prior record in 2005. Growth in investment income over the past
two years has been driven by strong cash flow for new investments, higher interest
income from the growing fixed-maturity portfolio and increased dividend income from the
common stock portfolio. |
|
|
|
Realized investment gains and losses We reported realized investment gains in
2006 and 2005 largely due to investment sales. The sale of our Alltel common stock
holding contributed $647 million (pretax) of the 2006 gain. |
Investment Results
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006-2005 |
|
|
2005-2004 |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Change % |
|
|
Investment income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
$ |
300 |
|
|
$ |
280 |
|
|
$ |
252 |
|
|
|
7.1 |
|
|
|
11.2 |
|
Dividends |
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
|
|
7.5 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Other |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
90.0 |
|
|
|
29.4 |
|
Investment expenses |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(19.3 |
) |
|
|
(22.3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total net investment income |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
|
|
8.4 |
|
|
|
6.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment interest credited to contract holders |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
|
|
5.7 |
|
|
|
12.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized investment gains and losses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized investment gains and losses |
|
|
678 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
883.0 |
|
|
|
(20.7 |
) |
Change in valuation of embedded derivatives |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
200.7 |
|
|
|
(167.2 |
) |
Other-than-temporary impairment charges |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
41.7 |
|
|
|
78.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net realized investment gains |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
1,026.0 |
|
|
|
(33.1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment operations income |
|
$ |
1,200 |
|
|
$ |
536 |
|
|
$ |
537 |
|
|
|
124.0 |
|
|
|
(0.4 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment Income
Growth in investment income reflected new investments, higher interest income from the
growing fixed-maturity portfolio and increased dividend income from the common stock
portfolio. The advantages of strong cash flow in the past three years for new investments
have been somewhat offset by the challenge of investing in a low interest rate environment.
In 2006, proceeds from the sale of the Alltel holding that were later used to make the
applicable tax payments during the year were invested in short-term instruments that
generated approximately $5 million in interest income.
Overall, common stock dividends contributed 42.4 percent of pretax investment income in 2006
compared with 43.7 percent in 2005 and 43.9 percent in 2004. Fifth Third, our largest equity
holding, contributed
2006 10-K Page 56
43.8 percent of total dividend income in 2006. We discuss our Fifth
Third investment in Item 7A, Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk,
Page 75. In 2006, 38 of the 50 common stock holdings in the portfolio raised their indicated
annual dividend payout, as did 36 of 49 in 2005 and 33 of 51 in 2004.
Net Realized Investment Gains and Losses
Net realized investment gains and losses are made up of realized investment gains and
losses on the sale of securities, changes in the valuation of embedded derivatives within
certain convertible securities and other-than-temporary impairment charges. These three
areas are discussed below.
Realized Investment Gains and Losses
Realized investment gains in the past three years largely were due to the sale of
equity holdings. We buy and sell both fixed-maturity and equity securities on an ongoing
basis to help achieve our portfolio objectives.
|
|
2006 We sold the remainder of our Alltel common stock holdings. We discuss this
sale in Item 1, Investments Segment, Page 14, and Item 8, Note 2 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements, Page 90. |
|
|
|
2005 We had gains from the sale of equity holdings that no longer met our
investment parameters or were obtained from convertible securities whose underlying
common stock was never intended to be a long-term holding. Included in 2005 were gains
from the initial sales of a portion of our Alltel holding. |
|
|
|
2004 We sold $356 million in equity holdings as part of a program to support the
financial strength ratings of our property casualty insurance operations. We selected
holdings to sell primarily based on the belief of the investment committee and
management that these securities would have a lower dividend growth rate over the next
several years when compared with other holdings in the portfolio. We also considered
the potential tax effect of any unrealized gains. Partial sales of holdings in which we
held over $100 million in fair value at year-end 2003 contributed $311 million. |
We sold fixed-maturity investments during the past three years as part of our portfolio
management strategies. The majority of these were bonds disposed of due to rating or credit
concerns, including several in the airline and auto-related industries. Although we prefer
to hold fixed-maturity investments until they mature, a decision to sell reflects our
perception of a change in the underlying fundamentals of the security and preference to
allocate those funds to investments that more closely meet the established parameters for
long-term stability and growth. Our opinion that a security fundamentally no longer meets
our investment parameters may reflect a loss of confidence in the issuers management, a
change in underlying risk factors (such as political risk, regulatory risk, sector risk or
credit risk), or a strategic shift in business strategy that is not consistent with our
long-term outlook.
Realized gains in the past three years also have included gains from the sale of previously
impaired securities.
Change in the Valuation of Embedded Derivatives
In 2006, we recorded $7 million in fair value increases compared with $7 million in
fair value declines in 2005 and $10 million in fair value increases in 2004. These changes
in fair value are due to the application of SFAS No. 133, which requires measurement of the
fluctuations in the value of the embedded derivative features in selected convertible
securities. The changes in fair values are recognized in net income in the period they
occur. See the discussion of Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities in Item
8, Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 85, for details on the accounting
for convertible security embedded options.
Other-than-temporary Impairment Charges
In 2006 and 2005, we recorded $1 million in write-downs of investments that we deemed
had experienced an other-than-temporary decline in market value versus $6 million in 2004.
The factors we consider when evaluating impairments are discussed in Critical Accounting
Estimates, Asset Impairment, Page 37. The other-than-temporary impairment charges
represented less than 0.1 percent of our total invested assets at year-end 2006, 2005 and
2004. Other-than-temporary impairment charges also include unrealized losses of holdings
that we have identified for sale but not yet completed a transaction.
The significant decline in other-than-temporary impairment in the past three years was due
to prior impairments in the portfolio, disposition of certain securities in prior years and
an improvement in the general financial climate.
Other-than-temporary impairment charges from the investment portfolio by industry are
summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Automotive |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
Airline |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
Other |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 57
Other-than-temporary impairment charges from the investment portfolio by the asset
class we described in Item 1, Investments Segment, Page 14, are summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Taxable fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment amount |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
New book value |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Number of securities impaired |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment amount |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
New book value |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
1 |
% |
Number of securities impaired |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common equities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment amount |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
New book value |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Number of securities impaired |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impairment amount |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
New book value |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Number of securities impaired |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent to total owned |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
|
|
0 |
% |
Investments Outlook
We believe investment income growth for 2007 could be in the range of 6.5 percent to
7.0 percent. This outlook is based on the higher anticipated level of dividend income from
equity holdings, the investment of insurance operations cash flow and the current portfolio
attributes. In 2007, we expect to allocate a higher proportion of cash available for
investment to equity securities, taking into consideration insurance department regulations
and ratings agency comments. We continue to identify companies with the potential for
revenue, earnings and dividend growth, a strong management team and favorable outlook. These
equities offer the potential for steadily increasing dividend income along with capital
appreciation. Dividend increases within the last 12 months by Fifth Third and another 37 of
the 50 common stock holdings in the equity portfolio should add $16 million to annualized
investment income.
We believe impairments in 2007 should be limited to securities that have been identified for
sale or that have experienced a sharp decline in fair value with little or no warning
because of issuer-specific events. All securities in the portfolio were trading at or above
70 percent of book value at December 31, 2006. Our asset
impairment committee continues to monitor the investment portfolio. The current asset
impairment policy is in Critical Accounting Estimates, Asset Impairment, Page 37.
Other
In 2006, other income of the insurance subsidiaries, parent company operations and
non-investment operations of CFC Investment Company and CinFin Capital Management Company
resulted in $14 million in revenues compared with $12 million in 2005 and $8 million in
2004. Losses before income taxes of $51 million in 2006 were primarily due to $51 million in
interest expense from debt of the parent company. Losses before income taxes were $50
million and $37 million in 2005 and 2004, when interest expense was $52 million and $36
million, respectively.
Taxes
Income tax expense was $399 million in 2006 compared with $221 million in 2005 and $216
million in 2004. The effective tax rate for 2006 was 30.0 percent compared with 26.8 percent
in 2005 and 27.0 percent in 2004. The sale of our Alltel common stock holdings in the first
three months of 2006, which generated a $647 million pretax gain, was the primary reason for
the change in effective tax rate for the year. Growth in the tax-exempt municipal bond
portfolio, higher investment income from dividends and lower operating earnings also
contributed to the change in the effective tax rate for 2006.
2006 10-K Page 58
We pursue a strategy of investing some portion of cash flow in tax-advantaged fixed-maturity
and equity securities to minimize our overall tax liability and maximize after-tax earnings.
For our insurance subsidiaries, approximately 85 percent of income from tax-advantaged
fixed-maturity investments is exempt from federal tax calculations. Our non-insurance
subsidiaries own no tax-advantaged fixed-maturity investments. For our insurance
subsidiaries, the dividend received deduction exempts approximately 60 percent of dividends
from qualified equities from federal tax calculations. The dividend received deduction
exempts 70 percent of dividends from qualified equities for our non-insurance subsidiaries.
Details regarding our effective tax rate are found in Item 8, Note 10 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements, Page 95.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Liquidity and capital resources represent the overall financial strength of our company
and our ability to generate cash flows to meet the short- and long-term cash requirements of
business obligations and growth needs. We seek to maintain prudent levels of liquidity and
financial strength for the protection of our policyholders, creditors and shareholders.
The parent companys primary means of meeting liquidity requirements are dividends from our
insurance subsidiary and income from investments held at the parent-company level supported
by our capital resources. At year-end 2006, we had shareholders equity of $6.808 billion
and total debt of $840 million. Our ability to access the capital markets and short-term
bank borrowing provide other potential sources of liquidity. One way we seek to maintain
financial strength is by keeping our ratio of debt to capital below 15 percent. Our parent
companys cash requirements include dividends to shareholders, interest payments on our
long-term debt, common stock repurchases and general operating expenses.
Our insurance subsidiarys primary sources of liquidity are collection of premiums and
investment income. Its cash needs primarily consist of paying property casualty and life
insurance loss and loss expenses as well as ongoing operating expenses and payments of
dividends to the parent company. Although we have never sold investments to pay claims, the
sale of investments would provide an additional source of liquidity, if required. After
satisfying operating cash requirements, cash flows are invested in fixed-maturity and equity
securities, leading to the potential for increases in future investment income and
unrealized appreciation.
Sources of Liquidity
Subsidiary Dividends
Our insurance subsidiary declared dividends to the parent company of $275 million in
both 2006 and 2005 and $175 million in 2004. State of Ohio regulatory requirements restrict
the dividends insurance subsidiaries can pay. During 2007, total dividends that our lead
insurance subsidiary can pay to our parent company without regulatory approval are
approximately $572 million.
Insurance Underwriting
Our property casualty and life insurance operations provide liquidity because premiums
generally are received before losses are paid under the policies purchased with those
premiums. After satisfying our cash requirements, excess cash flows are used for investment,
increasing future investment income.
This table shows a summary of cash flow of the insurance subsidiary (direct method):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Premiums collected |
|
$ |
3,285 |
|
|
$ |
3,187 |
|
|
$ |
3,055 |
|
Loss and loss expenses paid |
|
|
(1,859 |
) |
|
|
(1,752 |
) |
|
|
(1,694 |
) |
Commissions and other underwriting expenses paid |
|
|
(1,036 |
) |
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
(894 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance subsidiary cash flow from underwriting |
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
Investment income received |
|
|
471 |
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
362 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance subsidiary operating cash flow |
|
$ |
861 |
|
|
$ |
867 |
|
|
$ |
829 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Historically, cash receipts from property casualty and life insurance premiums, along
with investment income, have been more than sufficient to pay claims, operating expenses and
dividends to the parent company. While first-year life insurance expenses normally exceed
the premiums, subsequent premiums are used to generate investment income until the time the
policy benefits are paid.
After paying claims and operating expenses, cash flows from underwriting declined in 2006
from the level of 2005 and 2004. We discuss our future obligations for claims payments in
Contractual Obligations, Page 61, and our future obligations for underwriting expenses in
Commissions and Other Underwriting Expenses, Page 62. Insurance subsidiary operating cash
flow remained stable over the three years, however, due to rising investment income.
Based on our outlook for commercial lines, personal lines and life insurance, we believe
that cash flows from underwriting could decline again in 2007. A lower level of cash flow
available for investment could lead to lower investment income and reduced potential for
capital gains.
2006 10-K Page 59
Investing Activities
Investment income is a primary source of liquidity for both the parent company and
insurance subsidiary. The transfer of equity holdings to our insurance subsidiary from the
parent company in 2004 increased the amount of investment income generated at the subsidiary
level but had no effect on consolidated investment income. As we discuss under Investments
Results of Operations, Page 56, investment income rose in each of the past three years, and
we expect investment income could grow 6.5 percent to 7.0 percent in 2007.
Realized gains also can provide liquidity, although we follow a buy-and-hold investment
philosophy seeking to compound cash flows over the long-term. When we dispose of
investments, we generally reinvest the gains in new investment securities. Disposition of
investments occurs for a number of reasons:
|
|
Sales of fixed-maturity investments We prefer to hold fixed-maturity securities
until maturity. Any decision to sell or to reduce a holding reflects our perception of
a change in the underlying fundamentals of the security and our preference to allocate
those funds to investments that more closely meet our established parameters for
long-term stability and growth. |
|
|
|
Call or maturity of fixed-maturity investments Calls and maturities of
fixed-maturity investments are a function of the yield curve. The pace of calls of
fixed maturities continued to decline in 2006 as interest rates generally shifted
upward. |
|
|
|
Sales of equity securities investments The decision to divest an equity position
is generally reached after careful analysis regarding the direction the company is
headed and how well it meets our investment parameters. In 2006, we completed the sale
of our Alltel common stock holdings and made other sales of all or part of smaller
holdings. |
We generally have substantial discretion in the timing of investment sales and, therefore,
the resulting gains or losses that are recognized in any period. That discretion generally
is independent of the insurance underwriting process. In 2007, we expect to continue to
limit the disposition of investments to those that no longer meet our investment parameters
or those that reach maturity or are called by the issuer. The sale of equity investments
that no longer meet our investment criteria can provide cash for investment in common stocks
that we perceive to have greater potential for dividend growth and capital appreciation.
Capital Resources
As a long-term investor, we historically have followed a buy-and-hold investing
strategy. This policy has generated a significant amount of unrealized appreciation on
equity investments. Unrealized appreciation, before deferred income taxes, was $5.244
billion and $5.067 billion at year-end 2006 and 2005, respectively. On an after-tax basis,
it constituted 49.6 percent of total shareholders equity at year-end 2006.
At year-end 2006, our debt-to-capital ratio was 11.0 percent. Based on our present capital
requirements, we do not anticipate a material increase in debt levels during 2007. As a
result, we believe our debt-to-capital ratio will remain approximately 11 percent.
We had $791 million of long-term debt and $49 million in borrowings on our short-term lines
of credit. We generally have minimized our reliance on debt financing although we may
utilize lines of credit to fund short-term cash needs.
We provide details of our three long-term notes in Item 8, Note 7 of the Consolidated
Financial Statements, Page 93. None of the notes are encumbered by rating triggers.
On April 28, 2006, A.M. Best affirmed its senior debt ratings and issuer credit rating (ICR)
of aa- of Cincinnati Financial Corporation. On September 15, 2006, Fitch Ratings affirmed
its AA- issuer default rating and A+ senior debt ratings of Cincinnati Financial
Corporation. Moodys maintains our senior debt ratings at A2-. On July 25, 2006, Standard &
Poors Ratings Services affirmed its A (Strong) counterparty credit rating on Cincinnati
Financial Corporation.
At December 31, 2006, we had two lines of credit totaling $125 million with $49 million
outstanding. One line of credit for $75 million was established more than five years ago and
has no financial covenants. The second line of credit is an unsecured $50 million line of
credit from Fifth Third Bank established in 2005 and renewed annually. It is available for
general corporate purposes and contains customary financial covenants. During 2006, CFC
Investment Company, our commercial leasing and financing subsidiary, replaced $49 million of
intercompany debt with $49 million in borrowings against our $75 million line of credit to
improve cash flow for the parent company. This line of credit matures on February 28, 2007,
and we expect to renew it under terms and conditions that are essentially unchanged.
During 2006, we entered into an interest-rate swap as an economic cash flow hedge of
variable interest payments for certain variable-rate debt obligations ($49 million notional
amount). Under this interest-rate swap contract, we have agreed to pay a fixed rate of
interest for a three-year period. The contract is intended to be a hedge against changes in
the amount of future cash flows associated with the related interest payments. The
interest-rate swap contract is reflected at fair value in our balance sheet. SFAS No. 133
Accounting for Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities, as amended,
requires changes in the fair value of the
2006 10-K Page 60
companys derivative financial instruments to be
recognized periodically as realized gains or losses on the consolidated statement of income
or as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income in shareholders equity,
respectively. We recorded a $324,000 investment loss in 2006 due to the decline in the fair
value of the interest-rate swap.
In October 2006, we completed the necessary requirements for the interest-rate swap to
qualify for hedge accounting treatment under SFAS No. 133. We expect that the interest-rate
swap will be a highly effective hedge and that future changes in the fair value of the
interest-rate swap will be recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive
income. As a result, we do not expect any significant amounts to be reclassified into
earnings in the next 12 months.
Off-balance Sheet Arrangements
We do not utilize any special-purpose financing vehicles or have any undisclosed
off-balance sheet arrangements (as that term is defined in applicable SEC rules) that are
reasonably likely to have a current or future material effect on the companys financial
condition, results of operation, liquidity, capital expenditures or capital resources.
Similarly, the company holds no fair-value contracts for which a lack of marketplace
quotations would necessitate the use of fair-value techniques.
Uses of Liquidity
Our parent company and insurance subsidiary have contractual obligations and other
commitments. In addition, one of our primary uses of cash is to enhance shareholder return.
Contractual Obligations
At December 31, 2006, we estimated our future contractual obligations as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
Payment due by period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within |
|
|
Years |
|
|
Years |
|
|
More than |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 year |
|
|
2-3 |
|
|
4-5 |
|
|
5 years |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Interest on long-term debt |
|
$ |
52 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
|
$ |
996 |
|
|
$ |
1,256 |
|
Long-term debt |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
795 |
|
|
|
795 |
|
Short-term debt |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
Annuitization obligations |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
Headquarters building expansion |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
Computer hardware and software |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
Other invested assets |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Net life claims payments |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subtotal |
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
191 |
|
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
1,896 |
|
|
|
2,417 |
|
Net property casualty claims payments |
|
|
1,074 |
|
|
|
1,150 |
|
|
|
493 |
|
|
|
639 |
|
|
|
3,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,265 |
|
|
$ |
1,341 |
|
|
$ |
632 |
|
|
$ |
2,535 |
|
|
$ |
5,773 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Long-term Debt and Interest on Long-Term Debt
Our estimate of material commitments for interest on long-term debt was approximately
21.8 percent and our estimate of material commitments for long-term debt was 13.8 percent of
the estimated contractual obligations at year-end 2006.
Our interest expense remained unchanged in 2006 at an annual rate of approximately $52
million. We generally have tried to minimize our reliance on debt financing and do not
expect a material increase in interest expense from long-term debt in the near future.
Short-term Debt
Our estimate of material commitments for short-term debt was 1.0 percent of material
commitments at year-end 2006. On February 28, 2007, we plan to renew our $49 million
outstanding note payable drawn on our $75 million in line of credit.
Annuitization Obligations
Our estimate of material commitments for obligations due under annuities written by our
life insurance subsidiary was approximately 3.4 percent of the estimated contractual
obligations at year-end 2006.
Headquarters Building Expansion
The completion of our new office building and parking garage to be situated at our
headquarters located in Fairfield is expected to require approximately $62 million over the
next two years. The construction project is on schedule and on budget. As of December 31,
2006, construction costs totaled $41 million. We expect construction to be completed by
September 2008.
We invested $100 million of the proceeds from our 2004 issuance of $375 million aggregate
principal amount of 6.125% senior notes due 2034 in short-term investments to fund this
obligation.
2006 10-K Page 61
Computer Hardware and Software
We expect to need approximately $22 million over the next five years for current
material commitments for computer hardware and software, including maintenance contracts on
hardware and other known obligations. We discuss below the non-contractual expenses we
anticipate for computer hardware and software in 2007.
Property Casualty Claims Payments
Our estimate of material commitments for net property casualty claims payments was
approximately 58.1 percent of the estimated contractual obligations at year-end 2006.
We direct our associates to settle claims and pay losses as quickly as practical and made
$1.763 billion in net claim payments during 2006. At year-end 2006, we had net property
casualty reserves of $3.356 billion, reflecting $1.843 billion in unpaid amounts on reported
claims (case reserves), $771 million in loss expense reserves and $742 million in estimates
of IBNR claims. The specific amounts and timing of obligations related to case reserves and
associated loss expenses are not set contractually. The amounts and timing of obligations
for IBNR claims and related loss expenses are unknown. We discuss the adequacy of our
property casualty and life insurance loss and loss expense reserves in Property Casualty
Insurance Reserves, Page 63.
The historic pattern of using premium receipts for the payment of loss and loss expenses has
enabled us to extend slightly the maturities of our investment portfolio beyond the
estimated settlement date of the loss reserves. The effective duration of our fixed-maturity
portfolio was 5.1 years at year-end 2006. By contrast, the duration of our loss and loss
expense reserves was 2.9 years and the duration of all liabilities was 2.6 years. We believe
this difference in duration does not affect our ability to meet current obligations because
cash flow from operations is sufficient to meet these obligations. In addition, our
investment strategy has led to substantial unrealized gains from holdings in equity
securities. These equity holdings could be liquidated to meet higher than anticipated loss
and loss expenses.
We believe that our insurance subsidiaries maintain sufficient liquidity to pay claims and
operating expenses, as well as meet commitments in the event of unforeseen circumstances
such as catastrophe losses, reinsurer insolvencies, changes in the timing of claims
payments, increases in claims severity, reserve deficiencies or inadequate premium rates. We
believe catastrophic events are the most likely cause of an unexpected rise in claims
severity or frequency.
Our reinsurance program mitigates the liquidity risk of a single large loss or an unexpected
rise in claims severity or frequency due to a catastrophic event. Reinsurance does not
relieve us of our obligation to pay covered claims. The financial strength of our reinsurers
is important because our ability to recover for losses under one of our reinsurance
agreements depends on the financial viability of the reinsurer.
While we believe that historical performance of property casualty and life loss payment
patterns is a reasonable source for projecting future claims payments, there is inherent
uncertainty in this estimate of
contractual obligations. We believe that we could meet our obligations under a significant
and unexpected change in the timing of these payments because of the liquidity of our
invested assets, strong financial position and access to lines of credit.
Other Commitments
In addition to our contractual obligations, we have other operational commitments.
Commissions and Other Underwriting Expenses
As discussed above, commissions and non-commission underwriting expenses paid rose in
each the past two years, reflecting the operating expense trends we discuss in the
Commercial Lines and Personal Lines Insurance Results of Operations, Page 42 and Page 49.
Commission payments also include contingent, or profit-sharing, commissions, which are paid
to agencies using a formula that takes into account agency profitability and other factors.
Commission payments generally track with written premiums. Contingent commission payments in
2007 will be influenced by the decline in profitability we experienced in 2006.
Many of our operating expenses are not contractual obligations, but reflect the ongoing
expenses of our business. Staffing is the largest component of our operating expenses and is
expected to rise again in 2007, reflecting the 2.9 percent average annual growth in our
associate base over the past three years. Our associate base has grown as we focus on
enhancing service to our agencies and staffing additional field territories. Other expenses
should rise in line with our growth.
In addition to contractual obligations for hardware and software, we anticipate investing
approximately $35 million in key technology initiatives in 2007, of which approximately $14
million will be capitalized. Technology projects for 2007 include continued spending on our
personal lines policy processing system and investment in the development and rollout of our
commercial lines policy processing system that we discuss in Item 1, Technology Solutions,
Page 4. Capitalized development costs related to key technology initiatives totaled $15
million in 2006. These activities are conducted at our discretion and we have no material
contractual obligations for activities planned as part of these projects.
2006 10-K Page 62
Data Processing and Disaster Recovery Center
We expect to spend approximately $5 million in 2007 to begin renovation of a newly
purchased building that will serve as our data processing and disaster recovery center.
Qualified Pension Plan
Effective in 2008, the Pension Protection Act of 2006 changes the manner in which
pension funding is determined. We currently are assessing the impact of this Act but do not
except it to have a material effect on our results of operations or financial position. We
anticipate contributing $10 million to the plan in 2007.
Investing Activities
After fulfilling operating requirements, cash flows from underwriting, investment and
other corporate activities are invested in fixed maturity and equity securities on an
ongoing basis to help achieve our portfolio objectives. See Item 1, Investments Segment,
Page 14, for a discussion of our investment strategy, portfolio allocation and quality. From
the second quarter of 2004 until year-end 2005, virtually all of our available cash flow was
used to purchase fixed-maturity investments to reduce our property casualty subsidiarys
ratio of common stock to statutory surplus. In 2006, equity purchases returned to a more
significant level.
In 2007 we anticipate a resumption of active equity investing while also continuing to be
cognizant of rating agency and regulatory guidelines. See Item 1, Investments Segment, Page
14, for a discussion of our investment strategy, portfolio allocation and quality.
Uses of Capital
Uses of cash to enhance shareholder return include:
|
|
Dividends to shareholders Over the past 10 years, the company has paid an average
of 38 percent of net income as dividends, with the remaining 62 percent available to
reinvest for future growth and for share repurchases. The ability of the company to
continue paying cash dividends is subject to factors the board of directors may deem
relevant. |
|
|
|
In February 2007, the board of directors authorized a 6.0 percent increase in the
regular quarterly cash dividend to an indicated annual rate of $1.42 per share. In 2006,
2005 and 2004, we paid cash dividends of $228 million and $204 million and $177 million. |
|
|
|
Common stock repurchase Our board believes that stock repurchases can help
fulfill our commitment to enhancing shareholder value. Consequently, the board has
authorized the repurchase of outstanding shares. Common stock repurchases for treasury
have continued at a steady pace over the last several years and occur when we believe
that stock prices on the open market are favorable for such repurchases. At a minimum,
we would expect the repurchase to offset dilution from share-based
compensation. In 2006, 2005 and 2004, we used $120 million, $63 million and $66 million
for share repurchase. |
|
|
|
In 2005, the board authorized a 10 million share repurchase program to replace a program
authorized in 1999. At year-end 2006, 6.8 million shares remained authorized for
repurchase under the 2005 program. |
|
|
|
The details of the repurchase activity are described in Item 5, Market for the
Registrants Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity
Securities, Page 26. Between February 1999 and year-end 2006, we have repurchased 17.4
million shares at a total cost to the company of $661 million. We do not adjust the
number of shares repurchased and average price per repurchased share for stock
dividends. |
Property Casualty Insurance Reserves
At year-end 2006, the total reserve balance, net of reinsurance, was $3.356 billion,
compared with $3.111 billion at year-end 2005 and $2.977 billion at year-end 2004. We
provide a reconciliation of the property casualty reserve balances with the loss and loss
expense liability on the balance sheet in Item 8, Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial
Statements, Page 92. The reserves reflected in the consolidated financial statements are
managements best estimate.
The appointed actuarys range for adequate statutory reserves, net of reinsurance, was
$3.194 billion to $3.440 billion for 2006; $2.921 billion to $3.153 billion for 2005; and
$2.794 billion to $3.032 billion for 2004. The assumptions used to establish the recommended
ranges were consistent with the actuarys practices. Historically, we have established
reserves in the upper half of the actuarys range, as discussed in Critical Accounting
Estimates, Property Casualty Loss and Loss Expense Reserves, Page 35.
In addition to our conclusions regarding adequate reserve levels, other factors that have
affected reserve levels over the past three years included:
|
|
Increases in coverage in force in selected business lines |
|
|
|
New business activity |
|
|
|
Higher initial case reserves on liability claims |
2006 10-K Page 63
|
|
Workers compensation case reserving practices |
|
|
|
Increased loss expenses due to higher legal fees |
|
|
|
Judicial decisions and mass tort claims |
|
|
|
Changes in reinsurance treaty retentions |
|
|
|
Loss cost inflation in selected lines |
|
|
|
Higher loss adjustment expense due to a claims mediation process that promotes
earlier liability settlement resolution |
The types of coverages we offer and the risk levels retained have a direct influence on the
development of claims. Specifically, claims that develop quickly and have lower risk
retention levels generally are more predictable.
As we discuss in Commercial Lines Insurance Segment Reserves, Page 66, re-underwriting the
commercial lines book of business beginning in 2000, including decisions to non-renew
certain policyholders due to risk levels and to increase rates to better reflect exposure
levels, has resulted in improved profitability. We believe the program has led to a lower
risk profile for the overall commercial lines segment, contributing to favorable loss
reserve trends.
As we discuss in Personal Lines Insurance Segment Reserves, Page 68, we are seeking to
improve our personal lines segment performance, in particular the homeowner business line,
partially by reducing risk exposure through changes in policy terms and conditions. We do
not expect our actions in personal lines to have a material impact on loss reserve trends,
largely due to the relatively short-tail nature of homeowner claims.
In 2006, we reviewed each of our established workers compensation case reserves above
$100,000 in light of current trends in medical cost inflation and estimated payout periods.
The review led to the allocation of additional amounts to case reserves held for specific
claims from accident years going back as many as 20 years. Our intent is to bring workers
compensation case reserve adequacy more in line with our other business lines although our
success may be affected by additional medical cost inflation and longer life spans.
In 2003 and 2004, $70 million in reserves were released following the November 2003 Ohio
Supreme Courts decision limiting its 1999 Scott-Pontzer v. Liberty Mutual decision. The
reserve releases were primarily made in the commercial auto and commercial casualty business
lines. Following the fourth-quarter 2003 reserve review, reserve levels were modified to
reflect managements assessment that mold claims behaved
similar to asbestos and environmental claims, and reserves for these claims should be
estimated using similar methods. These changes have been seen predominately in the
commercial casualty business line. We expect that mold exclusions added to our commercial
policies beginning in 2003 will mitigate this issue after 2006.
Further, beginning in 2003, reserve levels reflected the need to establish higher expense
reserves because of the rise in litigation costs due to larger and more complex claims.
These changes have been seen predominately in the commercial casualty business line.
Beginning in 2002, our conclusions regarding reserve levels for all business lines reflected
refinement of the manner in which the value of future salvage and subrogation for claims
already incurred were estimated.
Development of Loss and Loss Expenses
We reconcile the beginning and ending balances of our reserve for loss and loss
expenses at December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, in Item 8, Note 4 to the Consolidated
Financial Statements, Page 92. The reconciliation of our year-end 2005 reserve balance to
net incurred losses one year later recognizes approximately $116 million in redundant
reserves.
The table on Page 65 shows the development of the estimated reserves for loss and loss
expenses the past 10 years.
|
|
Section A shows our total property casualty loss and loss expense reserves recorded
at the balance sheet date for each of the indicated calendar years on a gross and net
basis. Those reserves represent the estimated amount of unpaid loss and loss expenses
for claims arising in the indicated calendar year and all prior accident years at the
balance sheet date, including losses that have been incurred but not yet reported to
the company. |
|
|
|
Section B shows the cumulative net amount paid with respect to the previously
recorded reserve as of the end of each succeeding year. For example, as of December 31,
2006, we had paid $1.175 billion of loss and loss expenses in calendar years 1997
through 2006, for losses that occurred in accident years 1996 and prior. An estimated
$148 million of losses remained unpaid as of year-end 2006 (net re-estimated reserves
of $1.323 billion from Section C less cumulative paid loss and loss expenses of $1.175
billion). |
2006 10-K Page 64
|
|
Section C shows the re-estimated amount of the previously reported reserves based on
experience as of the end of each succeeding year. The estimate is increased or
decreased as we learn more about the frequency and severity of claims. |
|
|
|
Section D, cumulative net redundancy, represents the aggregate change in the
estimates for all years subsequent to the year the reserves were initially established.
For example, reserves established at December 31, 1996, had developed a $379 million
redundancy over 10 years, net of reinsurance, which was reflected in income over the 10
years. The table shows redundant reserves as a negative number. The effects on income
in 2006, 2005 and 2004 of changes in estimates of the reserves for loss and loss
expenses for all accident years are shown in the reconciliation below. |
In evaluating the development of our estimated reserves for loss and loss expenses for the
past 10 years, note that each amount includes the effects of all changes in amounts for
prior periods. For example, payments or reserve adjustments related to losses settled in
2006 but incurred in 2000 are included in the cumulative deficiency or redundancy amount for
2000 and each subsequent year. In addition, this table presents calendar year data, not
accident or policy year development data, which readers may be more accustomed to analyzing.
Conditions and trends that have affected development of the reserves in the past may not
necessarily occur in the future. Accordingly, it may not be appropriate to extrapolate
future redundancies or deficiencies based on this data.
Differences between the property casualty reserves reported in the accompanying consolidated
balance sheets (prepared in accordance with GAAP) and those same reserves reported in the
annual statements (filed with state insurance departments in accordance with statutory
accounting practices SAP), relate principally to the reporting of reinsurance
recoverables, which are recognized as receivables for GAAP and as an offset to reserves for
SAP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Calendar year ended December 31, |
|
|
|
1996 |
|
|
1997 |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
1999 |
|
|
2000 |
|
|
2001 |
|
|
2002 |
|
|
2003 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
A. Originally reported reserves for unpaid loss and loss expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross of reinsurance |
|
$ |
1,824 |
|
|
$ |
1,889 |
|
|
$ |
1,978 |
|
|
$ |
2,093 |
|
|
$ |
2,401 |
|
|
$ |
2,865 |
|
|
$ |
3,150 |
|
|
$ |
3,386 |
|
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
$ |
3,629 |
|
|
$ |
3,860 |
|
Reinsurance recoverable |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
219 |
|
|
|
513 |
|
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net of reinsurance |
|
$ |
1,702 |
|
|
$ |
1,777 |
|
|
$ |
1,840 |
|
|
$ |
1,932 |
|
|
$ |
2,182 |
|
|
$ |
2,352 |
|
|
$ |
2,608 |
|
|
$ |
2,845 |
|
|
$ |
2,977 |
|
|
$ |
3,111 |
|
|
$ |
3,356 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Cumulative net paid as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year later |
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
$ |
499 |
|
|
$ |
522 |
|
|
$ |
591 |
|
|
$ |
697 |
|
|
$ |
758 |
|
|
$ |
799 |
|
|
$ |
817 |
|
|
$ |
907 |
|
|
$ |
944 |
|
|
|
|
|
Two years later |
|
|
732 |
|
|
|
761 |
|
|
|
833 |
|
|
|
943 |
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
|
1,235 |
|
|
|
1,293 |
|
|
|
1,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
884 |
|
|
|
965 |
|
|
|
1,067 |
|
|
|
1,195 |
|
|
|
1,378 |
|
|
|
1,455 |
|
|
|
1,519 |
|
|
|
1,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Four years later |
|
|
992 |
|
|
|
1,075 |
|
|
|
1,207 |
|
|
|
1,327 |
|
|
|
1,526 |
|
|
|
1,614 |
|
|
|
1,716 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
1,049 |
|
|
|
1,152 |
|
|
|
1,283 |
|
|
|
1,412 |
|
|
|
1,623 |
|
|
|
1,717 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six years later |
|
|
1,093 |
|
|
|
1,205 |
|
|
|
1,333 |
|
|
|
1,464 |
|
|
|
1,680 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
1,123 |
|
|
|
1,239 |
|
|
|
1,366 |
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eight years later |
|
|
1,146 |
|
|
|
1,260 |
|
|
|
1,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
1,279 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ten years later |
|
|
1,175 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Net reserves re-estimated as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year later |
|
$ |
1,582 |
|
|
$ |
1,623 |
|
|
$ |
1,724 |
|
|
$ |
1,912 |
|
|
$ |
2,120 |
|
|
$ |
2,307 |
|
|
$ |
2,528 |
|
|
$ |
2,649 |
|
|
$ |
2,817 |
|
|
$ |
2,995 |
|
|
|
|
|
Two years later |
|
|
1,470 |
|
|
|
1,551 |
|
|
|
1,728 |
|
|
|
1,833 |
|
|
|
2,083 |
|
|
|
2,263 |
|
|
|
2,377 |
|
|
|
2,546 |
|
|
|
2,743 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
1,405 |
|
|
|
1,520 |
|
|
|
1,636 |
|
|
|
1,802 |
|
|
|
2,052 |
|
|
|
2,178 |
|
|
|
2,336 |
|
|
|
2,489 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Four years later |
|
|
1,380 |
|
|
|
1,465 |
|
|
|
1,615 |
|
|
|
1,771 |
|
|
|
2,010 |
|
|
|
2,153 |
|
|
|
2,299 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
1,326 |
|
|
|
1,466 |
|
|
|
1,608 |
|
|
|
1,757 |
|
|
|
1,999 |
|
|
|
2,127 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six years later |
|
|
1,333 |
|
|
|
1,463 |
|
|
|
1,602 |
|
|
|
1,733 |
|
|
|
1,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
1,333 |
|
|
|
1,460 |
|
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
1,739 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eight years later |
|
|
1,332 |
|
|
|
1,435 |
|
|
|
1,593 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
1,305 |
|
|
|
1,456 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ten years later |
|
|
1,323 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. Cumulative net redundancy as of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year later |
|
$ |
(120 |
) |
|
$ |
(154 |
) |
|
$ |
(116 |
) |
|
$ |
(20 |
) |
|
$ |
(62 |
) |
|
$ |
(45 |
) |
|
$ |
(80 |
) |
|
$ |
(196 |
) |
|
$ |
(160 |
) |
|
$ |
|
(116) |
|
|
|
|
Two years later |
|
|
(232 |
) |
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
(112 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
(99 |
) |
|
|
(89 |
) |
|
|
(231 |
) |
|
|
(299 |
) |
|
|
(234 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Three years later |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
(257 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(130 |
) |
|
|
(174 |
) |
|
|
(272 |
) |
|
|
(356 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Four years later |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(312 |
) |
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
(172 |
) |
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
(309 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Five years later |
|
|
(376 |
) |
|
|
(311 |
) |
|
|
(232 |
) |
|
|
(175 |
) |
|
|
(183 |
) |
|
|
(225 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Six years later |
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
(314 |
) |
|
|
(238 |
) |
|
|
(199 |
) |
|
|
(190 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Seven years later |
|
|
(369 |
) |
|
|
(317 |
) |
|
|
(263 |
) |
|
|
(193 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eight years later |
|
|
(370 |
) |
|
|
(342 |
) |
|
|
(247 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine years later |
|
|
(397 |
) |
|
|
(321 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ten years later |
|
|
(379 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net liability re-estimatedlatest |
|
$ |
1,323 |
|
|
$ |
1,456 |
|
|
$ |
1,593 |
|
|
$ |
1,739 |
|
|
$ |
1,992 |
|
|
$ |
2,127 |
|
|
$ |
2,299 |
|
|
$ |
2,489 |
|
|
$ |
2,743 |
|
|
$ |
2,995 |
|
|
|
|
|
Re-estimated recoverablelatest |
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
198 |
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
230 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
568 |
|
|
|
547 |
|
|
|
551 |
|
|
|
517 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross liability re-estimatedlatest |
|
$ |
1,506 |
|
|
$ |
1,654 |
|
|
$ |
1,817 |
|
|
$ |
1,969 |
|
|
$ |
2,251 |
|
|
$ |
2,659 |
|
|
$ |
2,867 |
|
|
$ |
3,036 |
|
|
$ |
3,294 |
|
|
$ |
3,512 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cumulative gross redundancy |
|
$ |
(318 |
) |
|
$ |
(235 |
) |
|
$ |
(161 |
) |
|
$ |
(124 |
) |
|
$ |
(150 |
) |
|
$ |
(206 |
) |
|
$ |
(283 |
) |
|
$ |
(350 |
) |
|
$ |
(220 |
) |
|
$ |
(117 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 65
Asbestos and Environmental Reserves
We believe that our asbestos and environmental reserves, including mold reserves, are
adequate at this time and that these coverage areas are immaterial to our financial position
due to the types of accounts we have insured in the past.
Loss and loss expenses incurred for all asbestos and environmental claims were $12 million,
or 0.6 percent of total loss and loss expenses in 2006, compared with $12 million, or 0.7
percent in 2005 and $42 million, or 2.4 percent, in 2004.
Net reserves for all asbestos and environmental claims were $131 million in 2006 compared
with $130 million in 2005 and $128 million in 2004. Net reserves for all asbestos and
environmental claims were 3.9 percent, 4.2 percent and 4.3 percent of total reserves in
2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
We generally wrote commercial accounts after the development of coverage forms that exclude
asbestos cleanup costs. We believe our exposure to risks associated with past production
and/or installation of asbestos materials is minimal because we primarily were a personal
lines company when most of the asbestos exposure occurred. The commercial coverage we did
offer was predominantly related to local market construction activity rather than asbestos
manufacturing. Further, over the past four years we have revised policy terms where
permitted by state regulation to limit our exposure to mold and other environmental risks
going forward. We continue to evaluate our exposure to silicosis and welding claims, but
believe our exposure is minimal.
Commercial Lines Insurance Segment Reserves
For the business lines in the commercial lines insurance segment, the following table
shows the breakout of gross reserves among case, IBNR and loss expense reserves. The rise in
total gross reserves for our commercial business lines is partially due to our growth. The
increase also reflected higher loss expense reserves due to a claims mediation process that
promoted earlier liability settlement resolution and increased loss expenses due to higher
legal fees. In addition, commercial casualty, workers compensation and surety and executive
risk gross reserves rose because of the increase in large losses as we discussed in
Commercial Lines Insurance Results of Operations, Page 42. Reserve practices discussed above
also contributed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Loss reserves |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case |
|
|
IBNR |
|
|
expense |
|
|
gross |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
of total |
|
|
At December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial casualty |
|
$ |
923 |
|
|
$ |
437 |
|
|
$ |
483 |
|
|
|
1,843 |
|
|
|
54.0 |
% |
Commercial property |
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
199 |
|
|
|
5.8 |
|
Commercial auto |
|
|
274 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
64 |
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
11.4 |
|
Workers compensation |
|
|
411 |
|
|
|
277 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
23.1 |
|
Specialty packages |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
2.5 |
|
Surety and executive risk |
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
2.9 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0.3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,892 |
|
|
$ |
802 |
|
|
$ |
720 |
|
|
$ |
3,414 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial casualty |
|
$ |
859 |
|
|
$ |
451 |
|
|
$ |
423 |
|
|
$ |
1,733 |
|
|
|
54.6 |
% |
Commercial property |
|
|
135 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
211 |
|
|
|
6.6 |
|
Commercial auto |
|
|
268 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
12.2 |
|
Workers compensation |
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
695 |
|
|
|
21.9 |
|
Specialty packages |
|
|
63 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
2.4 |
|
Surety and executive risk |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
2.1 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,647 |
|
|
$ |
882 |
|
|
$ |
647 |
|
|
$ |
3,176 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 66
The following table provides the amounts of net reserve changes made over the past
three years by commercial line of business and accident year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Commercial |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
Workers |
|
|
Specialty |
|
|
Surety & |
|
|
Machinery & |
|
|
|
|
|
|
casualty |
|
|
property |
|
|
auto |
|
|
compensation |
|
|
packages |
|
|
executive risk |
|
|
equipment |
|
|
Totals |
|
|
As of December 31, 2006
2005 accident year |
|
$ |
(52 |
) |
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(43 |
) |
2004 accident year |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
2003 accident year |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
2002 accident year |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
2001 accident year |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
2000 accident year |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
1999 and prior accident years |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(99 |
) |
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
1,359 |
|
|
$ |
160 |
|
|
$ |
386 |
|
|
$ |
634 |
|
|
$ |
73 |
|
|
$ |
63 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
2,681 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2006 |
|
|
1,260 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
365 |
|
|
|
643 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
68 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2,583 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(99 |
) |
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
(12.0) |
% |
|
|
0.9 |
% |
|
|
(4.6) |
% |
|
|
2.6 |
% |
|
|
1.6 |
% |
|
|
6.3 |
% |
|
|
2.8 |
% |
|
|
(4.1) |
% |
|
As of December 31, 2005
2004 accident year |
|
$ |
(78 |
) |
|
$ |
23 |
|
|
$ |
(15 |
) |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(53 |
) |
2003 accident year |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(47 |
) |
2002 accident year |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(11 |
) |
2001 accident year |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
2000 accident year |
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
1999 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
1998 and prior accident years |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(171 |
) |
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
1,332 |
|
|
$ |
104 |
|
|
$ |
372 |
|
|
$ |
558 |
|
|
$ |
72 |
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
2,507 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2005 |
|
|
1,161 |
|
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2,381 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(171 |
) |
|
$ |
17 |
|
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
41 |
|
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(126 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
(22.5) |
% |
|
|
3.5 |
% |
|
|
(5.0) |
% |
|
|
12.9 |
% |
|
|
10.9 |
% |
|
|
(5.4) |
% |
|
|
(3.7) |
% |
|
|
(5.6) |
% |
|
As of December 31, 2004
2001 accident year |
|
$ |
(46 |
) |
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
(11 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(53 |
) |
2000 accident year |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(57 |
) |
1999 accident year |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
1998 accident year |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(22 |
) |
1997 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
1996 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
1995 and prior accident years |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
(48 |
) |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
1,280 |
|
|
$ |
101 |
|
|
$ |
382 |
|
|
$ |
515 |
|
|
$ |
75 |
|
|
$ |
57 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
2,415 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2004 |
|
|
1,144 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
334 |
|
|
|
529 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
2,241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
(48 |
) |
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
(20.0) |
% |
|
|
(0.3) |
% |
|
|
(10.5) |
% |
|
|
4.9 |
% |
|
|
3.7 |
% |
|
|
(9.3) |
% |
|
|
(1.3) |
% |
|
|
(8.2) |
% |
The overall favorable development recorded in the commercial lines reserves illustrates
the potential for revisions inherent in estimating reserves, especially in long-tail lines
such as commercial casualty. With the
exception of the UM/UIM reserve releases and other significant changes in assumptions
discussed above, commercial lines reserve development over the past three years was
consistent with:
|
|
The initiative, begun in 2001, to establish higher initial case reserves on
liability claims in the period in which the claim is reported |
|
|
|
The initiative, begun in 2000 and expanded to other states in 2004, to use a claims
mediation process that promotes earlier liability settlement resolution |
|
|
|
Increased loss expenses due to higher legal fees |
|
|
|
Workers compensation claim reserve practices |
|
|
|
Higher than expected medical inflation affecting the workers compensation line |
|
|
|
Changes in reinsurance treaty retentions |
|
|
|
Settlements that differed from the established case reserves |
|
|
|
Changes in case reserves based on new information for specific claims or classes of claims |
|
|
|
Differences in the timing of actual settlements compared with the payout patterns
assumed in the accident year IBNR reductions |
|
|
|
Lower risk profile after 2001 due to commercial lines underwriting initiatives |
2006 10-K Page 67
Personal Lines Insurance Segment Reserves
For the business lines in the personal lines insurance segment, the following table
shows the breakout of gross reserves among case, IBNR and loss expense reserves. Total gross
reserves were down slightly from year-end 2005 due to the decline in premiums in this
business line. Homeowner gross reserves reflected the increase in large losses as we
discussed in Personal Lines Insurance Results of Operations, Page 49.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Loss reserves |
|
|
Loss |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Case |
|
|
IBNR |
|
|
expense |
|
|
gross |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
reserves |
|
|
of total |
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personal auto |
|
$ |
169 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
$ |
206 |
|
|
|
46.2 |
% |
Homeowners |
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
24.7 |
|
Other personal |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
29.1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
293 |
|
|
$ |
90 |
|
|
$ |
63 |
|
|
$ |
446 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2005
Personal auto |
|
$ |
175 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
34 |
|
|
$ |
213 |
|
|
|
47.1 |
% |
Homeowners |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
24.0 |
|
Other personal |
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
131 |
|
|
|
28.9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
297 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
64 |
|
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table provides the amounts of net reserve changes made over the past
three years by personal line of business and accident year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
Personal |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
auto |
|
|
Homeowner |
|
|
personal |
|
|
Totals |
|
|
As of December 31, 2006
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 accident year |
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
2004 accident year |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
5 |
|
2003 accident year |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
2002 accident year |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
2001 accident year |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
2000 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
1999 and prior accident years |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
213 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
$ |
118 |
|
|
$ |
430 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2006 |
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
(18 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
0.6 |
% |
|
|
1.5 |
% |
|
|
(28.6) |
% |
|
|
(2.4) |
% |
|
As of December 31, 2005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2002 accident year |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
2001 accident year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
2000 accident year |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
1999 accident year |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
1998 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
1997 accident year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
1996 and prior accident years |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(8 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
231 |
|
|
$ |
114 |
|
|
$ |
125 |
|
|
$ |
470 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2005 |
|
|
223 |
|
|
|
113 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
436 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
(8 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(25 |
) |
|
$ |
(34 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
(1.9) |
% |
|
|
(0.4) |
% |
|
|
(28.7) |
% |
|
|
(4.3) |
% |
|
As of December 31, 2004
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2001 accident year |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
5 |
|
2000 accident year |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
1999 accident year |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
1998 accident year |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
1997 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
1996 accident year |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
1995 and prior accident years |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
(16 |
) |
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves as originally estimated |
|
$ |
224 |
|
|
$ |
90 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
$ |
430 |
|
Reserves re-estimated as of December 31, 2004 |
|
|
225 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
408 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deficiency/(redundancy) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(7 |
) |
|
$ |
(16 |
) |
|
$ |
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impact on loss and loss expense ratio |
|
|
0.2 |
% |
|
|
(2.7) |
% |
|
|
(18.9) |
% |
|
|
(2.8) |
% |
2006 10-K Page 68
The overall favorable development recorded in the personal lines segment reserves
illustrates the potential for revisions inherent in estimating reserves. Personal lines
reserve development over the past three years was consistent with:
|
|
The initiative, begun in 2001, to establish higher initial case reserves on
liability claims in the period in which the claim is reported |
|
|
Settlements that differed from the established case reserves |
|
|
Changes in reinsurance treaty retentions |
|
|
Changes in case reserves based on new information for specific claims or classes of claims |
|
|
Differences in the timing of actual settlements compared with the payout patterns
assumed in the accident year IBNR reductions |
|
|
Recognition of favorable case reserve development |
Life Insurance Reserves
Gross life policy reserves were $1.409 billion at year-end 2006, compared with $1.343
billion at year-end 2005. We establish reserves for traditional life insurance policies
based on expected expenses, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal rates and investment yields,
including a provision for uncertainty. Once these assumptions are established, they
generally are maintained throughout the lives of the contracts. We use both our own
experience and industry experience adjusted for historical trends in arriving at our
assumptions for expected mortality, morbidity and withdrawal rates. We use our own
experience and historical trends for setting our assumptions for expected expenses. We base
our assumptions for expected investment income on our own experience adjusted for current
economic conditions.
We establish reserves for our universal life, deferred annuity and investment contracts
equal to the cumulative account balances, which include premium deposits plus credited
interest less charges and withdrawals. Some of our universal life insurance policies contain
no-lapse guarantee provisions. For these policies, we establish a reserve in addition to the
account balance based on expected no-lapse guarantee benefits and expected policy
assessments.
We regularly review our life insurance business to ensure that any deferred acquisition cost
associated with the business is recoverable and that our actuarial liabilities (life
insurance segment reserves) make sufficient provision for future benefits and related
expenses.
2007 Reinsurance Programs
A single large loss or an unexpected rise in claims severity or frequency due to a
catastrophic event could present us with a liquidity and financial risk. In an effort to
control such losses, we forego marketing property casualty insurance in specific geographic
areas, monitor our exposure in certain coastal regions, review aggregate exposures to huge
disasters and purchase reinsurance. We use the Risk Management Solutions (RMS) and Applied
Insurance Research (AIR) models to evaluate exposures in determining appropriate reinsurance
coverage programs. In conjunction with these activities, we also continue to evaluate
information provided by our reinsurance broker. These various sources explore and analyze
credible scientific evidence, including the impact of global climate change, which may
affect our exposure under insurance policies.
Reinsurance mitigates the risk of highly uncertain exposures and limits the maximum net loss
that can arise from large risks or risks concentrated in areas of exposure. Managements
decisions regarding the appropriate level of property casualty risk retention are affected
by various factors, including changes in our underwriting practices, capacity to retain
risks and reinsurance market conditions. Reinsurance does not relieve us of our obligation
to pay covered claims. The financial strength of our reinsurers is important because our
ability to recover for losses covered under one of our reinsurance agreements depends on the
financial viability of the reinsurer.
Currently participating on our property and casualty per-occurrence programs are Hannover
Reinsurance Company, Munich Reinsurance America, Partner Reinsurance Company of the U.S. and
Swiss Reinsurance America Corporation and its subsidiaries, all of which have A.M. Best
insurer financial strength ratings of A (Excellent) or A+ (Superior). Our property
catastrophe program is subscribed through a broker by reinsurers from the United States,
Bermuda, London and European markets.
Primary components of the 2007 property and casualty reinsurance program include:
|
|
Property per risk treaty The primary purpose of the property treaty is to provide
capacity up to $25 million, supplying adequate capacity for the majority of the risks
we write and also includes protection for extra-contractual liability coverage losses.
The ceded premium is estimated to be $35 million for 2007, compared with $30 million in
2006 and $29 million in 2005. We retain the first $4 million of each loss. Losses
between $4 million and $25 million are reinsured at 100 percent. |
2006 10-K Page 69
|
|
Casualty per occurrence treaty The casualty treaty provides capacity up to $25
million. Similar to the property treaty, this provides sufficient capacity to cover the
vast majority of casualty accounts we insure and also includes protection for
extra-contractual liability coverage losses. The ceded premium is estimated to be $50
million in 2007, compared with $45 million in 2006 and $64 million in 2005. We retain
the first $4 million of each loss. Losses between $4 million and $25 million are
reinsured at 100 percent. |
|
|
|
We have modified our casualty per occurrence treaty for director and officer policies
for four Fortune 1000 companies and one financial services company. For one of the five
companies, our retention could be as high as $15 million rather than the $4 million for
a typical policy; for one of the companies, our retention could be as high as $10
million; for the remaining three companies, our retention per policy could be as high as
$5 million. We believe the additional risk undertaken with these selected policies
remains at an acceptable level based on our financial strength. We arranged for this
exception for this small group of companies to maintain business relationships with key
agencies and insureds. We intend to review this element of our working treaties on an
ongoing basis. |
|
|
|
Casualty excess treaties We purchase a casualty reinsurance treaty that provides
an additional $25 million in protection for certain casualty losses. This treaty, along
with the casualty per occurrence treaty, provides a total of $50 million of protection
for workers compensation, extra-contractual liability coverage and clash coverage
losses, which is used when there is a single occurrence involving multiple
policyholders of The Cincinnati Insurance Companies or multiple coverages for one
insured. The ceded premium is estimated to be $2 million in 2007 and is comparable with
the premium paid in 2006. |
|
|
|
We purchase another casualty excess treaty, which provides an additional $20 million in
casualty loss coverage. This treaty also provides catastrophic coverage for workers
compensation and extra-contractual liability coverage losses. The ceded premium is
estimated to be $1 million for 2007, comparable with the premium paid in 2006. |
|
|
|
Property catastrophe treaty To protect against catastrophic events such as wind
and hail, hurricanes or earthquakes, we purchase property catastrophe reinsurance, with
a limit up to $500 million. For the 2007 treaty, ceded premiums are estimated to be $49
million, up from $38 million in 2006, and $29 million, excluding the reinstatement
premium, in 2005. The premium increase for 2007 primarily was due to the difficult
market conditions brought on in part by the record catastrophe losses experienced by
reinsurance companies in recent years. Our retention on this program remains at $45
million and we will retain: |
|
o |
|
5 percent of losses between $45 million and $200 million |
|
|
o |
|
14 percent of losses between $200 million and $300 million |
|
|
o |
|
18 percent of losses between $300 million and $500 million |
Our maximum exposure to a 2007 catastrophic event that resulted in $500 million in
losses would be $103 million compared with $68 million in 2006. The largest catastrophe
loss in our history was $87 million before reinsurance.
Individual risks with insured values in excess of $25 million, as identified in the policy,
are handled through a different reinsurance mechanism. We reinsure property coverage for
individual risks with insured values between $25 million and $50 million under an automatic
facultative treaty. For risks with property values exceeding $50 million, we negotiate the
purchase of facultative coverage on an individual certificate basis. For casualty coverage
on individual risks with limits exceeding $25 million, facultative reinsurance coverage is
placed on an individual certificate basis.
Responding to the challenges presented by terrorism has become a very important issue for
the insurance industry over the last five years. Terrorism coverage at various levels has
been secured in all of our reinsurance agreements. The broadest coverage for this peril is
found in the property and casualty working treaties, which provide coverage for commercial
and personal risks. In addition, our property catastrophe treaty provides coverage for
personal risks and the majority of our reinsurers provide limited coverage for commercial
risks with total insured values of $10 million or less.
Reinsurance protection for the companys surety business is covered under separate treaties
with many of the same reinsurers that write the property casualty working treaties.
Reinsurance protection for our life insurance business is covered under separate treaties
with many of the same reinsurers that write the property casualty working treaties. In 2005,
we modified our reinsurance protection for our term life insurance business due to changes
in the marketplace that affected the cost and availability of reinsurance for term life
insurance. We are retaining no more than a $500,000 exposure, ceding the balance using
excess over retention mortality coverage, and retaining the policy reserve. Retaining the
policy reserve has no direct impact on GAAP results. However, because of the conservative
nature of statutory reserving principles, retaining the policy reserve unduly depresses our
statutory earnings and requires a large commitment of our capital. We also have catastrophe
reinsurance coverage on our life
insurance operations
2006 10-K Page 70
that reimburses us up to $20 million for covered net losses in excess
of $5 million. The treaty contains a reinstatement provision, provided the covered losses
were not due to terrorism, and contains protection for extra-contractual liability coverage
losses. For term life insurance business written prior to 2005, we retain 10 percent to 25
percent of each term policy, not to exceed $500,000, ceding the balance or mortality risk
and policy reserve.
The NAIC has asked for comments on proposals to modify statutory accounting procedures to
reduce the negative effect on statutory life insurance income. We expect the NAIC proposals
will be adopted. If they are not, we believe we will be able to structure a reinsurance
program to provide the life insurance company with the ability to continue to grow in the
term life insurance marketplace while appropriately managing risk, at a cost that allows us
to achieve our life insurance company profit targets.
Safe Harbor Statement
This is our Safe Harbor statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act
of 1995. Our business is subject to certain risks and uncertainties that may cause actual
results to differ materially from those suggested by the forward-looking statements in this
report. Some of those risks and uncertainties are discussed in our Item 1A, Risk Factors,
Page 20. Although we often review or update our forward-looking statements when events
warrant, we caution our readers that we undertake no obligation to do so.
Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences include, but are not limited to:
|
|
Unusually high levels of catastrophe losses due to risk concentrations, changes in
weather patterns, environmental events, terrorism incidents or other causes |
|
|
|
Increased frequency and/or severity of claims |
|
|
|
Inaccurate estimates or assumptions used for critical accounting estimates |
|
|
|
Events or actions, including unauthorized intentional circumvention of controls,
that reduce the companys future ability to maintain effective internal control over
financial reporting under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
|
|
|
Events or conditions that could weaken or harm the companys relationships with its
independent agencies and hamper opportunities to add new agencies, resulting in
limitations on the companys opportunities for growth, such as: |
|
o |
|
Downgrade of the companys financial strength ratings |
|
|
o |
|
Concerns that doing business with the company is too difficult or |
|
|
o |
|
Perceptions that the companys level of service, particularly claims
service, is no longer a distinguishing characteristic in the marketplace |
|
|
Delays or inadequacies in the development, implementation, performance and benefits
of technology projects and enhancements |
|
|
|
Ability to obtain adequate reinsurance on acceptable terms, amount of reinsurance
purchased, financial strength of reinsurers and the potential for non-payment or delay
in payment by reinsurers |
|
|
|
Increased competition that could result in a significant reduction in the companys
premium growth rate |
|
|
|
Underwriting and pricing methods adopted by competitors that could allow them to
identify and flexibly price risks, which could decrease our competitive advantages |
|
|
|
Actions of insurance departments, state attorneys general or other regulatory agencies that: |
|
o |
|
Restrict our ability to exit or reduce writings of unprofitable coverages or lines of business |
|
|
o |
|
Place the insurance industry under greater regulatory scrutiny or result in
new statutes, rules and regulations |
|
|
o |
|
Increase our expenses |
|
|
o |
|
Add assessments for guaranty funds, other insurance related assessments or
mandatory reinsurance arrangements; or that impair our ability to recover such
assessments through future surcharges or other rate changes |
|
|
o |
|
Limit our ability to set fair, adequate and reasonable rates |
|
|
o |
|
Place us at a disadvantage in the marketplace or |
|
|
o |
|
Restrict our ability to execute our business model, including the way we compensate agents |
|
|
Sustained decline in overall stock market values negatively affecting the companys
equity portfolio and book value; in particular a sustained decline in the market value
of Fifth Third shares, a significant equity holding |
|
|
Recession or other economic conditions or regulatory, accounting or tax changes
resulting in lower demand for insurance products |
2006 10-K Page 71
|
|
Events that lead to a significant decline in the value of a particular security and
impairment of the asset |
|
|
Prolonged low interest rate environment or other factors that limit the companys
ability to generate growth in investment income or interest-rate fluctuations that
result in declining values of fixed-maturity investments |
|
|
Adverse outcomes from litigation or administrative proceedings |
|
|
Investment activities or market value fluctuations that trigger restrictions
applicable to the parent company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 |
|
|
Events, such as an avian flu epidemic, natural catastrophe, terrorism or
construction delays, that could hamper our ability to assemble our workforce at our
headquarters location |
Further, the companys insurance businesses are subject to the effects of changing social,
economic and regulatory environments. Public and regulatory initiatives have included
efforts to adversely influence and restrict premium rates, restrict the ability to cancel
policies, impose underwriting standards and expand overall regulation. The company also is
subject to public and regulatory initiatives that can affect the market value for its common
stock, such as recent measures affecting corporate financial reporting and governance. The
ultimate changes and eventual effects, if any, of these initiatives are uncertain.
Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Introduction
Market risk is the potential for a decrease in securities value resulting from broad
yet uncontrollable forces such as: inflation, economic growth, interest rates, world
political conditions or other widespread unpredictable events. It is comprised of many
individual risks that, when combined, create a macroeconomic impact. The company accepts and
manages risks in the investment portfolio as part of the means of achieving portfolio
objectives. Some of the risks are:
|
|
Political the potential for a decrease in market value due to the real or
perceived impact of governmental policies or conditions |
|
|
Regulatory the potential for a decrease in market value due to the impact of
legislative proposals or changes in laws or regulations |
|
|
Economic the potential for a decrease in value due to changes in general economic
factors (recession, inflation, deflation, etc.) |
|
|
Revaluation the potential for a decrease in market value due to a change in
relative value (change in market multiple) of the market brought on by general economic
factors |
|
|
Interest-rate the potential for a decrease in market value of a security or
portfolio due to its sensitivity to changes (increases or decreases) in the general
level of interest rates |
Company-specific risk is the potential for a particular issuer to experience a decline in
valuation due to the impact of sector or market risk on the holding or because of issues
specific to the firm:
|
|
Fraud the potential for a negative impact on an issuers performance due to actual
or alleged illegal or improper activity of individuals it employs |
|
|
Credit the potential for deterioration in an issuers financial profile due to
specific company issues, problems it faces in the course of its operations or
industry-related issues |
|
|
Default the possibility that an issuer will not make a required payment (interest
payment or return of principal) on its debt. Generally this occurs after its financial
profile has deteriorated (credit risk) and it no longer has the means to make its
payments |
The investment committee of the board of directors monitors the investment risk management
process primarily through its executive oversight of our investment activities. We take an
active approach to managing market and other investment risks, including the
accountabilities and controls over these activities. Actively managing these market risks is
integral to our operations and could require us to change the character of future
investments purchased or sold or require us to shift the existing asset portfolios to manage
exposure to market risk within acceptable ranges.
Sector risk is the potential for a negative impact on a particular industry due to its
sensitivity to factors that make up market risk. Market risk affects general supply/demand
factors for an industry and will affect companies within that industry to varying degrees.
2006 10-K Page 72
Risks associated with the five asset classes described in Item 1, Investments Segment, Page
14, can be summarized as follows (H high, A average, L low):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable |
|
Tax-exempt |
|
Common |
|
Preferred |
|
Short-term |
|
|
fixed maturities |
|
fixed maturities |
|
equities |
|
equities |
|
investments |
|
Political |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
H |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Regulatory |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Economic |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
H |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Revaluation |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
H |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Interest rate |
|
|
H |
|
|
|
H |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
H |
|
|
|
L |
|
Fraud |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Credit |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Default |
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
A |
|
|
|
L |
|
Fixed-Maturity Investments
For investment-grade corporate bonds, the inverse relationship between interest rates
and bond prices leads to falling bond values during periods of increasing interest rates.
Although the potential for a worsening financial condition, and ultimately default, does
exist with investment-grade corporate bonds, their higher-quality financial profiles make
credit risk less of a concern than for lower-quality investments. We address this risk by
consistently investing within a particular maturity range, which has, over the years,
provided the portfolio with a laddered maturity schedule, which we believe is less subject
to large swings in value due to interest rate changes. While a single maturity range may see
values drop due to general interest rate levels, other maturity ranges will be less affected
by those changes. Additionally, purchases are spread across a wide spectrum of industries
and companies, diversifying our holdings and minimizing the impact of specific industries or
companies with greater sensitivities to interest rate fluctuations.
The primary risk related to high-yield corporate bonds is credit risk or the potential for a
deteriorating financial structure. A weak financial profile can lead to rating downgrades
from the credit rating agencies, which can put further downward pressure on bond prices.
Interest rate risk is less of a factor with high-yield corporate bonds, as valuation is
related more directly to underlying operating performance than to general interest rates.
This puts more emphasis on the financial results achieved by the issuer rather than general
economic trends or statistics within the marketplace. We address this concern by analyzing
issuer- and industry-specific financial results and by closely monitoring holdings within
this asset class.
The primary risks related to tax-exempt bonds are interest rate risk and political risk
associated with the specific economic environment within the political boundaries of the
issuing municipal entity. We address these concerns by focusing on municipalities
general-obligation debt and on essential-service bonds. Essential-service bonds derive a
revenue stream from the services provided by the municipality, which are vital to the people
living in the area (water service, sewer service, etc.). Another risk related to tax-exempt
bonds is regulatory risk or the potential for legislative changes that would negate the
benefit of owning tax-exempt bonds. We monitor regulatory activity for situations that may
negatively affect current holdings and its ongoing strategy for investing in these
securities.
The final, less significant risk is a small exposure to credit risk for a portion of the
tax-exempt portfolio that has support from corporate entities. Examples are bonds insured by
corporate bond insurers or bonds with interest payments made by a corporate entity through a
municipal conduit/authority. While decisions regarding these investments primarily consider
the underlying municipal situation, the existence of third-party insurance reduces risk in
the event of default. In circumstances in which the municipality is unable to meet its
obligations, risk would be increased if the insuring entity were experiencing financial
duress. Because of our diverse exposure and selection of higher-rated entities with strong
financial profiles, we do not believe this is a material concern.
Interest Rate Sensitivity Analysis
Because of our strong surplus, long-term investment horizon and ability to hold most
fixed-maturity investments until maturity, we believe the company is well positioned if
interest rates were to rise. A higher rate environment would provide the opportunity to
invest cash flow in higher-yielding securities, while reducing the likelihood of untimely
redemptions of currently callable securities. While higher interest rates would be expected
to continue to increase the number of fixed-maturity holdings trading below 100 percent of
book value, we believe lower fixed-maturity security values due solely to interest rate
changes would not signal a decline in credit quality.
A dynamic financial planning model developed during 2002 uses analytical tools to assess
market risks. As part of this model, the effective duration of the fixed-maturity portfolio
is continually monitored by our investment department to evaluate the theoretical impact of
interest rate movements.
2006 10-K Page 73
The table below summarizes the effect of hypothetical changes in interest rates on the
fixed-maturity portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Fair value of |
|
Effective duration |
|
|
fixed maturity |
|
100 basis point |
|
100 basis point |
|
|
portfolio |
|
spread decrease |
|
spread increase |
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
$ |
5,805 |
|
|
$ |
6,099 |
|
|
$ |
5,511 |
|
|
At December 31, 2005 |
|
|
5,476 |
|
|
|
5,759 |
|
|
|
5,194 |
|
The effective duration of the fixed maturity portfolio is currently 5.1 years. A 100
basis point movement in interest rates would result in an approximately 5.1 percent change
in the market value of the fixed maturity portfolio. Generally speaking, the higher a bond
is rated, the more directly correlated movements in its market value will be to changes in
the general level of interest rates, exclusive of call features. The market values of
average- to lower-rated corporate bonds are additionally influenced by the expansion or
contraction of credit spreads. In prior reporting periods we have expressed our interest
rate sensitivity using both modified duration and duration to worst measures. Going forward,
we will use effective duration, a measure we believe more accurately depicts duration on an
option-adjusted basis.
In the dynamic financial planning model, the selected interest rate change of 100 basis
points represents our views of a shift in rates that is quite possible over a one-year
period. The rates modeled should not be considered a prediction of future events as interest
rates may be much more volatile in the future. The analysis is not intended to provide a
precise forecast of the effect of changes in rates on our results or financial condition,
nor does it take into account any actions that we might take to reduce exposure to such
risks.
Short-Term Investments
Our short-term investments present minimal risk as we generally purchase the highest quality
commercial paper.
Equity Investments
Common stocks are subject to a variety of risk factors encompassed under the umbrella of
market risk. General economic swings influence the performance of the underlying industries
and companies within those industries. A downturn in the economy can have a negative impact
on an equity portfolio. Industry- and company-specific risks have the potential to
substantially affect the market value of the companys equity portfolio. We address these
risks by maintaining investments in a small group of holdings that we can analyze closely,
better understanding their business and the related risk factors.
At December 31, 2006, the company held 13 individual equity positions valued at
approximately $100 million or above, see Item 1, Investments Segment, Page 14, for
additional details on these holdings. These equity positions accounted for approximately
91.8 percent of the unrealized appreciation of the entire portfolio.
We believe our equity investment style centered on companies that pay and increase
dividends to shareholders is an appropriate long-term strategy. While our long-term
financial position would be affected by prolonged changes in the market valuation of our
investments, we believe our strong surplus position and cash flow provide a cushion against
short-term fluctuations in valuation. We believe that the continued payment of cash
dividends by the issuers of the common equities we hold also should provide a floor to their
valuation.
Our investments are heavily weighted toward the financials sector, which represented 66.6
percent of the total fair value of the common stock portfolio at December 31, 2006.
Financials sector investments typically underperform the overall market during periods when
interest rates are expected to rise. We historically have seen these types of short-term
fluctuations in market value of our holdings as potential buying opportunities but are
cognizant that a prolonged downturn in this sector could create a long-term negative effect
on the portfolio.
Over the longer term, our objective is for the performance of our equity portfolio to exceed
that of the broader market. Over the five years ended December 31, 2006, our compound annual
equity portfolio return was 2.0 percent compared with a compound annual total return of 6.2
percent for the Standard & Poors 500 Index, a common benchmark of market performance. In
2006, our annual equity portfolio return was 16.1 percent, compared with an annual total
return of 15.8 percent for that Index. Our equity portfolio underperformed the market for
the five-year period because of the decline in the market value of our holdings of Fifth
Third common stock between 2002 and year-end 2005.
The primary risks related to preferred stocks are similar to those related to investment
grade corporate bonds. Falling interest rates adversely affect market values due to the
normal inverse relationship between rates and yields. Credit risk exists due to the
subordinate position of preferred stocks in the capital structure.
We minimize this risk by primarily purchasing investment grade preferred stocks of issuers
with a strong history of paying a common stock dividend.
2006 10-K Page 74
Fifth Third Bancorp Holding
One of our common stock holdings, Fifth Third, accounted for 25.7 percent of our
shareholders equity at year-end 2006 and dividends earned from our Fifth Third investment
were 20.2 percent of our investment income in 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions except market price data) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
Fifth Third Bancorp common stock holding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends earned |
|
$ |
115 |
|
|
$ |
106 |
|
Percent of total net investment income |
|
|
20.2 |
% |
|
|
20.2 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
At December 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
Shares held |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
Closing market price of Fifth Third |
|
$ |
40.93 |
|
|
$ |
37.72 |
|
Book value of holding |
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
Fair value of holding |
|
|
2,979 |
|
|
|
2,745 |
|
After-tax unrealized gain |
|
|
1,752 |
|
|
|
1,600 |
|
|
Market value as a percent of total equity investments |
|
|
38.2 |
% |
|
|
38.6 |
% |
Market value as a percent of invested assets |
|
|
21.7 |
|
|
|
21.6 |
|
Market value as a percent of total shareholders equity |
|
|
43.8 |
|
|
|
45.1 |
|
After-tax unrealized gain as a percent of total shareholders equity |
|
|
25.7 |
|
|
|
26.3 |
|
Based on 2006 results, a 10 percent change in dividends earned from our Fifth Third
holding would result in an $11 million change in pretax investment income and a $10 million
change in after-tax earnings.
Every $1.00 change in the market price of Fifth Thirds common stock has approximately a 27
cent impact on our book value per share. A 20 percent change in the market price of Fifth
Thirds common stock from its year-end 2006 closing price would result in a $596 million
change in assets and a $387 million change in after-tax unrealized gains.
The market value of Fifth Third, our largest holding, has been affected by the residual
effects of a regulatory review concluded in 2004 and, more recently, by a difficult interest
rate environment. We believe that its management team can execute on the strategy for growth
its management has defined. During this challenging period for the bank, we have continued
to benefit from its superior dividend growth. In June 2006, Fifth Third increased its
indicated annual dividend by 5.3 percent, which is expected to contribute an additional $6
million to investment income on an annualized basis.
Unrealized Investment Gains and Losses
At December 31, 2006, unrealized investment gains before taxes totaled $5.303 billion
and unrealized investment losses in the investment portfolio amounted to $59 million.
Unrealized Investment Gains
The unrealized gains at December 31, 2006, were due to long-term gains from our
holdings of Fifth Third common stock, which contributed 51.9 percent of the gain, and from
our other common stock holdings, including ExxonMobil Corporation, The Procter & Gamble
Company and PNC Financial Services Group, which each contributed at least 5 percent of the
gain. Reflecting the companys long-term investment philosophy, of the 1,294 securities
trading at or above book value, 633, or 48.9 percent, have shown unrealized gains for more
than 24 months.
Unrealized Investment Losses Potential Other-than-temporary Impairments
During 2006 and 2005, a total of three securities were written down as
other-than-temporarily impaired. We expect the number of securities trading below 100
percent of book value to fluctuate as interest rates rise or fall. Further, book values for
some securities have been revised due to impairment charges recognized during 2003 and 2002.
At December 31, 2006, 679 of the 1,973 securities we owned were trading below 100 percent of
book value compared with 732 of the 1,814 securities we owned at December 31, 2005, and 208
of the 1,593 securities we owned at December 31, 2004.
The 679 holdings trading below book value at December 31, 2006, represented 19.8 percent of
invested assets and $59 million in unrealized losses. We deem the risk related to securities
trading between
70 percent and 100 percent of book value to be relatively minor and at least partially
offset by the earned income potential of these investments.
|
|
671 of these holdings were trading between 90 percent and 100 percent of book value.
The value of these securities fluctuates primarily because of changes in interest
rates. The fair value of these 671 securities was $2.698 billion at December 31, 2006,
and they accounted for $55 million in unrealized losses. |
2006 10-K Page 75
|
|
Eight of these holdings were trading below 90 percent of book value at December 31,
2006. The fair value of these holdings was $30 million, and they accounted for the
remaining $4 million in unrealized losses. These holdings are being monitored for
credit- and industry-related risk factors, but we believe the changes in value
primarily are due to normal fluctuations and economic factors. |
|
|
|
Of these securities, the largest is a media-related convertible debenture with a fair
value of $9 million and an unrealized loss of $1.5 million. No other security had an
unrealized loss in excess of $1 million. |
|
|
|
No holdings were trading below 70 percent of book value at December 31, 2006. |
As discussed in Critical Accounting Estimates, Asset Impairment, Page 37, when evaluating
other-than-temporary impairments, we consider our intent and ability to retain a security
for a period adequate to recover a substantial portion of its cost. Because of our
investment philosophy and strong capitalization, we can hold securities until their
scheduled redemption that might otherwise be deemed impaired as we evaluate their potential
for recovery based on economic, industry or company factors.
The following table summarizes the length of time securities in the investment portfolio
have been in a continuous unrealized gain or loss position.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
6 Months or less |
|
|
> 6 - 12 Months |
|
|
> 12 - 24 Months |
|
|
> 24 - 36 Months |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Number |
|
|
unrealized |
|
|
Number |
|
|
unrealized |
|
|
Number |
|
|
unrealized |
|
|
Number |
|
|
unrealized |
|
|
|
of issues |
|
|
gain/loss |
|
|
of issues |
|
|
gain/loss |
|
|
of issues |
|
|
gain/loss |
|
|
of issues |
|
|
gain/loss |
|
|
Taxable fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
(33 |
) |
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
145 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
67 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
213 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
437 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
337 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common equities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
267 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
4,875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
265 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
4,875 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred equities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
124 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
(36 |
) |
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
(15 |
) |
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
4,981 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
739 |
|
|
$ |
34 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
$ |
265 |
|
|
|
422 |
|
|
$ |
(21 |
) |
|
|
708 |
|
|
$ |
4,966 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 76
The following table summarizes the investment portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
Number |
|
|
Book |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
unrealized |
|
|
investment |
|
|
|
of issues |
|
|
value |
|
|
value |
|
|
gain/loss |
|
|
income |
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Taxable fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
318 |
|
|
|
1,943 |
|
|
|
1,893 |
|
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
100 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
422 |
|
|
|
1,414 |
|
|
|
1,496 |
|
|
|
82 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
740 |
|
|
|
3,357 |
|
|
|
3,389 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
785 |
|
|
|
778 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
26 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
791 |
|
|
|
1,597 |
|
|
|
1,638 |
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,145 |
|
|
|
2,382 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common equities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
2,365 |
|
|
|
7,531 |
|
|
|
5,166 |
|
|
|
240 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
2,400 |
|
|
|
7,564 |
|
|
|
5,164 |
|
|
|
241 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred equities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
203 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portfolio summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
679 |
|
|
|
2,787 |
|
|
|
2,728 |
|
|
|
(59 |
) |
|
|
127 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
1,294 |
|
|
|
5,668 |
|
|
|
10,971 |
|
|
|
5,303 |
|
|
|
416 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,973 |
|
|
$ |
8,455 |
|
|
$ |
13,699 |
|
|
$ |
5,244 |
|
|
$ |
562 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portfolio summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Trading below 70% of book value |
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
(4 |
) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
Trading at 70% to less than 100% of book value |
|
|
730 |
|
|
|
2,894 |
|
|
|
2,820 |
|
|
|
(74 |
) |
|
|
118 |
|
Trading at 100% and above of book value |
|
|
1,082 |
|
|
|
4,684 |
|
|
|
9,829 |
|
|
|
5,145 |
|
|
|
387 |
|
Securities sold in current year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,814 |
|
|
$ |
7,590 |
|
|
$ |
12,657 |
|
|
$ |
5,067 |
|
|
$ |
524 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 77
Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data
Responsibility for Financial Statements
We have prepared the consolidated financial statements of Cincinnati Financial
Corporation and our subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2006, in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP).
We are responsible for the integrity and objectivity of these financial statements. The
amounts, presented on an accrual basis, reflect our best estimates and judgment. These
statements are consistent in all material aspects with other financial information in the
Annual Report on Form 10-K. Our accounting system and related internal controls are designed
to assure that our books and records accurately reflect the companys transactions in
accordance with established policies and procedures as implemented by qualified personnel.
Our board of directors has established an audit committee of independent outside directors.
We believe these directors are free from any relationships that could interfere with their
independent judgment as audit committee members.
The audit committee meets periodically with management, our independent registered public
accounting firm and our internal auditors to discuss how each is handling responsibilities.
The audit committee reports on their findings to the board of directors. The audit committee
recommends to the board the annual appointment of the independent registered public
accounting firm. The audit committee reviews with this firm the scope of the audit
assignment and the adequacy of internal controls and procedures.
Deloitte & Touche LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, audited the
consolidated financial statements of Cincinnati Financial Corporation and subsidiaries for
the year ended December 31, 2006. Their report is on Page 80. Deloittes auditors met with
our audit committee to discuss the results of their examination. They have the opportunity
to present their opinions about the adequacy of internal controls and the quality of
financial reporting without management present.
2006 10-K Page 78
Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
The management of Cincinnati Financial Corporation and its subsidiaries is responsible
for establishing and maintaining adequate internal controls, designed to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted
in the United States of America (GAAP). The companys internal control over financial
reporting includes those policies and procedures that:
1. |
|
Pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; |
2. |
|
Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit
preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP and that receipts and
expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of
management and the directors of the company; and |
3. |
|
Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of
unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of the companys assets that could have a
material effect on the financial statements. |
All internal control systems, no matter how well designed, have inherent limitations,
including the possibility of human error and the circumvention of overriding controls.
Accordingly, even effective internal control can provide only reasonable assurance with
respect to financial statement preparation and presentation. Further, because of changes in
conditions, the effectiveness of internal control may vary over time.
The companys management assessed the effectiveness of the companys internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes
Oxley Act of 2002. Managements assessment is based on the criteria established in the
Internal Control Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations
of the Treadway Commission and was designed to provide reasonable assurance that the company
maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006. The
assessment led management to conclude that, as of December 31, 2006, the companys internal
control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.
The companys independent registered public accounting firm has issued an attestation report
on our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, and the companys
management assessment of our internal control over financial reporting. This report appears
below.
|
|
|
/S/ John J. Schiff, Jr.
John J. Schiff, Jr., CPCU
|
|
|
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Kenneth W. Stecher
Kenneth W. Stecher
|
|
|
Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer |
|
|
(Principal Accounting Officer) |
|
|
|
|
|
February 23, 2007 |
|
|
2006 10-K Page 79
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of Cincinnati Financial Corporation:
We have audited the consolidated balance sheets of Cincinnati Financial Corporation and
subsidiaries (the company) as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated
statements of income, shareholders equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2006. Our audits also included the financial statement
schedules listed in the Index at Item 15(c). We also have audited managements assessment,
included in the Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
report, that the company maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as
of December 31, 2006, based on the criteria established in the Internal ControlIntegrated
Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission.
The companys management is responsible for these financial statements and financial
statement schedules, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting,
and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.
Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements and financial
statement schedules, an opinion on managements assessment, and an opinion on the
effectiveness of the companys internal control over financial reporting 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 financial statements are free of material
misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained
in all material respects. Our audit of financial statements included examining, on a test
basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements,
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over
financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial
reporting, evaluating managements assessment, testing and evaluating the design and
operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable
basis for our opinions.
A companys internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the
supervision of, the companys principal executive and principal financial officers, or
persons performing similar functions, and effected by the companys board of directors,
management, and other personnel to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of
financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in
accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. A
companys internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures
that: (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and
fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide
reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of
financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and that
receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with
authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable
assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or
disposition of the companys assets that could have a material effect on the financial
statements.
Because of the inherent limitations of internal control over financial reporting, including
the possibility of collusion or improper management override of controls, material
misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected on a timely basis.
Also, projections of any evaluation of the effectiveness of the internal control over
financial reporting to future periods are subject to the risk that the controls may become
inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the
policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in
all material respects, the financial position of the company as of December 31, 2006 and
2005, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in
the period ended December 31, 2006, 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.
Also, in our opinion, managements assessment that the company maintained effective internal
control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, is fairly stated, in all material
respects, based on the criteria established in Internal ControlIntegrated Framework issued
by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission. Furthermore, in our
opinion, the company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on the criteria established in Internal
ControlIntegrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the
Treadway Commission.
As discussed in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the company adopted the
provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 123(R), Share Based Payment,
on January 1, 2006, and the recognition and related disclosure provisions of Statement of
Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension
Plans and Other Postretirement Benefit Plans on December 31, 2006.
/S/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Cincinnati, Ohio
February 23, 2007
2006 10-K Page 80
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in millions except per share data) |
|
December 31, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities, at fair value (amortized cost: 2006$5,739; 2005$5,387) |
|
$ |
5,805 |
|
|
$ |
5,476 |
|
Equity securities, at fair value (cost: 2006$2,621; 2005$2,128) |
|
|
7,799 |
|
|
|
7,106 |
|
Short-term investments, at fair value (amortized cost: 2006 $95; 2005$75) |
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Other invested assets |
|
|
60 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
|
13,759 |
|
|
|
12,702 |
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
Investment income receivable |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
Finance receivable |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
105 |
|
Premiums receivable |
|
|
1,128 |
|
|
|
1,116 |
|
Reinsurance receivable |
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
681 |
|
Prepaid reinsurance premiums |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
429 |
|
Land, building and equipment, net, for company use (accumulated depreciation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006$261; 2005$232) |
|
|
193 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
66 |
|
Separate accounts |
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
17,222 |
|
|
$ |
16,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance reserves |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense reserves |
|
$ |
3,896 |
|
|
$ |
3,661 |
|
Life policy reserves |
|
|
1,409 |
|
|
|
1,343 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
1,579 |
|
|
|
1,559 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
533 |
|
|
|
455 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
1,653 |
|
|
|
1,622 |
|
Note payable |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
6.125% senior notes due 2034 |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
6.9% senior debentures due 2028 |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
6.92% senior
debentures due 2028 |
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
Separate accounts |
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
486 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
10,414 |
|
|
|
9,917 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments and contingent liabilities (Note 15) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, par value$2 per share; (authorized: 2006500 million shares,
2005500 million shares; issued: 2006196 million shares, 2005194 million shares) |
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
Paid-in capital |
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
|
969 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
2,786 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
3,284 |
|
Treasury stock at cost (200623 million shares, 200520 million shares) |
|
|
(763 |
) |
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
6,808 |
|
|
|
6,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
17,222 |
|
|
$ |
16,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
2006 10-K Page 81
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions except per share data) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property casualty |
|
$ |
3,163 |
|
|
$ |
3,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,919 |
|
Life |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Investment income, net of expenses |
|
|
570 |
|
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
492 |
|
Realized investment gains and losses |
|
|
684 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
Other income |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
4,550 |
|
|
|
3,767 |
|
|
|
3,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
BENEFITS AND EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance losses and policyholder benefits |
|
|
2,128 |
|
|
|
1,911 |
|
|
|
1,846 |
|
Commissions |
|
|
630 |
|
|
|
627 |
|
|
|
615 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
270 |
|
Taxes, licenses and fees |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
Increase in deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Interest expense |
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total benefits and expenses |
|
|
3,221 |
|
|
|
2,944 |
|
|
|
2,814 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES |
|
|
1,329 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROVISION (BENEFIT) FOR INCOME TAXES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
404 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
171 |
|
Deferred |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for income taxes |
|
|
399 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
216 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PER COMMON SHARE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net incomebasic |
|
$ |
5.36 |
|
|
$ |
3.44 |
|
|
$ |
3.30 |
|
Net incomediluted |
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.28 |
|
Accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
2006 10-K Page 82
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Shareholders Equity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
COMMON STOCK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
$ |
389 |
|
|
$ |
370 |
|
|
$ |
352 |
|
5% stock dividend |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Stock options exercised |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
|
|
370 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PAID-IN CAPITAL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
969 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
5% stock dividend |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
341 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
Stock loan |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
Stock options exercised |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Share-based compensation |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Other |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
|
969 |
|
|
|
618 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RETAINED EARNINGS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
2,057 |
|
|
|
1,986 |
|
Net income |
|
|
930 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
|
|
584 |
|
5% stock dividend |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(359 |
) |
|
|
(330 |
) |
Dividends declared |
|
|
(232 |
) |
|
|
(212 |
) |
|
|
(183 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
2,786 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
|
|
2,057 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
3,284 |
|
|
|
3,787 |
|
|
|
4,084 |
|
Other comprehensive income, net |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in accounting for pension obligations |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
3,284 |
|
|
|
3,787 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TREASURY STOCK |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
(583 |
) |
|
|
(524 |
) |
Purchase |
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(66 |
) |
Reissued |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
(763 |
) |
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
(583 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
$ |
6,808 |
|
|
$ |
6,086 |
|
|
$ |
6,249 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMMON STOCK NUMBER OF SHARES OUTSTANDING |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning of year |
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
5% stock dividend |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Shares issued |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Purchase of treasury shares |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of year |
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
167 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
COMPREHENSIVE INCOME |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
Other comprehensive income, net |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive income |
|
$ |
1,057 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
$ |
287 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
2006 10-K Page 83
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation, amortization and other non-cash items |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
Realized gains on investments |
|
|
(684 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
Share-based compensation |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Interest credited to contract holders |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
Changes in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment income receivable |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
Premiums and reinsurance receivable |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(118 |
) |
Deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(19 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Other assets |
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
(13 |
) |
Loss and loss expense reserves |
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
134 |
|
Life policy reserves |
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
83 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
33 |
|
|
|
45 |
|
Current income tax |
|
|
(23 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
615 |
|
|
|
805 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of fixed maturities |
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
243 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
Call or maturity of fixed maturities |
|
|
343 |
|
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
664 |
|
Sale of equity securities |
|
|
859 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
Collection of finance receivables |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Purchase of fixed maturities |
|
|
(753 |
) |
|
|
(1,297 |
) |
|
|
(1,718 |
) |
Purchase of equity securities |
|
|
(689 |
) |
|
|
(219 |
) |
|
|
(148 |
) |
Change in short-term investments, net |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(71 |
) |
Investment in buildings and equipment, net |
|
|
(52 |
) |
|
|
(44 |
) |
|
|
(33 |
) |
Investment in finance receivables |
|
|
(41 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(46 |
) |
Collection of negotiated settlement-software cost recovery |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Change in other invested assets, net |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in investing activities |
|
|
(214 |
) |
|
|
(771 |
) |
|
|
(601 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from 6.125% senior notes |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
Debt issuance costs from 6.125% senior notes |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Payment of cash dividends to shareholders |
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(177 |
) |
Purchase of treasury shares |
|
|
(120 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
Increase in notes payable |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(183 |
) |
Proceeds from stock options exercised |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Contract holder funds deposited |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
Contract holder funds withdrawn |
|
|
(78 |
) |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
Excess tax benefits on share-based compensation |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Other |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(318 |
) |
|
|
(221 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
(187 |
) |
|
|
215 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year |
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year |
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
$ |
119 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest paid (net of capitalized interest: 2006$2; 2005$1; 2004$0) |
|
$ |
53 |
|
|
$ |
51 |
|
|
$ |
34 |
|
Income taxes paid |
|
|
429 |
|
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
188 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Conversion of fixed maturity to equity security and fixed maturity investments |
|
$ |
50 |
|
|
$ |
42 |
|
|
$ |
23 |
|
Equipment acquired under capital lease obligations |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Accompanying notes are an integral part of this statement.
2006 10-K Page 84
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
|
|
1. Summary of Significant Accounting Policies |
Nature of Operations
We underwrite insurance through four companies that market through local independent
insurance agents. Our products include a broad range of business and personal policies, as
well as life and disability income insurance and annuities. We also provide finance/leasing
products and asset management services through our CFC Investment Company and CinFin Capital
Management Company subsidiaries.
Basis of Presentation
Our consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the parent company and
our wholly owned subsidiaries. We present our statements in accordance with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). In consolidating our
accounts, we have eliminated significant intercompany balances and transactions.
In accordance with GAAP, we have made estimates and assumptions that affect the amounts we
report and discuss in the consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes. Actual
results could differ from our estimates.
Earnings per Share
Net income per common share is based on the weighted average number of common shares
outstanding during each of the respective years. We calculate net income per common share
(diluted) assuming the exercise of stock options. We have adjusted shares and earnings per
share to reflect all stock splits and dividends prior to December 31, 2006, including the 5
percent stock dividend paid April 26, 2005.
Share-based Compensation
We grant qualified and non-qualified stock options (share-based compensation) under our
plans. These stock options are granted to associates at an exercise price that is not less
than market price at the date of grant and are exercisable over 10 year periods. Prior to
January 1, 2006, we accounted for those plans under the recognition and measurement
provisions of APB Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related
interpretations, as permitted by the Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No.
123, Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation. No stock-based employee compensation cost was
recognized in the Statement of Income for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004, as all
options granted under those plans had an exercise price equal to the market value of the
underlying common stock on the date of grant. Effective January 1, 2006, we adopted the fair
value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123(R), Share Based Payment, using the
modified-prospective-transition method. We have elected to use the alternative method for
determining the beginning balance of the additional paid-in capital pool, as described in
FASB Staff Position 123(R)-3. See Note 16, Page 100, for more information regarding our
share-based compensation.
Property Casualty Insurance
Property casualty policy written premiums are deferred and recorded as earned premiums
on a pro rata basis over the terms of the policies. We record as unearned premium the
portion of written premiums that apply to unexpired policy terms. The expenses associated
with issuing insurance policies primarily commissions, premium taxes and underwriting
costs are deferred and amortized over the terms of policies.
Certain property casualty policies are not booked before the effective date. An actuarial
estimate is made to determine the amount of unbooked written premiums. The majority of the
estimate is unearned and does not have a material impact on earned premium.
We establish reserves to cover the expected cost of claims or losses and our expenses
related to investigating, processing and resolving claims. Although determining the
appropriate amount of reserves including reserves for catastrophe losses is inherently
uncertain, we base our decisions on past experience and current facts. Reserves are based on
claims reported prior to the end of the year and estimates of unreported claims. We take
into account the fact that we may recover some of our costs through salvage and subrogation.
We regularly review and update reserves using the most current information available. Any
resulting adjustments are reflected in current year insurance losses and policyholder
benefits.
The Cincinnati Insurance Companies actively market property casualty insurance policies in
32 states. Our 10 largest states generated 70.0 percent and 69.7 percent of total property
casualty premiums in 2006 and 2005. Ohio, our largest state, accounted for 22.0 percent and
22.5 percent of total earned premiums in 2006 and 2005. Agencies in Georgia, Illinois,
Indiana, Michigan, North Carolina, Pennsylvania and Virginia each contributed between 4
percent and 10 percent of premium volume in 2006. No single agency relationship accounted
for more than 1.2 percent of the companys total agency direct earned premiums in 2006.
2006 10-K Page 85
Policyholder Dividends
Certain workers compensation policies include the possibility of an insured earning a
return of a portion of their premium, called a policyholder dividend. The dividend is
generally calculated by determining the profitability of a policy year along with the
associated premium. We reserve for all probable future policyholder dividend payments.
Life and Health Insurance
We offer several types of life and health insurance and we account for each according
to the duration of the contract. Short-duration contracts are written to cover claims that
arise during a short, fixed term of coverage. We generally have the right to change the
amount of premium charged or cancel the coverage at the end of each contract term. Group
life insurance is an example. We record premiums for short-duration contracts similarly to
property casualty contracts.
Long-duration contracts are written to provide coverage for an extended period of time.
Traditional long-duration contracts require policyholders to pay scheduled gross premiums,
generally not less frequently than annually, over the term of the coverage. Premiums for
these contracts are recognized as revenue when due. Whole life insurance is an example. Some
traditional long-duration contracts have premium payment periods shorter than the period
over which coverage is provided. For these contracts the excess of premium over the amount
required to pay expenses and benefits is recognized over the term of the coverage rather
than over the premium payment period. Ten-pay whole life insurance is an example.
We establish a liability for traditional long-duration contracts as we receive premiums. The
amount of this liability is the present value of future expenses and benefits less the
present value of future net premiums. Net premium is the portion of gross premium required
to provide for all expenses and benefits. We estimate future expenses and benefits and net
premium using assumptions for expected expenses, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal rates and
investment income. We include a provision for adverse deviation, meaning we allow for some
uncertainty in making our assumptions. We establish our assumptions when the contract is
issued and we generally maintain those assumptions for the life of the contract. We use both
our own experience and industry experience, adjusted for historical trends, in arriving at
our assumptions for expected mortality, morbidity and withdrawal rates. We use our own
experience and historical trends for setting our assumption for expected expenses. We base
our assumption for expected investment income on our own experience, adjusted for current
economic conditions.
When we issue a traditional long-duration contract, we capitalize acquisition costs.
Acquisition costs are costs which vary with, and are primarily related to, the production of
new business. We then charge these deferred policy acquisition costs to expenses over the
premium paying period of the contract and we use the same assumptions that we use when we
establish the liability for the contract.
Universal life contracts are long-duration contracts for which contractual provisions are
not fixed, unlike whole life insurance. Universal life contracts allow policyholders to vary
the amount of premium, within limits, without our consent. However we may vary the mortality
and expense charges, within limits, and the interest crediting rate used to accumulate
policy values. We do not record universal life premiums as revenue. Instead we recognize as
revenue the mortality charges, administration charges and surrender charges when received.
Some of our universal life contracts assess administration charges in the early years of the
contract that are compensation for services we will provide in the later years of the
contract. These administration charges are deferred and are recognized over the period when
we provide those future services.
For universal life long-duration contracts we maintain a liability equal to the policyholder
account value. There is no provision for adverse deviation. Some of our universal life
policies contain no-lapse guarantee provisions. For these policies, we establish a reserve
in addition to the account balance, based on expected no-lapse guarantee benefits and
expected policy assessments.
When we issue a universal life long-duration contract we capitalize acquisition costs. We
then charge these capitalized costs to expenses over the term of coverage of the contract.
When we charge deferred policy acquisition costs to expenses, we use assumptions based on
our best estimates of long-term experience. We review and modify these assumptions on a
regular basis.
Separate Accounts
We issue life contracts with guaranteed minimum returns, referred to as bank-owned life
insurance contracts (BOLIs). We legally segregate and record as separate accounts the assets
and liabilities for some of our BOLIs, based on the specific contract provisions. We
guarantee minimum investment returns, account values and death benefits for our separate
account BOLIs. Our other BOLIs are general account products.
We carry the assets of separate account BOLIs at fair value. The liabilities on separate
account BOLIs primarily are the contract holders claims to the related assets and are
carried at the fair value of the assets. If the BOLI asset value is projected below the
value we guaranteed, a liability is established by a charge to the companys earnings.
2006 10-K Page 86
Generally, investment income and realized investment gains and losses of the separate
accounts accrue directly to the contract holder and we do not include them in the
Consolidated Statements of Income. Revenues and expenses related to separate accounts
consist of contractual fees and mortality, surrender and expense risk charges. Also, each
separate account BOLI includes a negotiated gain and loss sharing arrangement with the
company. A percentage of each separate accounts realized gain and loss representing
contract fees and assessments accrues to us and is transferred from the separate account to
our general account and is recognized as revenue or expense.
Reinsurance
We reduce risk and uncertainty by buying property casualty and life reinsurance.
Reinsurance contracts do not relieve us from our duty to policyholders, but rather help
protect our financial strength to perform that duty. We estimate loss amounts recoverable
from our reinsurers based on the reinsurance policy terms. Historically, our claims with
reinsurers have been paid. We do not have an allowance for uncollectible reinsurance.
We also serve in a limited way as a reinsurer for other insurance companies, reinsurers and
involuntary state pools. We record our transactions for such assumed reinsurance based on
reports provided to us by the ceding reinsurer.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash and money market funds.
Investments
Our portfolio investments are primarily in publicly traded fixed-maturity, equity and
short-term investments, classified as available for sale at fair value in the consolidated
financial statements. Fixed-maturity investments (taxable bonds, tax-exempt bonds and
redeemable preferred stocks) and equity investments (common and non-redeemable preferred
stocks) are classified as available for sale and recorded at fair value in the consolidated
financial statements. Short-term investments are classified as available for sale and
recorded at amortized cost, which approximates fair value, in the consolidated financial
statements. The number of fixed-maturity securities trading below 100 percent of book value
can be expected to fluctuate as interest rates rise or fall. Because of our strong surplus
and long-term investment horizon, we intend to hold fixed-maturity investments until
maturity, regardless of short-term fluctuations in fair values.
We include unrealized gains and losses on investments, net of taxes, in shareholders equity
as accumulated other comprehensive income. Realized gains and losses on investments are
recognized in net income on a specific identification basis.
Investment income consists mainly of interest and dividends. We record interest on an
accrual basis and record dividends at the ex-dividend date. We amortize premiums and
discounts on fixed-maturity securities using the effective interest method.
Facts and circumstances sometimes warrant investment write-downs. We record such
other-than-temporary declines as realized investment losses.
Fair Value Disclosures
We primarily base fair value for investments in equity and fixed-maturity securities
(including redeemable preferred stock and assets held in separate accounts) on quoted market
prices or on data provided by an outside resource that supplies global securities pricing.
When a price is not available from these sources, as the case of securities that are not
publicly traded, we determine the fair value using quotes from independent brokers. The fair
value of investments priced by independent brokers is less than 1 percent of the fair value
of our total investment portfolio.
We estimate fair value for liabilities under investment-type insurance contracts (annuities)
using discounted cash flow calculations. We base the calculations on interest rates offered
on contracts of similar nature and maturity. We base fair value for long-term senior notes
and notes payable on the quoted market prices for such notes.
Derivative Financial Instruments and Hedging Activities
Some of our investments contain embedded options. These investments include convertible
debt and convertible preferred stock. We calculate fair value and account for the embedded
options separately. The changes in fair values of embedded derivates are recognized in net
income in the period they occur.
In 2006, CFC Investment Company, our commercial leasing and financing subsidiary, replaced
$49 million of intercompany debt with borrowings against one of our short-term lines of
credit to improve cash flow for the parent company. During the third quarter, we entered
into an interest-rate swap to manage the variability of interest payments for certain
variable-rate debt obligations ($49 million notional amount). Under this interest-rate swap
contract, we have agreed to pay a fixed rate of interest for a three-year period. The
contract is intended to be a hedge against changes in the amount of future cash flows
associated with the related interest
2006 10-K Page 87
payments for our short-term line of credit. The interest-rate swap contract is
reflected at fair value in our consolidated balance sheet.
SFAS No. 133, as amended, requires changes in the fair value of the companys derivative
financial instruments to be recognized periodically as realized gains or losses on the
consolidated statement of income or as a component of accumulated other comprehensive income
in shareholders equity, respectively. We recognized a $324,000 pretax realized investment
loss due to the decline in the fair value of the interest rate swap prior to qualifying for
hedge accounting treatment.
In October, we completed the necessary requirements for the interest-rate swap to qualify
for hedge accounting treatment under SFAS No. 133. We expect that the interest-rate swap
will be a highly effective hedge and that future changes in the fair value of the
interest-rate swap will be recorded as a component of accumulated other comprehensive
income. We do not expect any significant amounts to be reclassified into earnings in the
next 12 months. The fair value of the companys interest rate swap was $430,000 at December
31, 2006.
Securities Lending Program
In 2006, we began actively participating in a securities lending program under which
certain fixed-maturity securities from our investment portfolio are loaned to other
institutions for short periods of time. We require collateral in excess of the market value
of the loaned securities. The collateral is invested in accordance with our guidelines in
high-quality, short-duration instruments to generate additional investment income. The
market value of the loaned securities is monitored on a daily basis and additional
collateral is added or refunded as the market value of the loaned securities changes. The
securities lending collateral is recognized as an asset, and classified as securities
lending collateral, with a corresponding liability for the obligation to return the
collateral.
We maintain the right and ability to redeem the fixed-maturity securities loaned on short
notice and continue to earn interest on the securities. We maintain effective control over
the securities that we have loaned, which are classified as invested assets on our
consolidated balance sheets. Interest income on collateral, net of fees, was $697,000 for
the twelve months ended December 31, 2006. At December 31, 2006, we had no securities on
loan and held no collateral. We recalled our securities on loan prior to year end for
statutory reporting reasons. We have continued the securities lending program in 2007.
Lease/Finance
Our CFC Investment Company subsidiary provides auto and equipment direct financing
(leases and loans) to commercial and individual clients. We generally transfer ownership of
the property to the client as the terms of the leases expire. Our lease contracts contain
bargain purchase options. We record income over the financing term using the interest
method.
We capitalize and amortize lease or loan origination costs over the life of the financing
using the interest method. These costs may include, but are not limited to: finder fees,
broker fees, filing fees and the cost of credit reports.
Asset Management
Our CinFin Capital Management subsidiary generates revenue from management fees. We set
those fees based on the market value of assets under management, and we record our revenue
as it is earned.
Land, Building and Equipment
We record building and equipment at cost less accumulated depreciation. Certain
equipment held under capital leases also is classified as property and equipment with the
related lease obligations recorded as liabilities. Our depreciation is based on estimated
useful lives (ranging from three years to 391/2 years) using straight-line and accelerated
methods. Depreciation expense recorded in 2006, 2005 and 2004 was $38 million, $33 million
and $30 million, respectively. We monitor land, building and equipment for potential
impairments. Potential impairments may include a significant decrease in the market values
of the assets, considerable cost overruns on projects or a change in legal factors or
business climate, or other factors that indicate that the carrying amount may not be
recoverable.
We capitalize costs for internally developed computer software during the application
development stage. These costs generally consist of external consulting, payroll and
payroll-related costs.
Income Taxes
We calculate deferred income tax liabilities and assets using tax rates in effect for
the time when temporary differences in book and taxable income are estimated to reverse. We
recognize deferred income taxes for numerous temporary differences between our taxable
income and book-basis income and other changes in shareholders equity. Such temporary
differences relate primarily to unrealized gains on investments and differences in the
recognition of deferred acquisition costs and insurance reserves. We charge deferred income
taxes associated with unrealized appreciation (except the amounts related to the effect of
income tax rate
2006 10-K Page 88
changes) to shareholders equity in accumulated other comprehensive income. We charge
deferred taxes associated with other differences to income.
New Accounting Pronouncements
SFAS No. 155, Accounting for Certain Hybrid Financial Instruments, an amendment of
SFAS Nos. 133 and 140
In February 2006, Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 155. This
accounting standard permits fair value re-measurement for any hybrid financial instrument
containing an embedded derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation; clarifies which
interest-only strips and principal-only strips are not subject to the requirements of SFAS
No. 133; establishes a requirement to evaluate interests in securitized financial assets to
identify them as freestanding derivatives or as hybrid financial instruments containing an
embedded derivative requiring bifurcation; clarifies that concentrations of credit risk in
the form of subordination are not embedded derivatives; and amends SFAS No. 140 to eliminate
the prohibition on a qualifying special-purpose entity from holding a derivative financial
instrument pertaining to a beneficial interest other than another derivative financial
instrument. SFAS No. 155 is effective for all financial instruments acquired or issued after
the beginning of an entitys first fiscal year beginning after September 15, 2006.
We adopted SFAS No. 155 on January 1, 2007, to permit fair value re-measurement for our
hybrid financial instruments that contain embedded derivatives that required bifurcation
under the original provisions of SFAS No. 133. The adoption is not expected to
have a material impact on our results of operations or financial position.
SFAS No. 157, Fair Value Measurements
In September 2006, FASB issued SFAS No. 157, which defines fair value, establishes a
framework for measuring fair value, and expands disclosures about fair value measurements.
The provisions of SFAS No. 157 are effective for financial statements issued for fiscal
years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. We
currently are evaluating the timing and impact of adopting SFAS No. 157 on our financial
position.
SFAS No. 158, Employers Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other
Postretirement Plans, an amendment of SFAS Nos. 87, 88, 106, and 132(R)
In September 2006, FASB issued SFAS No. 158, which requires that we recognize the
over-funded or under-funded status of our defined benefit plans as an asset or liability.
SFAS No. 158 is effective as of December 31, 2006, with changes in the funded status
recognized through accumulated other comprehensive income in the year in which they occur.
The adoption of SFAS No. 158 resulted in an increase in liabilities of approximately $32
million on an after-tax basis with a corresponding reduction in accumulated other
comprehensive income and shareholders equity. SFAS No. 158 did not change the amount of net
periodic benefit expense recognized in an entitys results of operations.
SAB No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Qualifying
Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements
In September 2006, the SEC issued Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 108 to address
diversity in practice in quantifying financial statement misstatements. SAB 108 requires
that we quantify misstatements based on their impact on each of our financial statements and
related disclosures. SAB 108 is effective as of December 31, 2006, allowing a one-time
transitional cumulative effect adjustment to retained earnings as of January 1, 2006, for
errors that were not previously deemed material, but are material under the guidance in SAB
No. 108.The impact of adopting SAB No. 108 did not result in a material effect on our
results of operations and financial position.
Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes, an interpretation
of SFAS No. 109
In July 2006, FASB issued FASB Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in
Income Taxes. FIN 48 is an interpretation of SFAS No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. This
Interpretation clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an
enterprises financial statements in accordance with SFAS No. 109. This Interpretation
prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement
recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return.
This Interpretation also provides guidance on de-recognition, classification, interest and
penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. This Interpretation is
effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. We adopted FIN 48 as of
January 1, 2007, as required. In the first quarter of 2007, we will record a cumulative
effect adjustment of a change in accounting principle as prescribed by FIN 48. We do not
expect FIN 48 to have a material effect on our results or operations or
financial position.
2006 10-K Page 89
SOP 05-1, Accounting by Insurance Enterprises for Deferred Acquisition Costs in
Connection with Modifications or Exchanges of Insurance Contracts
In October 2005, the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants issued
Statement of Position (SOP) 05-1, which provides accounting guidance for deferred policy
acquisition costs on internal replacements of insurance and investment contracts other than
those specifically described in SFAS No. 97, Accounting and Reporting by Insurance
Enterprises for Certain Long-Duration Contracts and for Realized Gains and Losses from the
Sale of Investments. SOP 05-1 defines an internal replacement as a modification in product
benefits, features, rights or coverages that occurs by the exchange of a contract for a new
contract, or by amendment, endorsement or rider to a contract, or by the election of a
feature or coverage within a contract. Internal replacement contracts are those that are
substantially changed from the replaced contract and are accounted for as an extinguishment
of the replaced contract. Nonintegrated contract features are accounted for as separately
issued contracts. Modifications resulting from the election of a feature or coverage within
a contract or from an integrated contract feature generally do not result in an internal
replacement contract subject to SOP 05-1 provided certain conditions are met. The provisions
of SOP 05-1 are effective for internal replacements occurring in fiscal years beginning
after December 15, 2006. We do not expect this statement to have a material impact on our
results of operations or financial position.
Reclassifications
We have reclassified certain prior-year amounts to conform with current-year
classifications.
2. Investments
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Investment income summarized by investment category: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on fixed maturities |
|
$ |
300 |
|
|
$ |
280 |
|
|
$ |
252 |
|
Dividends on equity securities |
|
|
262 |
|
|
|
244 |
|
|
|
239 |
|
Other investment income |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
577 |
|
|
|
532 |
|
|
|
497 |
|
Less investment expenses |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
570 |
|
|
$ |
526 |
|
|
$ |
492 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Realized investment gains and losses summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross realized gains |
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
|
$ |
36 |
|
Gross realized losses |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
Other-than-temporary impairments |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross realized gains |
|
|
656 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Gross realized losses |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(6 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Other-than-temporary impairments |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
Embedded derivatives |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
10 |
|
Other |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
684 |
|
|
$ |
61 |
|
|
$ |
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in unrealized investment gains and losses and other summary: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities |
|
$ |
(23 |
) |
|
$ |
(198 |
) |
|
$ |
(6 |
) |
Equity securities |
|
|
200 |
|
|
|
(575 |
) |
|
|
(448 |
) |
Adjustment to deferred acquisition costs and life policy reserves |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Other |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
(6 |
) |
Income taxes on above |
|
|
(54 |
) |
|
|
246 |
|
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
127 |
|
|
$ |
(503 |
) |
|
$ |
(297 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006, contractual maturity dates for fixed-maturity and short-term
investments were:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
% of Fair |
|
(In millions) |
|
cost |
|
|
value |
|
|
value |
|
Maturity dates occurring: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than one year |
|
$ |
203 |
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
|
3.5 |
% |
One year through five years |
|
|
787 |
|
|
|
802 |
|
|
|
13.6 |
|
After five years through ten years |
|
|
2,860 |
|
|
|
2,865 |
|
|
|
48.5 |
|
After ten years through twenty years |
|
|
1,729 |
|
|
|
1,763 |
|
|
|
29.9 |
|
Over twenty years |
|
|
255 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
4.5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,834 |
|
|
$ |
5,900 |
|
|
|
100.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities when there is a right to call
or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
At December 31, 2006, investments with book value of $64 million and fair value of $66
million were on deposit with various states in compliance with regulatory requirements.
2006 10-K Page 90
The following table analyzes cost or amortized cost, gross unrealized gains, gross
unrealized losses and fair value for our investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cost or |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
amortized |
|
|
Gross unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
At December 31, |
|
cost |
|
|
gains |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States, municipalities and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
2,382 |
|
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
2,416 |
|
Convertibles and bonds with warrants attached |
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
Public utilities |
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
United States government |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Government-sponsored enterprises |
|
|
995 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
972 |
|
Foreign government |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
All other corporate bonds and short-term investments |
|
|
2,045 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
2,084 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,834 |
|
|
$ |
122 |
|
|
$ |
56 |
|
|
$ |
5,900 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
2,621 |
|
|
$ |
5,181 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
7,799 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States, municipalities and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
2,083 |
|
|
$ |
48 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
2,117 |
|
Convertibles and bonds with warrants attached |
|
|
270 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
Public utilities |
|
|
139 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
143 |
|
United States government |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Government-sponsored enterprises |
|
|
992 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
973 |
|
Foreign government |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
All other corporate bonds and short-term investments |
|
|
1,970 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
2,032 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
5,462 |
|
|
$ |
159 |
|
|
$ |
70 |
|
|
$ |
5,551 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
2,128 |
|
|
$ |
4,986 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
7,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This table reviews unrealized losses and fair values by investment category and by
length of time securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
(In millions) |
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
At December 31, |
|
value |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
losses |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States, municipalities and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
190 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
589 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
779 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
Convertibles and bonds with warrants attached |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Public utilities |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
58 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
United States government |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Government-sponsored enterprises |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
970 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
971 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Foreign government |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
All other corporate bonds and short-term investments |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
726 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
814 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
295 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
2,383 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
2,678 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
334 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
2,394 |
|
|
$ |
54 |
|
|
$ |
2,728 |
|
|
$ |
59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States, municipalities and political subdivisions |
|
$ |
754 |
|
|
$ |
8 |
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
927 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
Convertibles and bonds with warrants attached |
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
Public utilities |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
United States government |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Government-sponsored enterprises |
|
|
607 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
354 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
961 |
|
|
|
19 |
|
All other corporate bonds and short-term investments |
|
|
387 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
284 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
671 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,866 |
|
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
856 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
2,722 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,925 |
|
|
$ |
33 |
|
|
$ |
903 |
|
|
$ |
45 |
|
|
$ |
2,828 |
|
|
$ |
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006, 482 fixed-maturity investments with a total unrealized loss of
$53 million and three equity securities with a total unrealized loss of $1 million had been
in that position for 12 months or more. All were trading between 70 percent to less than 100
percent of book value.
At December 31, 2005, 177 fixed-maturity investments with a total unrealized loss of $39
million and three equity securities with a total unrealized loss of $6 million had been in
that position for 12 months or more. All were trading between 70 percent to less than 100
percent of book value.
2006 10-K Page 91
Investments in companies that exceed 10 percent of our shareholders equity at December 31
include:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
(In millions) |
|
Cost |
|
Fair value |
|
Cost |
|
Fair value |
Issuers: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fifth Third Bancorp common stock |
|
$ |
283 |
|
|
$ |
2,979 |
|
|
$ |
283 |
|
|
$ |
2,745 |
|
Exxon Mobil Corporation common stock |
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
687 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
Alltel Corporation common stock and fixed maturity |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
807 |
|
We sold 12,700,164 shares of our holdings of Alltel Corporation common stock in January
2006 and 475,000 shares in December 2005. The sale contributed $647 million and $27 million
to our 2006 and 2005 pretax realized gains. The sale contributed $412 million and $15
million to net income in 2006 and 2005, respectively.
3. Deferred Acquisition Costs
This table summarizes components of our deferred policy acquisition costs asset:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Deferred
policy acquisition costs asset at beginning of year |
|
$ |
429 |
|
|
$ |
400 |
|
|
$ |
372 |
|
Capitalized deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
706 |
|
|
|
683 |
|
|
|
657 |
|
Amortized deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
(685 |
) |
|
|
(664 |
) |
|
|
(626 |
) |
Amortized shadow deferred policy acquisition costs |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred
policy acquisition costs asset at end of year |
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
$ |
429 |
|
|
$ |
400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4. Property Casualty Loss and Loss Expenses
This table summarizes activity in the reserve for loss and loss expenses:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Gross loss and loss expense reserves, January 1 |
|
$ |
3,629 |
|
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
$ |
3,386 |
|
Less reinsurance receivable |
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
541 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss and loss expense reserves, January 1 |
|
|
3,111 |
|
|
|
2,977 |
|
|
|
2,845 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net incurred loss and loss expenses related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current accident year |
|
|
2,124 |
|
|
|
1,972 |
|
|
|
1,949 |
|
Prior accident years |
|
|
(116 |
) |
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
(196 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total incurred |
|
|
2,008 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net paid loss and loss expenses related to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current accident year |
|
|
819 |
|
|
|
772 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
Prior accident years |
|
|
944 |
|
|
|
906 |
|
|
|
817 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total paid |
|
|
1,763 |
|
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
1,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss and loss expense reserves, December 31 |
|
|
3,356 |
|
|
|
3,111 |
|
|
|
2,977 |
|
Plus reinsurance receivable |
|
|
504 |
|
|
|
518 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross loss and loss expense reserves, December 31 |
|
$ |
3,860 |
|
|
$ |
3,629 |
|
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We base property casualty loss and loss expenses reserve estimates on our experience
and on information gathered from internal analyses and our appointed actuary. When reviewing
reserves, we analyze historical data and estimate the effect of various other factors, such
as industry loss frequency and severity and premium trends; past, present and anticipated
product pricing; anticipated premium growth; other quantifiable trends; and projected
ultimate loss ratios.
Because of changes in estimates of insured events in prior years, we decreased the provision
for loss and loss expenses by $116 million, $160 million and $196 million in calendar years
2006, 2005 and 2004. These decreases are partly due to the effects of settling reported
(case) and unreported (IBNR) reserves established in prior years for amounts less than
expected.
The reserve for loss and loss expenses in the consolidated balance sheets also includes $36
million, $32 million and $35 million at December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively, for
certain life and health losses.
5. Life Policy Reserves
We establish the reserves for traditional life insurance policies based on expected
expenses, mortality, morbidity, withdrawal rates and investment yields, including a
provision for uncertainty. Once these assumptions are established, they generally are
maintained throughout the lives of the contracts. We use both our own experience and
industry experience, adjusted for historical trends, in arriving at our assumptions for
expected mortality, morbidity and withdrawal rates as well as for expected expenses. We base
our assumptions for expected investment income on our own experience adjusted for current
economic conditions.
2006 10-K Page 92
We establish reserves for the companys universal life, deferred annuity and investment
contracts equal to the cumulative account balances, which include premium deposits plus
credited interest less charges and withdrawals. Some of our universal life policies contain
no-lapse guarantee provisions. For these policies, we establish a reserve in addition to the
account balance, based on expected no-lapse guarantee benefits and expected policy
assessments.
Here is a summary of our life policy reserves:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Ordinary/traditional life |
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
$ |
419 |
|
Universal life |
|
|
396 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
Annuities |
|
|
537 |
|
|
|
523 |
|
Other |
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,409 |
|
|
$ |
1,343 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At both December 31, 2006 and 2005, the fair value associated with the annuities shown
above was approximately $563 million.
6. Notes Payable
We had two lines of credit with commercial banks amounting to $125 million with an
outstanding balance of $49 million at year-end 2006. We had no compensating balance
requirement on short-term debt for either 2006 or 2005. We had two lines of credit with
commercial banks amounting to $125 million with no outstanding balance at year-end 2005.
Interest rates charged on such borrowings ranged from 5.90 percent to 6.03 percent during
2006.
The companys subsidiary, CFC Investment Company, entered into an interest-rate swap
agreement during 2006, which expires in three years, to hedge future cash flows (thereby
obtaining a fixed interest rate of 5.985 percent) related to certain variable rate debt
obligations. This swap is reflected at fair value in the consolidated balance sheets and the
unrealized loss, net of tax, at December 31, 2006, of $69,000 is a component of
shareholders equity in accumulated other comprehensive income. The company does not expect
any significant amounts to be reclassified into earnings as a result of interest rate
changes in the next 12 months.
7. Senior Debt
This table summarizes the principal amounts of our long-term debt excluding unamortized
discounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest |
|
Year of |
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
rate |
|
issue |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
6.90 |
% |
|
|
1998 |
|
|
Senior debentures, due 2028 |
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
6.92 |
% |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
Senior debentures, due 2028 |
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
|
6.125 |
% |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Senior notes, due 2034 |
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
375 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
795 |
|
|
$ |
795 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fair value of our senior debt approximated $850 million at year-end 2006 and $870
million at year-end 2005. None of the notes are encumbered by rating triggers.
8. Shareholders Equity and Dividend Restrictions
Our insurance subsidiary declared dividends to the parent company of $275 million in
2006, $275 million in 2005 and $175 million in 2004. State of Ohio regulatory requirements
restrict the dividends insurance subsidiaries can pay. Generally, the most Ohio-domiciled
insurance subsidiaries can pay without prior regulatory approval is the greater of 10
percent of statutory surplus or 100 percent of statutory net income for the prior calendar
year up to the amount of statutory unassigned surplus as of the end of the prior calendar
year. Dividends exceeding these limitations may be paid only with approval of the Ohio
Department
of Insurance. During 2007, the total dividends that our lead insurance subsidiary may pay to
our parent company without regulatory approval will be approximately $572 million.
As of December 31, 2006, 11.6 million shares of common stock were available for future stock
option grants.
Declared cash dividends per share were $1.34, $1.21 and $1.04 for the years ended December
31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively.
2006 10-K Page 93
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income
The change in unrealized gains and losses on investments and derivatives included:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Before |
|
|
Income |
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
tax |
|
|
tax |
|
|
Net |
|
|
tax |
|
|
tax |
|
|
Net |
|
|
tax |
|
|
tax |
|
|
Net |
|
Accumulated unrealized gains
(losses) on securities available
for sale at January 1 |
|
$ |
5,060 |
|
|
$ |
1,776 |
|
|
$ |
3,284 |
|
|
$ |
5,809 |
|
|
$ |
2,022 |
|
|
$ |
3,787 |
|
|
$ |
6,269 |
|
|
$ |
2,183 |
|
|
$ |
4,086 |
|
Net unrealized gains (losses) |
|
|
880 |
|
|
|
298 |
|
|
|
582 |
|
|
|
(692 |
) |
|
|
(226 |
) |
|
|
(466 |
) |
|
|
(372 |
) |
|
|
(131 |
) |
|
|
(241 |
) |
Reclassification adjustment for
(gains) losses included in net
income |
|
|
(701 |
) |
|
|
(245 |
) |
|
|
(456 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
(40 |
) |
|
|
(91 |
) |
|
|
(31 |
) |
|
|
(60 |
) |
Adjustment to deferred acquisition
costs and life policy reserves |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on other comprehensive
income |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(749 |
) |
|
|
(246 |
) |
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
(460 |
) |
|
|
(161 |
) |
|
|
(299 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated unrealized gains
(losses) on securities available
for sale at December 31 |
|
$ |
5,241 |
|
|
$ |
1,830 |
|
|
$ |
3,411 |
|
|
$ |
5,060 |
|
|
$ |
1,776 |
|
|
$ |
3,284 |
|
|
$ |
5,809 |
|
|
$ |
2,022 |
|
|
$ |
3,787 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated unrealized gains
(losses) on derivatives used in
cash flow hedging relationships
at January 1 |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
Net unrealized gains (losses) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Reclassification adjustment for
(gains) losses included in net
income |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effect on other comprehensive
income |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated unrealized gains
(losses) on derivatives used in
cash flow hedging
relationships at December 31 |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated unrealized losses
for pension obligations at
January 1 |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Cumulative effect of change
in accounting for pension
obligations |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated unrealized losses
for pension obligations at
December 31 |
|
$ |
(49 |
) |
|
$ |
(17 |
) |
|
$ |
(32 |
) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other
comprehensive income at
January 1 |
|
$ |
5,060 |
|
|
$ |
1,776 |
|
|
$ |
3,284 |
|
|
$ |
5,809 |
|
|
$ |
2,022 |
|
|
$ |
3,787 |
|
|
$ |
6,266 |
|
|
$ |
2,182 |
|
|
$ |
4,084 |
|
Other comprehensive income (loss) |
|
|
181 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(749 |
) |
|
|
(246 |
) |
|
|
(503 |
) |
|
|
(457 |
) |
|
|
(160 |
) |
|
|
(297 |
) |
Cumulative effect of change in
accounting for pension
obligations |
|
|
(49 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated other
comprehensive income
at December 31 |
|
$ |
5,192 |
|
|
$ |
1,813 |
|
|
$ |
3,379 |
|
|
$ |
5,060 |
|
|
$ |
1,776 |
|
|
$ |
3,284 |
|
|
$ |
5,809 |
|
|
$ |
2,022 |
|
|
$ |
3,787 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9. Reinsurance
Our statements of income include earned property casualty premiums on assumed and ceded
business:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Direct earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,296 |
|
|
$ |
3,209 |
|
|
$ |
3,062 |
|
Assumed earned premiums |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Ceded earned premiums |
|
|
(158 |
) |
|
|
(179 |
) |
|
|
(175 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net earned premiums |
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 94
Our statements of income include incurred property casualty loss and loss expenses on
assumed and ceded business:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Direct incurred loss and loss expenses |
|
$ |
2,072 |
|
|
$ |
1,898 |
|
|
$ |
1,870 |
|
Assumed incurred loss and loss expenses |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
40 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Ceded incurred loss and loss expenses |
|
|
(77 |
) |
|
|
(126 |
) |
|
|
(134 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net incurred loss and loss expenses |
|
$ |
2,008 |
|
|
$ |
1,812 |
|
|
$ |
1,753 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10. Income Taxes
Here is a summary of the major components of our net deferred tax liability:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Deferred tax liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gains on investments and derivatives |
|
$ |
1,824 |
|
|
$ |
1,788 |
|
Deferred acquisition costs |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
135 |
|
Other |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2,002 |
|
|
|
1,955 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred tax assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expense reserves |
|
|
190 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
Unearned premiums |
|
|
109 |
|
|
|
108 |
|
Life policy reserves |
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
Other |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
349 |
|
|
|
333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net deferred tax liability |
|
$ |
1,653 |
|
|
$ |
1,622 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The provision for federal income taxes is based upon a consolidated income tax return
for the company and subsidiaries. As of December 31, 2006, we had no capital loss carry
forwards.
The differences between the statutory income tax rates and our effective income tax rates
are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Tax at statutory rate |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
|
|
35.0 |
% |
Increase (decrease) resulting from: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tax-exempt municipal bonds |
|
|
(2.2 |
) |
|
|
(3.2 |
) |
|
|
(2.5 |
) |
Dividend exclusion |
|
|
(3.9 |
) |
|
|
(5.7 |
) |
|
|
(5.7 |
) |
Other |
|
|
1.1 |
|
|
|
0.7 |
|
|
|
0.2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Effective rate |
|
|
30.0 |
% |
|
|
26.8 |
% |
|
|
27.0 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Filed tax returns for calendar years 2000 through 2005 are currently open with the
Internal Revenue Service. As of December 31, 2005, federal income taxes had not been
provided for on our life insurance subsidiarys Policyholder Surplus Account (PSA), which
totaled $14 million as of December 31, 2005 and 2004. The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004
suspended for a two-year period beginning January 1, 2005, the tax
liability of a stock life insurance company on distributions made from the PSA. In July
2006, the companys life insurance subsidiary declared and paid a $14 million dividend,
eliminating its PSA balance as of December 31, 2006.
11. Net Income Per Common Share
Basic earnings per share are computed based on the weighted average number of shares
outstanding. Diluted earnings per share are computed based on the weighted average number of
common and dilutive potential common shares outstanding. We have adjusted shares and
earnings per share to reflect all stock splits and dividends prior to December 31, 2006.
2006 10-K Page 95
Here are calculations for basic and diluted earnings per share:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Numerator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net incomebasic and diluted |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Denominator: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average common shares outstanding |
|
|
173,423,395 |
|
|
|
175,062,669 |
|
|
|
176,476,722 |
|
Effect of stock options |
|
|
2,027,946 |
|
|
|
2,053,457 |
|
|
|
1,900,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjusted weighted-average shares |
|
|
175,451,341 |
|
|
|
177,116,126 |
|
|
|
178,376,848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earnings per share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
5.36 |
|
|
$ |
3.44 |
|
|
$ |
3.30 |
|
Diluted |
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
|
3.40 |
|
|
|
3.28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Number of anti-dilutive option shares |
|
|
1,336,150 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
264,602 |
|
Exercise price of anti-dilutive option shares |
|
$ |
45.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
41.14 |
|
The only current source of dilution of our common shares is outstanding stock options
to purchase shares of common stock. The above table shows the number of anti-dilutive
options shares at year-end 2006, 2005 and 2004. We did not include these options in the
computation of net income per common share (diluted) because their exercise would have an
anti-dilutive effect.
12. Pension Plan
We sponsor a defined contribution plan (401(k) savings plan) and a defined benefit
pension plan covering substantially all employees. We do not contribute to the 401(k) plan
but we do pay all operating expenses. Benefits for the defined benefit pension plan are
based on years of credited service and compensation level. Contributions are based on the
frozen entry age actuarial cost method. We also maintain a supplemental retirement plan
(SERP) with liabilities of approximately $5 million to $9 million at year-end 2006 and 2005.
The SERP is included in the obligation and expense amounts. Our pension expense is composed
of several components that are determined using the projected unit credit actuarial cost
method and are based on certain actuarial assumptions.
Key assumptions used in developing the 2006 net pension obligation were a 5.75 percent
discount rate and rates of compensation increases ranging from 4 percent to 6 percent. To
determine the discount rate, the plans particular liability characteristics the amounts,
timing and interest sensitivity of expected benefit payments were evaluated and then
matched to a yield curve based on actual high-quality corporate bonds across a full maturity
spectrum. Once the plans projected cash flows matched the yield curve, a present value was
developed, which was then calibrated to a single-equivalent discount rate. That discount
rate, when applied to a single sum, would generate the necessary cash flows to pay benefits
when due. It was increased by 0.25 percentage points in 2006 due to market interest rates
conditions. We based the rates of compensation increase on the companys historical data,
which led us to lower the range from the 5 percent to 7 percent used in previous years.
Key assumptions used in developing the 2006 net pension expense were a 5.50 percent discount
rate, an 8 percent expected return on plan assets and rates of compensation increases
ranging from 5 percent to 7 percent. The 8 percent return on plan assets assumption is based
partially on the fact that substantially all of the investments held by the pension plan are
common stocks that pay annual dividends. We believe this rate is representative of the
expected long-term rate of return on these assets. These assumptions were consistent with
the prior year, except that the discount rate was reduced by 0.25 percentage points due to
market interest rate conditions.
2006 10-K Page 96
Benefit obligation activity using an actuarial measurement date at December 31 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualified Pension Plan |
|
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
|
|
Totals |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
Change in projected benefit obligation: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefit obligation at beginning of year |
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
199 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
244 |
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
Service cost |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Plan amendments |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Actuarial loss |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation at end of year |
|
$ |
266 |
|
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
$ |
244 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated benefit obligation |
|
$ |
200 |
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
|
$ |
4 |
|
|
$ |
6 |
|
|
$ |
204 |
|
|
$ |
171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in plan assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at beginning of year |
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
$ |
158 |
|
Actual return on plan assets |
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
Employer contributions |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Benefits paid |
|
|
(10 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded (unfunded) status: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Funded (unfunded) status at end of year |
|
$ |
(58 |
) |
|
$ |
(62 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(9 |
) |
|
$ |
(63 |
) |
|
$ |
(71 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accumulated benefit obligation was $204 million and $171 million at December 31,
2006 and 2005, respectively. The fair value of our stock comprised $29 million (14 percent
of total plan assets) at December 31, 2006, and $29 million (17 percent of total plan
assets) at December 31, 2005.
At December 31, 2005 there were no amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive
income for the plans. A reconciliation follows of the funded status at the end of the
measurement period to the amounts recognized in the statement of financial position at
December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualified |
|
|
Supplemental |
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Pension Plan |
|
|
Pension Plan |
|
|
Total |
|
Amounts recognized in the statement of financial position consist of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncurrent liability |
|
$ |
(58 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(63 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(58 |
) |
|
$ |
(5 |
) |
|
$ |
(63 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amounts recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income not yet
recognized
as a component of net periodic benefit cost consist of: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net actuarial loss/(gain) |
|
$ |
40 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
39 |
|
Prior service cost |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The projected benefit obligation and fair value of plan assets for pension plans with a
projected benefit obligation in excess of plan assets at December 31 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualified Pension Plan |
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
|
Total |
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Projected benefit obligation in excess of
plan assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation, at end of year |
|
$ |
266 |
|
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
271 |
|
|
$ |
244 |
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
208 |
|
|
|
173 |
|
The projected benefit obligation, accumulated benefit obligation and fair value of plan
assets for pension plans with an accumulated benefit obligation in excess of plan assets at
December 31 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Accumulated benefit obligation in excess of
plan assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Projected benefit obligation, at end of year |
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
Accumulated benefit obligation, at end of year |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Fair value of plan assets at end of year |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
The weighted-average assumptions used to determine benefit obligations at December 31
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Discount rate |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
Rate of compensation increase |
|
|
4-6 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
We evaluate our pension plan assumptions annually and update them as necessary. The
discount rate assumptions for our benefit obligation track with Moodys Aa bond yield, and
yearly adjustments reflect any
2006 10-K Page 97
changes to those bond yields. Compensation increase
assumptions reflect historical calendar year compensation increases.
Here are the components of our net periodic benefit cost at December 31:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Qualified Pension Plan |
|
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
Service cost |
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
11 |
|
Interest cost |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(13 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
Amortization of actuarial
gain, prior service cost
and transition asset |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net periodic benefit cost |
|
$ |
18 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
19 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Here is a summary of the weighted-average assumptions we use to determine our net
expense for the plan:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualified Pension Plan |
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
Discount rate |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
|
|
5.50 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
Expected return on plan assets |
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
|
8.00 |
|
|
NA |
|
NA |
|
NA |
Rate of compensation increase |
|
|
5-7 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
|
|
5-7 |
|
Our pension plan asset allocations by category are:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
Asset category: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
|
94 |
% |
|
|
93 |
% |
Fixed maturities |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We expect to contribute approximately $10 million to our pension plan in 2007 with a
target allocation of 90 percent equity securities and 10 percent fixed maturities and cash.
We expect to make the following benefit payments, which reflect expected future service:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Qualified |
|
Supplemental |
|
|
For the years ended December 31, |
|
Pension Plan |
|
Pension Plan |
|
Total |
2007 |
|
$ |
9 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
9 |
|
2008 |
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
2009 |
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
2010 |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
2011 |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
Years 2012-2016 |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
109 |
|
The estimated costs that will be amortized from accumulated other comprehensive income
into net periodic benefit cost over the next year are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In millions) |
|
Qualified |
|
|
Supplemental |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pension Plan |
|
|
Pension Plan |
|
|
Total |
|
Actuarial (gain)/loss |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
Prior service cost |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The incremental effect of applying SFAS No. 158 on individual line items in the
statement of financial position at December 31, 2006, follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Qualified Pension Plan |
|
Supplemental Pension Plan |
|
Total |
|
|
Without |
|
With |
|
Increase/ |
|
Without |
|
With |
|
Increase/ |
|
Without |
|
With |
|
Increase/ |
(In millions) |
|
FAS 158 |
|
FAS 158 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
FAS 158 |
|
FAS 158 |
|
(Decrease) |
|
FAS 158 |
|
FAS 158 |
|
(Decrease) |
Other liabilities |
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
$ |
46 |
|
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
14 |
|
|
$ |
63 |
|
|
$ |
49 |
|
Deferred income tax |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(20 |
) |
|
|
(16 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Accumulated other
comprehensive income |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(32 |
) |
|
|
(32 |
) |
13. Statutory Accounting Information
Insurance companies use statutory accounting practices (SAP) as prescribed by
regulatory authorities. The three primary differences between SAP and GAAP are:
|
|
policy acquisition costs are expensed when incurred, |
|
|
life insurance reserves are based upon different actuarial assumptions and |
|
|
deferred income taxes are valued and established using a different basis. |
2006 10-K Page 98
Statutory net income and capital and surplus determined in accordance with SAP
prescribed or permitted by insurance regulatory authorities for four legal entities, our
insurance subsidiary and its three insurance subsidiaries, are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SAP Net Income |
|
Capital and Surplus |
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
At December 31, |
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
2004 |
|
2006 |
|
2005 |
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
$ |
572 |
|
|
$ |
517 |
|
|
$ |
588 |
|
|
$ |
4,723 |
|
|
$ |
4,220 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
263 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
62 |
|
|
|
63 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
Statutory capital and surplus for our insurance subsidiary, The Cincinnati Insurance
Company, includes capital and surplus of its three insurance subsidiaries.
14. Transactions with Affiliated Parties
We paid certain officers and directors, or insurance agencies of which they are
shareholders, commissions of approximately $7 million, $6 million and $11 million on premium
volume of approximately $40 million, $41 million and $76 million for 2006, 2005 and 2004,
respectively.
15.
Commitments and
Contingent Liabilities
Legal issues are part of the normal course of business for all companies. As such, we
have various litigation and claims against us in process and pending. Having analyzed those
claims with our legal counsel, we believe the outcomes of normal insurance matters will not
have a material effect on our consolidated financial position, results of operations or cash
flows. We further believe that the outcomes of non-insurance matters will be covered by
insurance coverage or will not have a material effect on our consolidated financial
position, results of operations or cash flows.
In June 2004 we discovered some uncertainty regarding the status of the Cincinnati Financial
Corporation holding (parent) company under the Investment Company Act of 1940. Several tests
and enumerated exemptions determine whether a company meets the definition of an investment
company under the Investment Company Act. In particular, one test states that a company may
be an investment company if it owns investment securities with a value greater than 40
percent of its total assets (excluding assets of its subsidiaries), a level which the
holding company exceeded between 1991 and August 2004.
On June 28, 2004, Cincinnati Financial Corporation filed an application with the SEC
formally requesting an exemption for the holding company under Section 3(b)(2) of the
Investment Company Act. Section 3(b)(2) specifically permits the SEC to exempt entities
primarily engaged in business other than that of investing, reinvesting, owning, holding or
trading in securities. Cincinnati Financial Corporation alternatively asked the SEC for
relief pursuant to Section 6(c) of the Investment Company Act, which would exempt it from
all the provisions of the Act because doing so is necessary or appropriate in the public
interest, consistent with the protection of investors and consistent with the purposes
intended by the Investment Company Act.
Following its SEC filing, the holding company transferred investment securities to our
subsidiary, The Cincinnati Insurance Company, in August 2004, lowering the holding companys
ratio of investment securities to holding-company-only assets below 40 percent. We have
maintained that ratio below the 40 percent level since the time of the transfer.
Because the ratio is below 40 percent, we believe the SEC staff is not actively considering
the application.
We strongly believe the holding company is, and has been, outside the intended scope of the
Investment Company Act because the company is, and has been, primarily engaged in the
business of property casualty and life insurance through its subsidiaries. As a registered
investment company, the holding company would not be permitted to operate its business as it
currently operates, nor would a registered investment company be permitted to have many of
the relationships that the holding company has with its affiliated companies.
To increase certainty that regulation under the Investment Company Act would not apply to
the company in the future, our operations are limited by the constraint that investment
securities held at the holding company level should remain below the 40 percent threshold
described above. Efforts to stay below the threshold could result in:
|
|
A need to dispose of otherwise desirable investment securities, possibly under
undesirable conditions. Such dispositions could result in a lower return on investment
because of market value fluctuations. Dispositions also could result in loss of
investment income that we may be unable to replace in a timely fashion. If we were
unable to manage the timing of the dispositions, we also might realize unnecessary
capital gains, which would increase our annual tax payment. |
|
|
|
Limited opportunities to purchase equity securities that hold the potential for
market value appreciation. Historically, the holding company has successfully invested
in equity securities that provided both income |
2006 10-K Page 99
|
|
and capital appreciation, contributing to long-term growth in book value. Constraining
our ability to pursue this strategy and invest in equity securities could hamper book
value growth over the long term. |
|
|
|
Maintenance of a greater portion of our portfolio of equity securities at our
insurance subsidiary. As a result of the transfer of assets to ensure compliance with
the 40 percent threshold, the holding company now is more reliant on that subsidiary
for cash to fund parent-company obligations, including shareholder dividends and
interest on long-term debt. |
Although we intend to manage assets to stay below the 40 percent threshold, events beyond
our control, including significant appreciation in the value of certain investment
securities, could result in the holding company exceeding the 40 percent threshold. While we
believe that even in such circumstances the company would not be an investment company
because it is primarily engaged in the business of insurance through its subsidiaries, the
SEC, among others, could disagree with this position.
If it were determined that the holding company is an unregistered investment company, the
holding company might be unable to enforce contracts with third parties, and third parties
could seek rescission of transactions with the holding company undertaken during the period
that it was an unregistered investment company, subject to equitable considerations set
forth in the Investment Company Act. In addition, the holding company could become subject
to monetary penalties or injunctive relief, or both, in an action brought by the SEC.
16. Equity Compensation Plans
As a result of adopting SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006, our income before income
taxes for the year ended December 31, 2006, was reduced by $17 million. Our net income for
the year ended December 31, 2006, was reduced by $14 million. If we had continued to account
for stock-based compensation under APB Opinion No. 25, there would have been no effect on
net income. The weighted-average grant-date fair value of options granted during 2006 and
2005 was $10.09 and $12.49, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options exercised
during the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, was $22 million, $9 million and $6
million, respectively. The total intrinsic value of options vested during the years ended
December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, was $10 million, $12 million and $11 million. (Intrinsic
value is the market price less the exercise price.)
Under the modified-prospective-transition method, in 2006, we recognized:
|
|
compensation cost for all stock options granted subsequent to January 1, 2006, based
on the grant-date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of SFAS No.
123(R) |
|
|
|
compensation cost for all non-vested stock options granted prior to January 1, 2006,
that vested during 2006, based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance
with the original provisions of SFAS No. 123 and |
|
|
|
compensation cost for all non-vested stock options that have nonsubstantive vesting
requirements, such as those to associates who are eligible for retirement. |
Results for prior periods have not been retrospectively adjusted for SFAS No. 123(R). As of
December 31, 2006, we had $14 million of unrecognized total compensation cost related to
non-vested stock options. That cost will be recognized over a weighted-average period of 1.7
years. SFAS No. 123(R) also requires us to classify certain tax benefits related to
share-based compensation deductions as cash from financing activities. As of December 31,
2006, these tax benefits totaled $2 million.
In determining the share-based compensation amounts for 2006, the fair value of each option
granted in 2006 was estimated on the date of grant using the binomial option-pricing model
with the following weighted average assumptions used for grants in 2006: dividend yield of
3.22 percent; expected volatility ranging from 20.25 to 27.12 percent; risk-free interest
rates ranging from 4.5 to 4.61 percent; and expected lives of five to seven years.
The following table illustrates the effect on net income and earnings per share if we had
applied the fair value recognition provisions of SFAS No. 123 to options granted under our
stock option plans prior to our adoption of SFAS No. 123(R) on January 1, 2006. For purposes
of this pro forma disclosure, the fair value of each option was estimated on the date of
grant using the binomial option-pricing model with the following weighted-average
assumptions used for grants in:
|
|
2005 Dividend yield of 2.66 percent; expected volatility of 25.61 percent;
risk-free interest rate of 4.62 percent; and expected lives of 10 years. |
|
|
|
2004 Dividend yield of 2.40 percent; expected volatility of 25.65 percent;
risk-free interest rate of 4.37 percent; and expected lives of 10 years. |
2006 10-K Page 100
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions except per share data) |
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Net income |
|
As reported |
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
Stock-based employee compensation
expense determined under
fair value based method for all
awards, net of related tax effects |
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pro forma |
|
$ |
589 |
|
|
$ |
572 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common sharebasic |
|
As reported |
|
$ |
3.44 |
|
|
$ |
3.30 |
|
|
|
Pro forma |
|
|
3.36 |
|
|
|
3.24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income per common sharediluted |
|
As reported |
|
$ |
3.40 |
|
|
$ |
3.28 |
|
|
|
Pro forma |
|
|
3.32 |
|
|
|
3.21 |
|
Here is a summary of options information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
average |
|
intrinsic |
(Dollars in millions, shares in thousands) |
|
Shares |
|
exercise |
|
value |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of year |
|
|
10,589 |
|
|
$ |
33.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted/reinstated |
|
|
1,372 |
|
|
|
45.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(1,084 |
) |
|
|
24.93 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited/revoked |
|
|
(210 |
) |
|
|
36.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period |
|
|
10,667 |
|
|
|
36.03 |
|
|
$ |
99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at end of period |
|
|
7,985 |
|
|
$ |
33.70 |
|
|
$ |
93 |
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted during the period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
10.09 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of year |
|
|
9,698 |
|
|
$ |
32.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted/reinstated |
|
|
1,504 |
|
|
|
41.62 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(467 |
) |
|
|
24.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited/revoked |
|
|
(146 |
) |
|
|
35.89 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period |
|
|
10,589 |
|
|
|
33.70 |
|
|
$ |
116 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at end of period |
|
|
7,794 |
|
|
$ |
31.69 |
|
|
$ |
101 |
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted during the period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
12.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2004 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at beginning of year |
|
|
8,791 |
|
|
$ |
30.63 |
|
|
|
|
|
Granted/reinstated |
|
|
1,439 |
|
|
|
38.81 |
|
|
|
|
|
Exercised |
|
|
(397 |
) |
|
|
24.02 |
|
|
|
|
|
Forfeited/revoked |
|
|
(135 |
) |
|
|
34.29 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Outstanding at end of period |
|
|
9,698 |
|
|
|
32.05 |
|
|
$ |
98 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options exercisable at end of period |
|
|
7,050 |
|
|
$ |
30.50 |
|
|
$ |
82 |
|
Weighted-average fair value of options granted during the period |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11.18 |
|
|
|
|
|
Cash received from the exercise of options was $27 million, $11 million and $10 million
for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, respectively. The tax benefit realized
on options exercised was $3 million for the year ended December 31, 2006, and less than $1
million for the years ended December 31, 2005 and 2004.
Options outstanding and exercisable consisted of the following at December 31, 2006:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options outstanding |
|
Options exercisable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-average |
|
Weighted- |
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted- |
(Shares in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
remaining contractual |
|
average |
|
|
|
|
|
average |
Range of exercise prices |
|
Shares |
|
life |
|
exercise price |
|
Shares |
|
exercise price |
|
|
|
$15.00 to $19.99 |
|
|
2 |
|
|
0.11 yrs |
|
$ |
19.34 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
$ |
19.34 |
|
$20.00 to $24.99 |
|
|
161 |
|
|
0.28 yrs |
|
|
20.60 |
|
|
|
161 |
|
|
|
20.60 |
|
$25.00 to $29.99 |
|
|
944 |
|
|
3.01 yrs |
|
|
27.07 |
|
|
|
944 |
|
|
|
27.07 |
|
$30.00 to $34.99 |
|
|
4,571 |
|
|
4.19 yrs |
|
|
32.66 |
|
|
|
4,571 |
|
|
|
32.66 |
|
$35.00 to $39.99 |
|
|
1,968 |
|
|
5.31 yrs |
|
|
38.44 |
|
|
|
1,535 |
|
|
|
38.34 |
|
$40.00 to $44.99 |
|
|
1,685 |
|
|
6.94 yrs |
|
|
41.54 |
|
|
|
757 |
|
|
|
41.45 |
|
$45.00 to $49.99 |
|
|
1,336 |
|
|
9.08 yrs |
|
|
45.26 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
45.26 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
10,667 |
|
|
5.28 yrs |
|
|
36.03 |
|
|
|
7,985 |
|
|
|
33.70 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The weighted-average remaining contractual life for exercisable awards as of December
31, 2006, was 4.24 years. As of December 31, 2006, 11.6 million shares of common stock were
available for future stock option grants. We currently issue new shares for option
exercises.
2006 10-K Page 101
17. Segment Information
We operate primarily in two industries, property casualty insurance and life insurance.
We regularly review four different reporting segments to make decisions about allocating
resources and assessing performance:
|
|
Commercial lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Personal lines property casualty insurance |
|
|
|
Life insurance |
|
|
|
Investment operations |
We report as Other the non-investment operations of the parent company, CFC Investment
Company and CinFin Capital Management Company (excluding client investment activities), as
well as other income of our insurance subsidiary.
Revenues come primarily from unaffiliated customers:
|
|
All three insurance segments record revenues from insurance premiums earned. Life
insurance segment revenues also include separate account investment management fees. |
|
|
|
Our investment operations revenues are pretax net investment income plus realized
investment gains and losses. |
|
|
|
Other revenues are primarily finance/lease income. |
Income or loss before income taxes for each segment is reported based on the nature of that
business areas operations:
|
|
Income before income taxes for the insurance segments is defined as underwriting
income or loss. |
|
o |
|
For commercial lines and personal lines insurance segments, we calculate
underwriting income or loss by recording premiums earned minus loss and loss
expenses and underwriting expenses incurred. |
|
|
o |
|
For the life insurance segment, we calculate underwriting income or loss by
recording premiums earned and separate account investment management fees, minus
contract holder benefits and expenses incurred, plus investment interest credited
to contract holders. |
|
|
Income before income taxes for the investment operations segment is net investment
income plus realized investment gains and losses for all fixed-maturity and equity
security investments of the entire company, minus investment interest credited to
contract holders of the life insurance segment. |
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes for the Other category is primarily due to interest expense
from debt of the parent company and operating expenses of our headquarters. |
Identifiable assets are used by each segment in its operations. We do not separately report
the identifiable assets for the commercial or personal lines segments because we do not use
that measure to analyze the segments. We include all fixed-maturity and equity security
investment assets, regardless of ownership, in the investment operations segment.
2006 10-K Page 102
This table summarizes segment information:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial casualty |
|
$ |
831 |
|
|
$ |
759 |
|
|
$ |
686 |
|
Commercial property |
|
|
491 |
|
|
|
467 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
Commercial auto |
|
|
453 |
|
|
|
457 |
|
|
|
450 |
|
Workers compensation |
|
|
366 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
313 |
|
Specialty packages |
|
|
141 |
|
|
|
137 |
|
|
|
133 |
|
Surety and executive risk |
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
80 |
|
Machinery and equipment |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial lines insurance |
|
|
2,402 |
|
|
|
2,254 |
|
|
|
2,126 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Personal auto |
|
|
385 |
|
|
|
433 |
|
|
|
451 |
|
Homeowner |
|
|
289 |
|
|
|
282 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
Other personal lines |
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total personal lines insurance |
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
|
|
104 |
|
Investment operations |
|
|
1,254 |
|
|
|
587 |
|
|
|
583 |
|
Other |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
Consolidated eliminations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
4,550 |
|
|
$ |
3,767 |
|
|
$ |
3,614 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income (loss) before income taxes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Insurance underwriting results: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
208 |
|
|
$ |
285 |
|
|
$ |
338 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
45 |
|
|
|
(40 |
) |
Life insurance |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Investment operations |
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
536 |
|
|
|
537 |
|
Other |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(50 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,329 |
|
|
$ |
823 |
|
|
$ |
800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Identifiable assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Property casualty insurance |
|
$ |
2,220 |
|
|
$ |
2,167 |
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance |
|
|
886 |
|
|
|
845 |
|
|
|
|
|
Investment operations |
|
|
13,820 |
|
|
|
12,774 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
296 |
|
|
|
217 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
17,222 |
|
|
$ |
16,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarterly Supplementary Data (Unaudited)
This table includes unaudited quarterly financial information for the years ended
December 31, 2006 and 2005:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter |
(Dollars in millions except per share data) |
|
1st |
|
2nd |
|
3rd |
|
4th |
|
Full year |
|
2006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
1,607 |
|
|
$ |
981 |
|
|
$ |
967 |
|
|
$ |
995 |
|
|
$ |
4,550 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
834 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
|
|
148 |
|
|
|
172 |
|
|
|
1,329 |
|
Net income |
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
132 |
|
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
130 |
|
|
|
930 |
|
Net income per common sharebasic |
|
|
3.17 |
|
|
|
0.77 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
5.36 |
|
Net income per common sharediluted |
|
|
3.13 |
|
|
|
0.76 |
|
|
|
0.66 |
|
|
|
0.75 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Revenues |
|
$ |
916 |
|
|
$ |
940 |
|
|
$ |
944 |
|
|
$ |
967 |
|
|
$ |
3,767 |
|
Income before income taxes |
|
|
195 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
151 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
Net income |
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
183 |
|
|
|
602 |
|
Net income per common sharebasic |
|
|
0.82 |
|
|
|
0.90 |
|
|
|
0.67 |
|
|
|
1.04 |
|
|
|
3.44 |
|
Net income per common sharediluted |
|
|
0.81 |
|
|
|
0.89 |
|
|
|
0.66 |
|
|
|
1.03 |
|
|
|
3.40 |
|
Note: The sum of the quarterly reported amounts may not equal the full year as each is computed independently.
First-quarter and full-year 2006 The company sold its holdings in Alltel Corporation
common stock in the first quarter of 2006. The sale contributed $647 million to revenues and
$412 million, or $2.35 per share, to net income.
2006 10-K Page 103
Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial
Disclosure
We had no disagreements with the independent registered public accounting firm on
accounting and financial disclosure during the last two fiscal years.
Item 9A. Controls and Procedures
Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures - The company maintains disclosure
controls and procedures (as that term is defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act)).
Any controls and procedures, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only
reasonable assurance of achieving the desired control objectives. The companys management,
with the participation of the companys chief executive officer and chief financial officer,
has evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of the companys disclosure
controls and procedures as of December 31, 2006. Based upon that evaluation, the companys
chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that the design and operation
of the companys disclosure controls and procedures provided reasonable assurance that the
disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that:
|
|
information required to be disclosed in the companys reports under the Exchange Act is
recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the
Securities and Exchange Commissions rules and forms, and |
|
|
|
such information is accumulated and communicated to the companys management, including
its chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate, to allow
timely decisions regarding required disclosures. |
Changes in Internal Control over Financial Reporting - During the three months ended
December 31, 2006, there were no changes in our internal controls over financial reporting
that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal
control over financial reporting. Managements Annual Report on Internal Control Over
Financial Reporting and the Attestation Report of the Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm are set forth in Item 8, Pages 79 and 80.
Item 9B. Other Information
None
Part III
Our Proxy Statement will be filed with the SEC in preparation for the 2007 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders no later than April 13, 2007. As permitted in Paragraph G(3) of the
General Instructions for Form 10-K, we are incorporating by reference to that statement
portions of the information required by Part III as noted in Item 10 through Item 14 below.
Item 10. Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant
a) Information about our directors and executive officers is in the Proxy Statement
under Security Ownership of Principal Shareholders and Management, Information Regarding
Nondirector Executive Officers and Information regarding the Board of Directors.
b) Information about Section 16(a) beneficial ownership reporting compliance appears in the
Proxy Statement under Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance.
c) Information about the Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers appeared in the 2004
Proxy Statement as an appendix and is available in the Investors section of our Web site,
www.cinfin.com. Our code of ethics applies to those who are responsible for preparing and
disclosing our financial information. This includes our chief executive officer, chief
financial officer, chief investment officer and others performing similar functions or
reporting directly to these officers.
d) Information about our audit committee membership and our financial expert compliance
appears in the Proxy Statement under Information Regarding the Board of Directors and
Report of the Audit Committee.
e) The procedures under which shareholders may recommend director nominees have not changed
during the reporting period. Information on the nominating committee processes appears in
the Proxy Statement under Information Regarding the Board of Directors.
Item 11. Executive Compensation
Information on executive compensation appears in the Proxy Statement under
Compensation of Named Executive Officers and Directors, which includes the Report of the
Compensation Committee and the Compensation Discussion and Analysis.
2006 10-K Page 104
Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related
Stockholder Matters
a) Information on the security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management
appears in the Proxy Statement under Security Ownership of Principal Shareholders and
Management.
b) Information on securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans appears
in the Proxy Statement under Compensation of Named Executive Officers and Directors, which
includes Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans. Additional
information on share-based compensation under our equity compensation plans is available in
Item 8, Note 16 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, Page 100.
Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions
Information about certain relationships and related transactions appears in the Proxy
Statement under Certain Relationships and Transactions and Compensation Committee
Interlocks and Insider Participation.
Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services
Information about independent registered public accounting firm fees and services and
audit committee pre-approval policies and procedures appears in the Proxy Statement under
Audit-related Matters, which includes the Report of the Audit Committee, Fees Billed by
the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and Services Provided by the Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm.
Part IV
Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules
a) |
|
Financial Statements information contained in Part II, Item 8 of this report,
Pages 81-85 |
|
b) |
|
Exhibits see Index of Exhibits, Page 117 |
|
c) |
|
Financial Statement Schedules |
|
|
|
Schedule I Summary of Investments Other than Investments in Related Parties,
Page 106 |
|
|
|
Schedule II Condensed Financial Statements of Registrant, Page 108 |
|
|
|
Schedule III Supplementary Insurance Information, Page 111 |
|
|
|
Schedule IV Reinsurance, Page 113 |
|
|
|
Schedule V Valuation and Qualifying Accounts, Page 114 |
|
|
|
Schedule VI Supplementary Information Concerning Property Casualty Insurance
Operations, Page 115 |
2006 10-K Page 105
Schedule I
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Summary of Investments Other than Investments in Related Parties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
(In millions) |
|
Cost or |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Balance sheet |
|
Type of investment |
|
amortized cost |
|
|
value |
|
|
amount |
|
|
Fixed maturities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government-sponsored enterprises: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
620 |
|
|
|
605 |
|
|
|
605 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
359 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
995 |
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
|
972 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Foreign government: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
States, municipalities and political subdivisions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
2,218 |
|
|
|
2,248 |
|
|
|
2,248 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
|
|
129 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
2,382 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
2,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public utilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
55 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
79 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
140 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Convertibles and bonds with warrants attached: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
163 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
|
|
174 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
92 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
278 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other corporate bonds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
977 |
|
|
|
995 |
|
|
|
995 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
819 |
|
|
|
837 |
|
|
|
837 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,950 |
|
|
|
1,989 |
|
|
|
1,989 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fixed maturities |
|
$ |
5,739 |
|
|
$ |
5,805 |
|
|
$ |
5,805 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 106
Schedule I (Continued)
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Summary of Investments Other than Investments in Related Parties
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2006 |
|
(In millions) |
|
Cost or |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Balance sheet |
|
Type of investment |
|
amortized cost |
|
|
value |
|
|
amount |
|
|
Equity securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stocks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Public utilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
$ |
82 |
|
|
$ |
144 |
|
|
$ |
144 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
CinFin Capital Management Company |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
86 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
125 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
266 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banks, trust and insurance companies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
466 |
|
|
|
2,485 |
|
|
|
2,485 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
|
|
84 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
59 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
CinFin Capital Management Company |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
502 |
|
|
|
1,813 |
|
|
|
1,813 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,044 |
|
|
|
4,566 |
|
|
|
4,566 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Industrial, miscellaneous and all other: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
703 |
|
|
|
1,784 |
|
|
|
1,784 |
|
The Cincinnati Casualty Company |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
The Cincinnati Indemnity Company |
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
|
|
283 |
|
CinFin Capital Management Company |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
|
|
5 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
381 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
571 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,231 |
|
|
|
2,732 |
|
|
|
2,732 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nonredeemable preferred stocks: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
|
169 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
|
|
182 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
39 |
|
CinFin Capital Management Company |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity securities |
|
$ |
2,621 |
|
|
$ |
7,799 |
|
|
$ |
7,799 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Short-term investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Insurance Company |
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
|
$ |
92 |
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total short-term investments |
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
$ |
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other invested assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Real estate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Policy loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Cincinnati Life Insurance Company |
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Limited partnerships: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other invested assets |
|
$ |
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
$ |
8,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
13,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 107
Schedule II
Cincinnati Financial Corporation (parent company only)
Condensed Balance Sheets
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed maturities, at fair value |
|
$ |
128 |
|
|
$ |
123 |
|
Equity securities, at fair value |
|
|
2,484 |
|
|
|
2,444 |
|
Other invested assets |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
7 |
|
Equity in net assets of subsidiaries |
|
|
5,303 |
|
|
|
4,685 |
|
Investment income receivable |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Land, building and equipment, net, for company use
(accumulated depreciation: 2006$64; 2005$61) |
|
|
121 |
|
|
|
98 |
|
Prepaid federal income tax |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
17 |
|
Due from subsidiaries |
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
144 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
8,284 |
|
|
$ |
7,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared but unpaid |
|
$ |
58 |
|
|
$ |
53 |
|
Deferred federal income tax |
|
|
526 |
|
|
|
635 |
|
6.92% senior debentures due 2028 |
|
|
392 |
|
|
|
392 |
|
6.9% senior debentures due 2028 |
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
6.125% senior notes due 2034 |
|
|
371 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
Other liabilities |
|
|
101 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
1,476 |
|
|
|
1,494 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
SHAREHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock |
|
|
391 |
|
|
|
389 |
|
Paid-in capital |
|
|
1,015 |
|
|
|
969 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
2,786 |
|
|
|
2,088 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income |
|
|
3,379 |
|
|
|
3,284 |
|
Treasury stock at cost |
|
|
(763 |
) |
|
|
(644 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total shareholders equity |
|
|
6,808 |
|
|
|
6,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and shareholders equity |
|
$ |
8,284 |
|
|
$ |
7,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This condensed financial information should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes included in Part II, Item 8, Page 78.
2006 10-K Page 108
Schedule II (Continued)
Cincinnati Financial Corporation (parent company only)
Condensed Statements of Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
REVENUES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends from subsidiaries |
|
$ |
275 |
|
|
$ |
275 |
|
|
$ |
175 |
|
Investment income, net of expenses |
|
|
98 |
|
|
|
89 |
|
|
|
110 |
|
Realized gains on investments |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
Other revenue |
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
9 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total revenues |
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
376 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EXPENSES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
51 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Depreciation expense |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Other expenses |
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total expenses |
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
53 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
INCOME BEFORE INCOME TAXES AND EARNINGS OF SUBSIDIARIES |
|
|
721 |
|
|
|
305 |
|
|
|
259 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
PROVISION (BENEFIT) FOR INCOME TAXES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current |
|
|
153 |
|
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(17 |
) |
Deferred |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for income taxes |
|
|
142 |
|
|
|
(7 |
) |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME BEFORE EARNINGS OF SUBSIDIARIES |
|
|
579 |
|
|
|
312 |
|
|
|
256 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Increase in undistributed earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
290 |
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NET INCOME |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This condensed financial information should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial
Statements and Notes included
in Part II, Item 8, Page 78.
2006 10-K Page 109
Schedule II (Continued)
Cincinnati Financial Corporation (parent company only)
Condensed Statements of Cash Flows
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income |
|
$ |
930 |
|
|
$ |
602 |
|
|
$ |
584 |
|
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash
provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation and amortization |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Realized (gains) on investments |
|
|
(410 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
Changes in: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment income receivable |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
Current federal income taxes |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(30 |
) |
Deferred income taxes |
|
|
(11 |
) |
|
|
19 |
|
|
|
20 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(2 |
) |
Other liabilities |
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
Undistributed earnings of subsidiaries |
|
|
(351 |
) |
|
|
(290 |
) |
|
|
(328 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
317 |
|
|
|
245 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sale of fixed-maturities |
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
193 |
|
Call or maturity of fixed-maturities |
|
|
36 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
Sale of equity securities |
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
36 |
|
Purchase of fixed-maturities |
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
(9 |
) |
|
|
(95 |
) |
Purchase of equity securities |
|
|
(351 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(196 |
) |
Change in short-term investments, net |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
Investment in buildings and equipment, net |
|
|
(26 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
Change in other invested assets, net |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities |
|
|
127 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(35 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Proceeds from 6.125% senior notes |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
371 |
|
Debt issuance costs from 6.125% senior notes |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Decrease in notes payable |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
(152 |
) |
Payment of cash dividends to shareholders |
|
|
(228 |
) |
|
|
(204 |
) |
|
|
(177 |
) |
Purchase/issuance of treasury shares |
|
|
(119 |
) |
|
|
(61 |
) |
|
|
(59 |
) |
Proceeds from stock options exercised |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Net transfers to subsidiaries |
|
|
(5 |
) |
|
|
(80 |
) |
|
|
(170 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash used in financing activities |
|
|
(322 |
) |
|
|
(334 |
) |
|
|
(188 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
31 |
|
|
|
(21 |
) |
|
|
22 |
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of year |
|
|
7 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of year |
|
$ |
38 |
|
|
$ |
7 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This condensed financial information should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated
Financial Statements and Notes included in Part II, Item 8, Page 78.
2006 10-K Page 110
Schedule III
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Supplementary Insurance Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
226 |
|
|
$ |
218 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
315 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
306 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
94 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
453 |
|
|
$ |
429 |
|
|
$ |
400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Future policy benefits, losses, claims and expense losses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
3,414 |
|
|
$ |
3,173 |
|
|
$ |
3,016 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
498 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
3,860 |
|
|
|
3,629 |
|
|
|
3,514 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
1,430 |
|
|
|
1,362 |
|
|
|
1,213 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (1) |
|
$ |
5,290 |
|
|
$ |
4,991 |
|
|
$ |
4,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unearned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
1,195 |
|
|
$ |
1,150 |
|
|
$ |
1,112 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
425 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
1,577 |
|
|
|
1,557 |
|
|
|
1,537 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (1) |
|
$ |
1,579 |
|
|
$ |
1,559 |
|
|
$ |
1,539 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other policy claims and benefits payable: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (1) |
|
$ |
15 |
|
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premium revenues: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,402 |
|
|
$ |
2,254 |
|
|
$ |
2,126 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
3,058 |
|
|
|
2,919 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Consolidated eliminations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,278 |
|
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 111
Schedule III (Continued)
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Supplementary
Insurance Information
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Investment income, net of expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance (3) |
|
|
367 |
|
|
|
338 |
|
|
|
289 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
108 |
|
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
475 |
|
|
$ |
437 |
|
|
$ |
380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Benefits, claims losses and settlement expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
1,466 |
|
|
$ |
1,298 |
|
|
$ |
1,154 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
542 |
|
|
|
514 |
|
|
|
599 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
2,008 |
|
|
|
1,812 |
|
|
|
1,753 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
122 |
|
|
|
102 |
|
|
|
95 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,130 |
|
|
$ |
1,914 |
|
|
$ |
1,848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
504 |
|
|
$ |
473 |
|
|
$ |
448 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
664 |
|
|
|
641 |
|
|
|
610 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
|
|
16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (2) |
|
$ |
685 |
|
|
$ |
664 |
|
|
$ |
626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other operating expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
224 |
|
|
$ |
198 |
|
|
$ |
186 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
311 |
|
|
|
275 |
|
|
|
258 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total (2) |
|
$ |
341 |
|
|
$ |
304 |
|
|
$ |
295 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,442 |
|
|
$ |
2,290 |
|
|
$ |
2,186 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
3,178 |
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
2,997 |
|
Accident health insurance |
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
Consolidated eliminations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,180 |
|
|
$ |
3,079 |
|
|
$ |
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes to Schedule III:
(1) The sum of future policy benefits, losses, claims and expense losses, unearned
premium and other policy claims and other policy claims and benefits payable is equal to the
sum of loss and loss expense, life policy reserves and unearned premiums reported in the
companys consolidated balance sheets.
(2) The sum of amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs and other operating
expenses is equal to the sum of Commissions; Other operating expenses; Taxes, licenses and
fees; and Increase in deferred acquisition costs expenses shown in the consolidated
statements of income, less other expenses not applicable to the above insurance segments.
(3) This segment information is not regularly allocated to segments and reviewed by company
management in making decisions about resources to be allocated to the segments or to assess
their performance.
2006 10-K Page 112
Schedule IV
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Reinsurance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(Dollars in millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Gross amounts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance in force |
|
$ |
56,968 |
|
|
$ |
51,488 |
|
|
$ |
44,916 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,513 |
|
|
$ |
2,386 |
|
|
$ |
2,246 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
783 |
|
|
|
823 |
|
|
|
816 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
3,296 |
|
|
|
3,209 |
|
|
|
3,062 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
159 |
|
|
|
150 |
|
|
|
138 |
|
Consolidated eliminations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,454 |
|
|
$ |
3,359 |
|
|
$ |
3,200 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ceded amounts to other companies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance in force |
|
$ |
31,744 |
|
|
$ |
30,705 |
|
|
$ |
28,196 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
134 |
|
|
$ |
157 |
|
|
$ |
148 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
24 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
158 |
|
|
|
179 |
|
|
|
175 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
44 |
|
|
|
37 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
202 |
|
|
$ |
223 |
|
|
$ |
212 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assumed amounts from other companies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance in force |
|
$ |
3 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
24 |
|
|
$ |
25 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
4 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
26 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
26 |
|
|
$ |
28 |
|
|
$ |
32 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net amounts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance in force |
|
$ |
25,227 |
|
|
$ |
20,788 |
|
|
$ |
16,725 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,402 |
|
|
$ |
2,254 |
|
|
$ |
2,126 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
3,164 |
|
|
|
3,058 |
|
|
|
2,919 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
106 |
|
|
|
101 |
|
Consolidated eliminations |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,278 |
|
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,020 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percentage of amounts assumed to net: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Life insurance in force |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
|
|
0.0 |
% |
Earned premiums
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
1.1 |
% |
|
|
1.3 |
% |
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.4 |
|
|
|
0.5 |
|
Total property casualty insurance |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
Life insurance |
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.0 |
|
|
|
0.1 |
|
Total |
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
0.9 |
|
|
|
1.1 |
|
2006 10-K Page 113
Schedule V
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Valuation and
Qualifying Accounts
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Allowance for doubtful receivables: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Additions charged to costs and expenses |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Other additions |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
Deductions |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2006 10-K Page 114
Schedule VI
Cincinnati Financial Corporation and Subsidiaries
Supplementary Information Concerning Property Casualty Insurance Operations
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years ended December 31, |
|
(In millions) |
|
2006 |
|
|
2005 |
|
|
2004 |
|
|
Deferred policy acquisition costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
235 |
|
|
$ |
226 |
|
|
$ |
218 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
80 |
|
|
|
85 |
|
|
|
88 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
315 |
|
|
$ |
311 |
|
|
$ |
306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserves for unpaid claims and claim adjustment expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
3,414 |
|
|
$ |
3,173 |
|
|
$ |
3,016 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
446 |
|
|
|
456 |
|
|
|
498 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,860 |
|
|
$ |
3,629 |
|
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reserve discount deducted |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unearned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
1,194 |
|
|
$ |
1,150 |
|
|
$ |
1,112 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
382 |
|
|
|
407 |
|
|
|
425 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,576 |
|
|
$ |
1,557 |
|
|
$ |
1,537 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Earned premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,402 |
|
|
$ |
2,254 |
|
|
$ |
2,126 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
762 |
|
|
|
804 |
|
|
|
793 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,164 |
|
|
$ |
3,058 |
|
|
$ |
2,919 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance (1) |
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
|
$ |
0 |
|
Personal lines insurance (1) |
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
0 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
367 |
|
|
$ |
338 |
|
|
$ |
289 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred related to current accident year: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
1,564 |
|
|
$ |
1,424 |
|
|
$ |
1,328 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
560 |
|
|
|
548 |
|
|
|
621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
2,124 |
|
|
$ |
1,972 |
|
|
$ |
1,949 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss and loss expenses incurred related to prior accident years: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
(98 |
) |
|
$ |
(126 |
) |
|
$ |
(174 |
) |
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(34 |
) |
|
|
(22 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
(116 |
) |
|
$ |
(160 |
) |
|
$ |
(196 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortization of deferred policy acquisition costs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
504 |
|
|
$ |
473 |
|
|
$ |
448 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
160 |
|
|
|
168 |
|
|
|
162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
664 |
|
|
$ |
641 |
|
|
$ |
610 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Paid loss and loss expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
1,218 |
|
|
$ |
1,126 |
|
|
$ |
1,062 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
545 |
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
559 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,763 |
|
|
$ |
1,678 |
|
|
$ |
1,621 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Written premiums: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial lines insurance |
|
$ |
2,442 |
|
|
$ |
2,290 |
|
|
$ |
2,186 |
|
Personal lines insurance |
|
|
736 |
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
811 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
3,178 |
|
|
$ |
3,076 |
|
|
$ |
2,997 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Note to Schedule VI:
(1) This segment information is not regularly allocated to segments and not reviewed by
company management in making decisions about resources to be allocated to the segments or to
assess their performance.
2006 10-K Page 115
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.
|
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation |
|
|
|
/S/ Kenneth W. Stecher
By: Kenneth W. Stecher
|
|
|
Title: Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President, Secretary and Treasurer |
Date: February 28, 2007 |
|
|
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been
duly signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities
and on the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
Signature |
|
Title |
|
Date |
/S/ John J. Schiff, Jr.
John J. Schiff, Jr.
|
|
Chairman, Chief Executive Officer and Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Kenneth W. Stecher
Kenneth W. Stecher
|
|
Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice
President, Secretary and Treasurer (Principal
Accounting Officer)
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ William F. Bahl
William F. Bahl
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ James E. Benoski
James E. Benoski
|
|
Vice Chairman, President, Chief Operating
Officer, Chief Insurance Officer and Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Gregory T. Bier
Gregory T. Bier
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Michael Brown
Michael Brown
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Dirk J. Debbink
Dirk J. Debbink
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Kenneth C. Lichtendahl
Kenneth C. Lichtendahl
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ W. Rodney McMullen
W. Rodney McMullen
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Gretchen W. Price
Gretchen W. Price
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Thomas R. Schiff
Thomas R. Schiff
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
John M. Shepherd |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Douglas S. Skidmore
Douglas S. Skidmore
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ John F. Steele, Jr.
John F. Steele, Jr.
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ Larry R. Webb
Larry R. Webb
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
|
|
|
|
|
/S/ E. Anthony Woods
E. Anthony Woods
|
|
Director
|
|
February 28, 2007 |
2006 10-K Page 116
Index of Exhibits
|
|
|
Exhibit No. |
|
Exhibit Description |
3.1A
|
|
Amended Articles of Incorporation of Cincinnati Financial Corporation (1) |
|
|
|
3.1B
|
|
Amendment to Article Fourth of Amended Articles of Incorporation of Cincinnati Financial Corporation (2) |
|
|
|
3.2
|
|
Regulations of Cincinnati Financial Corporation (3) |
|
|
|
4.1
|
|
Indenture with The Bank of New York Trust Company (4) |
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Supplemental Indenture with The Bank of New York Trust Company (4) |
|
|
|
4.3
|
|
Second Supplemental Indenture with The Bank of New York Trust Company (5) |
|
|
|
4.4
|
|
Form of 6.125% Exchange Note Due 2034 (included in Exhibit 4.2) |
|
|
|
4.5
|
|
Form of 6.92% Debentures Due 2028 (included in Exhibit 4.3) |
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
Indenture with the First National Bank of Chicago (subsequently assigned to The Bank of New York Trust Company) (6) |
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
Form of 6.90% Debentures Due 2028 (included in Exhibit 4.6) |
|
|
|
10.1
|
|
Agreement with Messer Construction (7) |
|
|
|
10.2
|
|
2003 Non Employee Directors Stock Plan (8) |
|
|
|
10.3
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Stock Option Plan No. VI (9) |
|
|
|
10.4
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Stock Option Plan No. VII (10) |
|
|
|
10.5
|
|
Standard Form of Nonqualified and Incentive Option Agreements for Stock Option Plan No. VI (7) |
|
|
|
10.6
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Incentive Compensation Plan (11) |
|
|
|
10.7
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation 2006 Stock Compensation Plan (11) |
|
|
|
10.8
|
|
Standard Form of Combined Incentive/Nonqualified Stock Option for Stock Option Plan VI (12) |
|
|
|
10.9
|
|
364-Day Credit Agreement by and among Cincinnati Financial Corporation and CFC Investment Company, as Borrowers, and Fifth
Third Bank, as Lender (13) |
|
|
|
10.10
|
|
Director and Named Executive Officer Compensation Summary (11) |
|
|
|
10.11
|
|
Executive Compensation Plan (14) |
|
|
|
10.12
|
|
Amendment No. 1 to Credit Agreement by and among Cincinnati Financial Corporation and CFC investment Company, as Borrower,
and Fifth Third Bank, as lender. (15) |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
1999 Annual Report on Form 10-K dated March 23, 2000 (File No. 000-04604). |
|
(2) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 3(i)
filed with the companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 15, 2005. |
|
(3) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
Definitive Proxy Statement dated March 2, 1992, Exhibit 2 (File No. 000-04604). |
|
(4) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 2, 2004, filed with respect to the
issuance of the companys 6.125% Senior Notes due November 1, 2034. |
|
(5) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 9, 2005, filed with respect to the
completion of the companys exchange offer and rescission offer for its 6.90%
senior debentures due 2028. |
|
(6) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
registration statement on Form S-3 effective May 22, 1998 (File No. 333-51677). |
|
(7) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K dated March 11, 2005. |
|
(8) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys
Definitive Proxy Statement dated March 21, 2005. |
|
(9) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys Definitive Proxy
Statement dated March 1, 1999 (File No. 000-04604). |
|
(10) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys Definitive Proxy
Statement dated March 8, 2002 (File No. 000-04604). |
|
(11) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys Definitive Proxy
Statement to be filed no later than April 13, 2007. |
|
(12) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 filed with the
companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated July 15, 2005. |
|
(13) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 filed with the
companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 31, 2005. |
|
(14) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 filed with the
companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated November 23, 2005. |
|
(15) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.01 filed with the
companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated May 26, 2006. |
2006 10-K Page 117
|
|
|
10.13
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Supplemental Retirement Plan (16) |
|
|
|
10.14
|
|
Standard Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement for Stock Option Plan VII (17) |
|
|
|
10.15
|
|
Standard Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement for Stock Option Plan VII (18) |
|
|
|
10.16
|
|
Standard Form of Incentive Stock Option Agreement for the 2006 Stock Compensation Plan (19) |
|
|
|
10.17
|
|
Standard Form of Nonqualified Stock Option Agreement for the 2006 Stock Compensation Plan (20) |
|
|
|
10.18
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for John J. Schiff, Jr., dated January 31, 2007 (21) |
|
|
|
10.19
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for James E. Benoski., dated January 21, 2007 (21) |
|
|
|
10.20
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for Jacob F. Scherer, Jr., dated January 31, 2007 (21) |
|
|
|
10.21
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for Kenneth W. Stecher., dated January 31, 2007 (21) |
|
|
|
10.22
|
|
Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for Thomas A. Joseph, dated January 31, 2007 (21) |
|
|
|
10.23
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for use under the Cincinnati Financial Corporation 2006 Stock Purchase Incentive Plan
(service based) |
|
|
|
10.24
|
|
Form of Restricted Stock Unit Agreement for use under the Cincinnati Financial Corporation 2006 Stock Purchase Incentive Plan
(performance based) |
|
|
|
11
|
|
Statement re: Computation of per share earnings for the year ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, contained in Note 11 to the
Consolidated Financial Statements included in Part II, Item 8 of this report,, Page 95 |
|
|
|
14
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers (22) |
|
|
|
21
|
|
Cincinnati Financial Corporation Subsidiaries contained in Part I, Item 1, Page 1 |
|
|
|
23
|
|
Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm, Page 119 |
|
|
|
31.1
|
|
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 Chief Executive Officer, Page 120 |
|
|
|
31.2
|
|
Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002 Chief Financial Officer, Page 121 |
|
|
|
32
|
|
Certification pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, Page 122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(16) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.17 filed with the companys Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006. |
|
(17) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.1 filed with the companys Current Report
on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2006. |
|
(18) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.2 filed with the companys Current Report
on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2006. |
|
(19) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.3 filed with the companys Current Report
on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2006. |
|
(20) |
|
Incorporated by reference to Exhibit 10.4 filed with the companys Current Report
on Form 8-K dated October 20, 2006. |
|
(21) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys Current Report on Form 8-K dated January
31, 2007. |
|
(22) |
|
Incorporated by reference to the companys Definitive Proxy Statement dated March
18, 2004. |
2006 10-K Page 118